It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

No charges over G20 man's death

page: 4
46
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
yeah they look after there own!
police scum!
next time there is a protest i hope the scum
responsable get a brick to the skull.




posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


It's certainly an issue of injustice, but you make it sound like the Officer got away with attempted murder, which we both know is not the case. Would you be as infuriated if one of your friends tripped somebody as a joke, only to have that person suffer a heart attack and die?

The contempt you feel for law enforcement officials is impacting your ability to reason and makes your views on the matter come across as bias.

[edit on 22/7/2010 by Dark Ghost]


I'm sorry but you're wrong, quite simply.

This officer was obscuring his identity, he was masked, and his ID number was hidden from view. This was not a person tripping someone as a joke in the street so please gain some perspective and learn the facts about the event to enable you to form a proper opinion on this.

He attacked an unarmed man not even involved in the G20 protests.

There are several questions here:
Why did the first coroners report incorrectly state Heart Attack?
Why did the second change this to internal bleeding? Even a layman with a scalpel and a medical book could have made this distinction!
Why was the officer not punished for obscuring his identity?

If someone attacked another person in the street, and that person died as a result of internal injuries, the perpetrator of that assault would be charged with manslaughter at the least.
Unless you're a Police Officer.

This entire situation reeks of corruption and is completely disgraceful.


[edit on 22-7-2010 by detachedindividual]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
I said to a work mate today that today was decision day on the G20 officer. He asked me for my opinion and I replied, I will bet money with you that that the officer would be let off even know there is good evidence that he had acted wrong.

2 hours later I was proved right...

Just shocking. The UK police wonder why we have very little faith in anything they do.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
Keep the posts on topic. There will be no more posting to the poster.

Further deviations from this will result in post removal.


My apologies. We have both resolved the issue privately.


On topic - I really hope people protest against this decision, maybe write to your MP's and keep reminding the politicians that we will not stand for corruption and injustice.

Write to downing street and the houses of parliament, and use social networking sites to keep the information flowing in the public domain. Murder and / or mansaughter or any other form of brutality should not go ignored.

Use your power as thinkers and writers and get scribbling.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Acidtastic
Dammit I hope so. If there aren't mass protests on the streets, akin to the poll tax riots, then I won't be a happy bunny. These murderers MUST be stopped!


Not akin to the poll tax riots! They were instigated by the police! I do not want to see more heads cracked with batons, more prosecution of victims, innocent bystanders and the like!



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Well at least the police are happy with the result

ukpoliceonline.co.uk

look in news section in general forum

[edit on 22-7-2010 by badvok123]



 

Mod Edit: Link format - Jak

[edit on 23/7/10 by JAK]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by detachedindividual
He attacked an unarmed man not even involved in the G20 protests.
[edit on 22-7-2010 by detachedindividual]


Firstly he may not have been involved in the actual protests themselves (no one can say for sure) he was however being a nuisance to the police before the incident which was caught on video. He was blocking a riot van which was on its way to a job so lets not make him out to be this whiter than white innocent man caught up in all the trouble.

Secondly its not illegal to film the police as long as you don't interfere with them performing their duties.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Twizzy

Firstly he may not have been involved in the actual protests themselves (no one can say for sure) he was however being a nuisance to the police before the incident which was caught on video. He was blocking a riot van which was on its way to a job so lets not make him out to be this whiter than white innocent man caught up in all the trouble.

Secondly its not illegal to film the police as long as you don't interfere with them performing their duties.


Even if he was blocking the riot van it would take a couple of officers no effort to go over to him either have a quiet word or simply just pick him up by the arms and move him. Having a masked police riot trooper in full body armour rugby tackle any person is just gross abuse of power and quite simply stupid. That is why this officer should be punished; he was overzealous and didn’t think. He has tarnished the police force’s reputation and destroyed a family's life.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by teapot

Originally posted by Acidtastic
Dammit I hope so. If there aren't mass protests on the streets, akin to the poll tax riots, then I won't be a happy bunny. These murderers MUST be stopped!


Not akin to the poll tax riots! They were instigated by the police! I do not want to see more heads cracked with batons, more prosecution of victims, innocent bystanders and the like!


