Riot Cops Killed Newspaper Seller At G20

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by spikey
Prison Planet can't have it both ways.

They say the press and media are in with the NWO and cannot be trusted as far as they can be thrown, or in this instance when it suits Prison Planet's apparent agenda, they are paragons of virtue and their word is gospel?

Yes they can.

Thanks to the advent of the internet and blogging - The "press and media" are now composed of Individuals, who have not been co-opted, censored or edited in any way.

Blogs and individuals with websites have been the last bastion of honest journalism in this country and the best source for accurate information and unfiltered/uncensored reporting.

When Prison Planet refers to the 'press and media', as you are indicating they did; they are obviously referring to the mainstream media and newspapers who lied us into war and who active ignored the criminal wrongdoings of the government. Consequently, many of these papers are now going bankrupt after losing customers to the blog-sphere and honest internet news sites.

This is quite obvious from most of the Prison Planet articles pertaining to the issue, and to state otherwise is quite likely misrepresentation - which is wrong.

In cases such as this poor man's murder, the blog-sphere and internet have been far more capable at providing up-to date and accurate informing about the case. Many even allow for comments from the readers, which is far better than 'letters to the editor' and allows a much greater likelihood for exposure and thus, it causes even more reader contribution.

The authorities and governments (municipal, etc) can then read the comments, and use this additional input to aid in decision making.

Perhaps public opinion on the internet will have an effect on how the perpetrators are punished in this case. These officers may have to be convicted so as to 'take one for the team' in order to calm the public down and improve appearances.

[edit on 9-4-2009 by Exuberant1]

No, they can't have it both ways - Prison Planet did not state bloggers and internet reporters, they said 'press reporter'. Obviously, the internet, being an electronic medium, does not use 'presses', the printed newsmedia do however.

Again, the press and media in classic understanding isn't the same thing as individuals typing their own personal bias over the web, a.k.a. Bloggers.

Do you know these individual bloggers personally then? All of them?
You must get around a fair bit, to claim they are the last bastion of honesty in reporting and jouralism in the UK. Are we to assume then, that every Tom, Dick or Harry sitting behind a computer is as honest as the day is long? Very Naive, IMHO.

Do i say i believe what the mainstream media i.e. the press, has to say?
No, personally i don't. I haven't bought a newpaper tabloid or broadsheet for around twenty years, due to the sensationalism and out and out fabrications that are often woven in with the truth of a matter being reported. Some high profile libel cases attest to this.

Do i believe what an individual blogger has to say? No, i don't for the same reasons. Unless of course, i have personal knowledge of the reported subject matter, and have access to the facts myself or can easily check on the facts.

I refer you to what i have written above. I don't know the authors at P.P. any more than i know random individual bloggers, so it's a mute point to say they are honest and report only the truth. And again, is incredibly naive. Human beings rarely tell the 'whole' truth when they have an agenda, whatever that agenda happens to be.

You are sensationalising the issue by stating categorically that this man was murdered. At the most, if borne out by supporting evidence, this would be a case of manslaughter, not murder. You are obviously intelligent, you should know this.

Perhaps public opinion will force someones hand as it were. If so, then it would be just as much a misscarriage of justice as not investigating the matter fully and properly in the first place.

Taking one for the team is not justice. It is not in the interests of truth or justice to offer a sacrifice to the baying crowds just because they want an excuse to blame someone, anyone.

IF it turns out that any officer was guilty of a crime on that day, i too should expect them to be investigated fully, and then if proven, punished in accordance with the law. Just as you and i would be.

spikey.

wow some of the comments here defending the police are downright disgusting,there is never ever going to be justification for pushing a man who has his hands in his pockets,back turned walking away from you. it is what is is the video is right there to see.

Just because he might have been an alchoholic and might not have been in the fittest shape does that mean its more acceptable that he died after being pushed?

so with that logic i can go and push a Aids/cancer patient i see at a protest walking away from me hands in pocket not being aggressive? when the police come to arrest me ill say hey "he was living on borrowed time" as one insensitive person said?

the guy could have been an olympic runner still dont make it any better.

reply to post by Reading


innit, people like to use media slurs to justify the police tactics. The Sun and the Mail have today, already stated that he was a "homless achaholic" which means NOTHING to the fact that he was assaulted by a police officer for NO GOOD REASON. Other than he didn't bust into a sprint when he was told to , instead, he just moved. At his own pace. F# the police and their lies. they've twisted their version of events so many times since their first press release it's nearly funny. they're going to squirm their way out of it, unless the people stand up and say NO.

