|
Locodogz wrote: Happily corrected that your "all" were only those committing acts of assault - still think it's a little dodgy.
Fair point. I meant it as a turn of phrase; that it was the luck of the draw, that Harwood's attack on Tomlinson was by no means the worst such assault on the day but he was unfortunate enough to have picked on someone who died of it soon after. You're right that it's not 'lucky' in the lottery sense.
Locodogz wrote: Your point about the implications of PC Harwoods colleagues inaction - well I thought you yourself earlier described as "shonky" the logic that this means they had all committed similar acts?
I think we've misunderstood here - you appeared to be criticising the use of the word 'all' in the phrase 'colleagues don't react at all'; I think that's something shown on the video so can't really be disagreed with.
If you're referring to the original point, that they'd all done it earlier that day then yes, I have already said that you're right, is an exaggeration and inaccurate. I should have said that a serious proportion of them had committed similar acts, and surely an overwhelming majority had done it or seen it yet not reported it.
Locodogz wrote: Indeed a number of them reported his actions didn't they which would imply (that word agin!) at least some thought his actions excessive?
The number of officers is one. (The other two were later identified by superiors and called in and asked to make statements). It was an officer with Harwood who came forward a couple of days after Tomlinson died. One wonders what would have happened had Tomlinson not died.
As far as we know, none have come forward to report any other uses of excessive force on the day even though it happened many thousands of times.
|