This cartoon was made way before the G20 protests, but seems to capture the essence of police vs protester



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Twizzy
 


If true then what a heinous crime, up there with Fred West and Peter Sutcliffe etc, obstructing a riot van.
Course he deserved to die!

He had been selling the evening newspaper and had several times requested that he be let through the police cordon to go home.

Even if he had not died the actions of the police officer were excessive and unnecessary and he should have been charged with assault.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


Thats what they said mate they reckoned it was evidence of me obstructing them



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   
The officer was not even suspended from duty? Sacked from his job? THIS is a terrible miscarrige of justice, that poor guys family, they've been screwed twice over by the same PTB



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   
It seems they can do whatever they want... But they are playing with fire. Remember what happened in Greece (I think) when the police shot a child that was throwing stones at them?
Police in the UK is bent like everywhere else.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   
PROTESTERS RATIONALIZE THROWING BRICKS



Originally posted by Jon Quinn
Even if he was blocking the riot van it would take a couple of officers no effort to go over to him either have a quiet word or simply just pick him up by the arms and move him. Having a masked police riot trooper in full body armour rugby tackle any person is just gross abuse of power and quite simply stupid. That is why this officer should be punished; he was overzealous and didn’t think. He has tarnished the police force’s reputation and destroyed a family's life.


which is exactly why this is going to happen:


Originally posted by stealthyaroura
yeah they look after there own!
police scum!

next time there is a protest i hope the scum
responsible get a brick to the skull.


Except it will just be some unrelated officer, otherwise acting in high regard, on the other side of the globe with a brick through his front wind shield.

Acquitting this man of any charges was a mistake and it only creates more mistakes.

Wiki Constructive Involuntary Manslaughter 7/22/10:
en.wikipedia.org...



Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention. It is normally divided into two categories; constructive manslaughter and criminally negligent manslaughter.

Constructive manslaughter is also referred to as ‘unlawful act’ manslaughter. It is based on the doctrine of constructive malice, whereby the malicious intent inherent in the commission of a crime is considered to apply to the consequences of that crime. It occurs when someone kills, without intent, in the course of committing an unlawful act. The malice involved in the crime is transferred to the killing, resulting in a charge of manslaughter.

For example, if a person throws a brick off a bridge into vehicular traffic below they could be found to intend or be reckless as to assault or criminal damage (see DPP v Newbury[11]). There is no intent to kill, and a resulting death would not be considered murder, but would be considered involuntary manslaughter. The accused's responsibility for causing death is constructed from the fault in committing what might have been a minor criminal act.

There are three requirements for constructive manslaughter:

* The defendant must do an unlawful act. This must be a criminal, not civil, offence[12] and must involve mens rea of intention or recklessness. Crimes involving negligence or omission will not suffice.[13].
* The act must be dangerous. Whether the act is dangerous is objectively judged from the point of view of a sober and reasonable person present at the scene who witnessed the act.[14] The defendant need not be aware the act is dangerous[15] and the act need not be directed at the victim.[16]
* The act must cause the death of the victim.




VIDEO: Tomlinson Family: "Decision a Disgrace"

from that video:



Family member:
THE CPS CLEARLY ADMITTED THAT THE POLICE OFFICER ASSAULTED OUR DAD
[]
THE CPS Have accepted that the conduct of the OFFICER WAS UNLAWFUL.
[]
Having accepted that the officer committed an unlawful assault on their dad and that he died of either a heart attack or internal bleeding immediately afterwards.
It is clearly a disgrace.



Final Word:

Involuntary Constructive Manslaughter

No Charge =

PROTESTERS RATIONALIZE THROWING BRICKS

man's law may be flawed, but God's Law is EYE FOR EYE

Here's the footage of the BATON TO LEG and PUSH TO PAVEMENT


where you don't actually see:

footage of Tomlinson's HEAD BOUNCING OFF THE PAVEMENT

or the fact that:



The Crown Prosecution Service’s report said that at 7.15pm on April 1, a police dog handler put out his hand to move Mr Tomlinson away and a police dog bit him on his leg. Mr Tomlinson did not react to the bite, and it was then that Pc Harwood moved in and shoved him to the ground.


but given the events that transpired it is no surprise that:

Pc Harwood Faced Two Previous Aggression Inquiries

5 minutes later, AN INNOCENT BYSTANDER, with his HANDS IN POCKETS is dead from either a heart attack or internal bleeding.