[edit on 9/4/2009 by Acidtastic]

reply to post by Acidtastic


yup as they always do the sad fact is the tabloids/papers and mainstream news are peoples only source of skewed "news"

can people really not see by them saying he was an alchoholic big issue seller that shows they have an agenda to keep up. i saw the dude on the floor when he was dead/dying and he was wetting himself im not a doctor or had a wife in the buisness like that other tool but is it normal for heart attack patients to wet themselves?

I have been going through my phone for any footage of Mr Tomlinson and have just realised that the ambulance in this video (which is being blocked by the line of riot police?) was intended for Mr Tomlinson. For what it's worth I have asked if anyone has footage of the first attack on Ian which I witnessed but didn't film.

Give this film to the solicitors that I u2ud you

(if you haven't done so already) It could be important in getting some kind of conviction.

Originally posted by Reading
wow some of the comments here defending the police are downright disgusting,there is never ever going to be justification for pushing a man who has his hands in his pockets,back turned walking away from you. it is what is is the video is right there to see.

Just because he might have been an alchoholic and might not have been in the fittest shape does that mean its more acceptable that he died after being pushed?

so with that logic i can go and push a Aids/cancer patient i see at a protest walking away from me hands in pocket not being aggressive? when the police come to arrest me ill say hey "he was living on borrowed time" as one insensitive person said?

the guy could have been an olympic runner still dont make it any better.

Agrees, seems to me, that there is one rule for the police, and another rule for the citizens of the UK, If that was someone else whom shoved that gentleman, they would have been arrested and charged, with assault, the fact of the evidence shows the police officer shoving that individual, to the ground with no reason what so ever. That officer who shoved him to the ground should face criminal charges.

The police are there to enforce the law. They are not there to go vigilante on innocent bystanders, which sadly happens all the time in the UK,.

The police officer in question has come forward, to answer questions, I will tell you one thing, if this is covered up, people will turn on the police as a whole.

[edit on 9-4-2009 by Laurauk]

[edit on 9-4-2009 by Laurauk]

reply to post by RE2505

Mate along with the other footage acid tastic showed us you can clearly see the protestors letting it through and the police blocking it. as i have said in other posts there was an argument between a few of the protestors including me, we got wires crossed and ll wanted the ambulance to get through.

its strange really is i am right by the ambulance but i cant see myself in the footage. isnt it strange how we all was there on the day and didnt even know eachover from so thats me RE2505 and acid tastic all there makes you think how much more footage is on its way

Sadists and sociopaths always find a way to blame the victim. Those of you that are blaming the victim and show sympathy for the police are a clear minority and now you know what you are.

I suggest that you seek help before you harm someone and end up front and center on the evening news while ATS members discuss your rotting corpse.

[edit on 9/4/09 by John Matrix]

The police may be referred to as plods because your average cop is a plod but that does not mean the police are stupid.

My observations are that the police are highly organised, very well trained (funny thing with health or medical training is that it equips the trained to understand not only how to protect health but also what works to incapacitate and even cause injury), and highly motivated. The policing of protests, demonstrations and other large gatherings appears to be highly organised and strategically planned. I believe that the training police receive is militaristic in nature. They act in formation, are provided with weaponary and protective equipment and make good use of the tactics of psychological warfare and infiltration, as well as use of physical force, even to the point of extreme acts of violence, leading to injury and even death, as seen with Ian T.

Comments on this thread and others, asking protesters to state the cause of their protest indicate to me that the protests/protesters are not organised, do not have an agreed common goal and are therefore well placed to be demonised or criminalised for their actions, real or perceived. I would not advocate using this board to plan and organise any protest action (I cannot imagine that police will not be monitoring these boards, intello gathering for any planned actions as well as to identify individuals and their associates). I do advocate ensuring that all required permits are applied for, that legal representation is available to advise and advocate on behalf of both any organised or individual protesters and that anyone attending be aware that the police may want to conduct riots on the streets and be seen to have control of the mass.

To suggest that Ian T was merely unfortunate to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time and that anyway, he had a history of being a homeless drunk, ignores the records/evidence available. It merely subverts focus by deminishing or even demonising him and is nothing more than a personal value judgement that demeans individual rights to be self determining, even to the point of making lifestyle choices that we may or may not agree with. Typical bullying strategy, blame the victim. Suggest that in some way, the victim deserved it.

