Riot Cops Killed Newspaper Seller At G20

The officer n question has now been suspended (doesn't say if it's with or without pay)

Hope that he's behind bars where he belongs, very soon.
news.bbc.co.uk...

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.

Footage from Channel 4 appeared to show him being hit with a baton.

A statement from the IPCC said: "The IPCC called for the officer to be suspended. The MPS has now informed us that the officer has suspended with immediate effect.

a little light amusement, taken from the day.

Here's an interesting piece.
Correcting the media narrative of the G20 protests.
ceasefiremagazine.co.uk...

ote that the “violent outburst” (Telegraph) of window-breaking took place hours after the police had decided to “herd the crowd” of at least 5,000 people “into a pen” without access to food, water or toilet facilities - and without allowing them to leave.

The press was surely aware of this. The Guardian’s live blog from the day noted at 11.57 a.m. that “the barriers designed to fence in the protesters are not big enough”, an hour later it confirms that there is “a ‘kettle’ at the Bank of England”: half an hour later they report “clashes” and finally, at 1.30 p.m., “a window has been smashed.” An objective observer of the sequence of events here might ask whether the police ‘kettle’ had in fact been responsible for the “clashes”, “violence” and smashed window.

But this idea - that the kettle might have provoked the “clashes”, and that the police might therefore be responsible for the “violence” - is remarkably absent from virtually all of the reams of press coverage of the protests. We do, of course, have a spectrum of opinion: whereas the right-wing Daily Mail sees the protestors as “a fearsome group of thugs”, a “bizarre group of misfits” fuelled by “Dutch courage” and a “willingness to use violence” (April 1), for the left-wing Guardian only “a minority of demonstrators seemed determined to cause damage” whilst “much of the protesting” was “peaceful” (April 1).

excuse me acid but i think your pictures are misleading that isnt a baton in the hands of that police medic its a riot issue thermometer actaully

for taking temperatures when the heat is on!

do you know what the gaurdian is the only paper that has handled this well, other papers are just full of boobs sensationalist stories

Originally posted by RE2505
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.

grey jumper blue jeans brown shoes not that its gonna help much lol short brown hair, i have spotted meself on some other videos on youtube but not much! would be appreciated

Two comments:

First, it makes no difference if the guy participated in the protest, or didn't. From the article, he wasn't doing anything threatening or destructive, gave no cause for any violence against him.

Second, autopsies are not conducted by the police.

reply to post by chiron613


i read today on this site or on the news i heard somebody is calling for another autopsy dont qoute me on it though

reply to post by Reading


The IPCC have ordered another autopsy to take place and have begun a criminal investigation into this.

Its good the police are not getting away with it. it was out of order.

but I still stand by my view that from the video It dosen't seem clear cut to me he was walikng away from them. he was facing them at first then turnd away but dosen't walk away , he almost on purpus obstructs them. you don't know what he might of been doing or saying to them. you Don't know and neither do I, so lets look at it from all angles

he could have been anyone. whilst I don't support what the police did, they did have a right to move him along, by force as he (as it appers to me in the video) was being defient.

and to whoever called me a moron, I'm giving you an angle on the story and being objective, you don't agree with it, thats fine, I may be totally wrong, but we need to look at it from all angles and possabilities, Dosent matter if I'm mistaken, in order to discuss it fully you need to take into account of all the possibilities like I do.



sweet

[edit on 9-4-2009 by TrentReznor]

[edit on 9-4-2009 by TrentReznor]

Why would they need to move him along . Seems they about pushed him at around the spot they were planning to form a line anyway, so I see it as an act of pure vindictiveness . That cop thought .. this is the last chance I'll get to do this guy as we are about to stop around here , and did what he did before the poor guy got out of reach .

Originally posted by TrentReznor
and to whoever called me a moron, I'm giving you an angle on the story and being objective, you don't agree with it, thats fine, I may be totally wrong, but we need to look at it from all angles and possabilities, Dosent matter if I'm mistaken, in order to discuss it fully you need to take into account of all the possibilities like I do.

Your reading far too much into this. It's obvious to me the guy is a bit confused as to what the officers would like him to do. Remember, he was not part of the protest, he was walking home from work. So in my view of things I see him moving to one side to let the pigs get around him, then he realizes they are not going to go around him and he goes in the opposite direction as well as moving forward. Then the pig has to take 3 steps toward him in order to attack him from behind. The guys hands are in his pockets which indicates to me he is sending a signal that he is non violent and a bit confused. Running from the police implies guilt. He was not guilty of anything, so why run.