It is what it is, watch for flying bricks.

I am,

Sri Oracle

My heart and empathy to the family.
This was indeed a disgrace.


[edit on 22-7-2010 by Sri Oracle]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by foxhoundone
 


There were three autopsies performed; one immediately after death, the findings of which can now only be described as highly suspect.
The second was performed at the request of the deceased's familly and found that death was the result of internal bleeding due to blunt force trauma to the abdomen.
The third post mortem, performed at the request of the officer due to the conflicting evidence of the first two, agreed with the findings of the second.

From a layman's point of view, granted with relatively limited knowledge, I would suggest that the bleeding was from either one or a combination of the blows Tomlinson received from the police officer.

There is substantial video evidence to support this.

I have known quite a few private individuals be tried and convicted on far less clear video and circumstantial evidence.



[edit on 22/7/10 by Freeborn]


Even worse, none of this 'fluid' was retained. The first pathologist poured it away. Interesting to note that prior to his suspension, his 'neutrality' had been questioned on a number of occasions.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Hawkwind.
 

It was a clearly unprovoked assault. In normal situations where death results from an unprovoked assault a charge of manslaughter would normally follow. In my opinion the Crown Prosecution Service should have allowed a jury to test the evidence and not prejudge the issue themselves. If the Coroners Inquest returns a verdict of unlawful killing, which it is open for it do, the CPS may have to look at this again. The family has the alternative of a private prosecution, but the snag is that the CPS may take it over and the family may still be denied justice. I sincerely hope that the family is given all the help that it needs to get justice. I've no doubt that the policeman concerned did not intend to kill, but every time someone launches an attack on someone that causes them to fall to the ground, lethal head injuries can occur and the police should be well aware of this possibility. The fact that two pathologists said death was caused by severe internal bleeding suggests a strong possibility of cause and direct effect. This story is not over.


[edit on 22-7-2010 by ciscoagent]

[edit on 22-7-2010 by ciscoagent]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
I respect a person that wants to protect his surroundings and does his job for a #ty pay with honor and justice.

People like Simon Harwood (if that's his real name) make me sick. The same sickness I got from the bicyclist that was pushed for no reason.
How frustrated and psychologically damaged these people have to be to act violently without any reason.

I believe Simon Harwood might want to consider resigning his job and move out of Europe, or better yet the world for a while.

At least if it were my dad Simon was looking consciously at his own autopsy by now to find out the distinct differences between the conclusions in the reports....



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
In my opinion this is a clear example of inside corruption. No matter whatever might have been the medical cause of Mr Ian Thomlinson's death, the fact remains that he was viciously assaulted for no apparant reason, by an uniformed officer of a British Police Constabulary. As a consequence of the unprovoked assault, Mr Ian Thomlinson suffered severe internal bleeding, which lead to his eventual death some hours later. But for that assault, Mr Ian Thomlinson would still be alive today. In my opinion, what all the pathologists should agree on, is that Mr Ian Thomlinson was a medically fragile person, which only adds to the scandal, in that an officer of a British Police Constabulary assaulted a medically fragile person, apparantly without any justifiable reason.

If you, or I, or anyone else, were to have assaulted Mr Ian Thomlinson, in such a manner, we would certainly have been prosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Service, and would certainly not be at liberty. The identity of the particular Police Constable, should be made known to the public, and he should be refused further employment, not just in the Police, but also in security work anywhere else too. The particular Police Constable who attacked Mr Ian Thomlinson, is obviously a seriously sick in the head [*see explanatory note below] person and should be behind bars at London Zoo, as an example of a living fossil, as a proof of the theory that we as a species are descended from the apes. My opinion is that the Police Constable who murdered Mr Ian Thomlinson, is in much the same category, as was the now passed away by suicide, Mr Raoul Thomas Moat. They suffer the same psychological disorder. Once again are STEROIDS to blame for this kind of senseless mindless violence ? Are the Police Constables officially or unofficially pumping themselves up with a cocktail of drugs, alcohol and steroids ? Obviously that might be the problem. In which case such officers should be required to leave the Police Force.