He was violently attacked from behind by someone/people who, we the taxpayer, pay, to uphold the law and protect people and property.

We are policed by consent in the UK and I did not consent to the police finding it reasonable to forcibly detain people (kettling) and attack them. I further did not consent to, and am very resentful of, the fact that any proportion of my wealth, the money I earn through my own effort, be spent on investigating, charging or prosecuting criminals or criminal activity within the police service.

Points raised here concerning the transparency and objectiveness of the IPCC, when they deal with deviant, criminal police officers, sadden me greatly. It says a lot about a police service that attracts so many criminals into it's ranks. That there do not seem to be effective internal remedies to both identify likely criminal elements within the service and then sack them; before they have progressed through the criminal hierachy, to murderer. (My math is not so good; it would be interesting to see the crime figures per capita in the police compared with the general population!)

To any police trolling these boards, the criminal element within your ranks, those who are not innocent of abusing the authority of their office,
that you do nothing about, is one reason that so many ordinary citizens have lost trust in you and your badge.

Recent FOI requests show that for Kent and Sussex forces alone show that over a two and half year period, 23 officers were arrested, 8 prosecuted and 2 jailed.


Given total manpower is 7,000 officers, thats 1 jailed for every 3,500.

Given stats for England and Wales show the general public are jailed, on average, at a rate of of 128 for every 100,000, which is 1.28 for every 1,000.

Given police officers are supposed to be well-bahaved that is a pretty high rate of conviction.

Those are some stats put up earlier in the discussion courtesy of stumason

reply to post by Reading


Thanks Reading

Seeing that in the earlier post was what piqued my curiosity. I still think it would be interesting to see the full stats on all recorded criminality within the police for the whole of UK, rather than just jail stats for only 2 forces.

Does any member who is not UK have figures available for this type of thing in your country?

reply to post by teapot


no problem im glad you said that because that was my disagreement with the stumason

shouldnt these facts be on the internet? FOI requests? maybe id have a look but i need to go do something now

Oh look, yet another video which completly contradicts what the origional police statement said, about people throwing bottles to impede mr Tomlinsons aid. Infact, it shows just the opposite.

www.guardian.co.uk...

In.your.face.

wow the evidence is really mounting up and im f@cking ecstatic about it, frustrating tho all the videos dont show me in them :-( im so close to their i must be behind the camera or something i remember somebody throwing somethin then i put my hands in the air to tell em to stop! when i read the description i thought it might have been me lol wanted something to keep for ever

I know, it's fantastic isn't it. 1 by one the police lies are coming undone.

I just hope that ALL who have lied, fabricated/with held evidence and perverted the course of justice. Will be put to trial. I have no faith in the legal system, so i doubt that they will.

reply to post by Reading



What were you wearing? I have about 40 minutes of footage from the area.
I'm glad to see more evidence come out. There were a massive amount of people taking pictures so I expect there is more to come.

Originally posted by Acidtastic
I know, it's fantastic isn't it. 1 by one the police lies are coming undone.

I just hope that ALL who have lied, fabricated/with held evidence and perverted the course of justice. Will be put to trial. I have no faith in the legal system, so i doubt that they will.

Its a shame we cannot live in a society where if people goto the police and make up looney rubbish and the police destroy the person for them, that persona nd the police should be on trial for things like murder. How is the police destroyong life, not like some serial killer. Its a shame that scum can use the police and the police love the power they have, not understanding scum are using them for there vendettas.

One of the worst things in this society is police corruption, and its everywhere and will only get worse, as well as things like social workers. Scum seem to be attracted to these jobs. shame.

I wonder how this will affect the debate regarding section 76 of the counter terrorism act . No doubts , after this , the police will want to ensure nobody films or photographs them. They don't want this kind of hassle everytime they go assaulting innocent civilians causing injury or death .

BBC page regarding Section 76

The IPCC has launched a criminal investigation into the death now:

The officer captured on video pushing a man during the G20 protests in London has been suspended, police have said.

Ian Tomlinson, 47, died from a heart attack minutes after the incident on 1 April.

The Metropolitan Police suspended the officer after the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) called for the penalty.

The IPCC has launched a criminal investigation into the newspaper seller's death.

news.bbc.co.uk...