Also, none of the protesters were out of control or being a threat in that video. There was no provocation, no justification for the action taken. You are straining the boundaries of common sense when you show sympathy for that coward pig. You also attempt to cast suspicion on the guys character, motives etc. and you come very close to blaming the victim, which is what sociopaths and sadists do....blame the victim. The guy was walking home from work and he should have been offered a safe escort, not the smack down from behind.

Originally posted by Drexl
Why would they need to move him along . Seems they about pushed him at around the spot they were planning to form a line anyway, so I see it as an act of pure vindictiveness . That cop thought .. this is the last chance I'll get to do this guy as we are about to stop around here , and did what he did before the poor guy got out of reach .

That's true....I noticed that and forgot to mention it. The cops had already reached the point where they stopped and made their line. The cop had to step forward and in front of another cop so he could do his act of cowardice. Then he had to step back into formation. It's abuse of force, plain and simple.

reply to post by John Matrix



Thats right . That scum cop went out of his way to move forward beyond his designated line to perpetrate his assault on that defenceless man and can clearly be seen moving back to his assigned position after committing his cowardly act . So any talk of this man being slow or wayward or jay walking-like is redundant and obscurant as he was clearly beyond the position where he could have caused an obstruction to the formation of their line .

I hope the sum bag gets jail time...

I seriously do.

Imagine if any of you guys had unprovokedly pushed a man over and a few minutes later he drops dead?

reply to post by mr-lizard


The same that is happening to this Policeman now. He is subject to a criminal investigation, pending autopsy and witness reports. Then the file is passed to the CPS, who will decide if sufficient evidence exists for a conviction. Then he will be put on trial.

I see no difference between what is happenning now and what you'd expect to happen to you.

[edit on 9/4/09 by stumason]

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by mr-lizard

 

The same that is happening to this Policeman now. He is subject to a criminal investigation, pending autopsy and witness reports. Then the file is passed to the CPS, who will decide if sufficient evidence exists for a convistion. Then he will be put on trial.

I see no difference between what is happenning now and what you'd expect to happen to you.

Good, let's hope justice prevails.

Instead of paramilitary training maybe they will smarten up and do some sensitivity training.

Like I said, Tomlinson should have been given an escort out of the area by police, not given the smack down that killed him.

reply to post by John Matrix


Tomlinson would have been much better off if he had either stayed at home, sought tempoary shelter in a pub or restaurant or remained in his place of work.

Attempting to move THROUGH a police riot line, several times by all accounts, is possibly the stupidest thing a man could do in that situation.

The Police weren't to know who he was or his intentions if they did let him through the lines.

He was unfortunate to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. It is totally unreasonable to expect the Police to have diverted much-needed manpower to escort a homeless drunk back to his hostel.

Using that logic, one would expect the Police to have dissolved their lines all together and escort everyone who claimed they had nothing to do with anything on that day.

I feel for the man and his family, but if that was me in that situation I would have acted in a totally different way.

reply to post by stumason


How can you say that ????????????????????????????????

you just watched a video showing him attacked FROM BEHIND

with his hands IN HIS POCKETS

reply to post by Seany


A 3o second video of anything is not going to tell the whole story, is it? I've seen many pics and videos of the day and to be honest, Tomlinson could have done himself many favours by not trying to break through the lines as he was.

An eye witness, on this very board, spoke to Tomlinson as he was on the floor and said he reeked of alcohol. What would the Police think if they had a drunken man repeatedly try to penetrate their lines?

In the video's I have seen, he is shown to be ambling along and seemingly ignoring any communication from the police. He apparently repeatedly attempted to break their lines, despite being told not too.

I'm not excusing the Police officers actions, but rather stating that the man who died didn't exactly make his own life any easier. If it was me, I would have found somewhere quiet to just go and sit down. make it known your not a threat and stay out of the way.

Being argumentative and insisting you be allowed through the lines to go home is asking for trouble, especially as you have several hundred other people, some of whom are being very aggressive, asking the same damned thing. The Police cordon will eventually be lifted, so what's the big deal, just wait.

reply to post by stumason


I'll take prison planet over a lot of the MSM bs.

The protestors were throwing things at the cops because word had got out that they (or at least one of their number) were the reason behind the death of the man they were treating.

Now the video is out it shows clearly the cops were to blame!