According to the Protocols of the Geneva Convention, usage of force against the civilian population, is by definition a crime called brutality. Usage of military force against the civilian population, is by definition a crime called terrorism. Torture is a crime worse than murder. Perhaps what needs to be done is to investigate why do the Police Forces employ who they employ. Perhaps the Police are employing and training the wrong type of men ? The particular Constabulary, who assaulted Mr Ian Thomlinson, are a "special force" pertaining to the Temple District of the City of London. It being a clandestine, secretive and subterranean nation unto itself, in that it is exempted from having to pay taxes, usually demanded by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs. With regard to this particular murder case, there is a strong stench of Freemasonry. It being a freemasonry cover up operation, similar to that of the Jack the Ripper murders. The Police Constabulary are a sectarian gang, the same as any other sectarian gang. It is the same psychology at work.

[*dellusional psychosis in that the Police Constable was psycho-pathologically obsessively compulsively autistically thinking that members of the public, not just Mr Ian Thomlinson, were behaving criminally, just because they were in the street, instead of being hidden away indoors. As if just being in the street is a crime. Persons diagnosed with autism, and or any other form of micro-encephalitis, are not suitable for working in the Police or any position of public responsibility].


Recommended reading : THE DRAGON SYNDICATES [The Global Phenomenon of the Triads] by MARTIN BOOTH published by Doubleday of Transworld Ltd. 1999. ISBN 0-385-40914-1.
Amazon Books



[edit on 22/7/2010 by CAELENIUM]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   
I've followed this case since the news broke about it. It has saddened and angered me from day 1. This crime was committed by the UK Police Force, people I would expect to have HELPED me or anyone else stuck amidst the chaos that was London that day.

Ian Tomlinson wasn't a protestor or a rioter (big difference between the two by the way), he was just a man on his way home to watch the footie. He probably had no idea what was going off before he set off for home.

This isn't even a cover up, the video shows very clearly a police officer pushing him to the ground. If someone filmed me pushing someone around like that, it is likely the evidence would be used AGAINST me by the police in court, and I would be prosecuted, as I would hope anyone behaving in this manner towards another human being would be.

Police officers are NOT above the law, they mearly are charged by the government to enforce it. A bit like how someone at a cash till is trusted by the store to take payment for goods in exchange for a wage, NOT to receive profits on every payment they receive or pocket the cash for themselves!

I was really hoping our new government would not let this go, and make sure the officer concerned was dealt with as a criminal. It doesn't seem that way does it. There were many other reports & recordings of assaults on the public by police during the G20 protests, and I expect many, many more went unreported.

The behavour of the police that day towards what was for the best part a PEACEFUL PROTEST, NOT A RIOT, was diabolical. Those few people hellbent on rioting caused an overeaction I have never in my 24 years of life witnessed by the police. They should have been contained & moved on, allowing people to protest in a peaceful manner free from abuse & assault by the police.

All the police should have been doing is keeping the peace, not marching all over people, and evidently harming them.

In this digital age there should have been no way out for this man, he should certainly be facing charges for assault at the very least. I really do not know how it is possible to say he is free from any charges at all.

The video shows an assault being commited, wether or not the said assault contributed to Mr Tomlinson's death might be up for debate, but I have no doubts it contributed to it.

I have shed a few tears for Mr Tomlinson, and hoped to everyone's god the officer be brought to justice. The only hope now is that our new government steps in & demands the case not be closed, and the officer kept away from the public during the process.

But again, the elite pay off the elite, the closed doors remain closed and the criminal gets away with his crime.

I wonder how much money in bribes is being accepted by those dealing with this investigation? Power pulls a few strings, money pulls them all.

The whole way this happened made me think the officer may have known Mr Tomlinson from another time, maybe some time in his past, and had a grudge or something. I see NO valid reason for pushing Mr Tomlinson, he was nowhere near the said officer and posed no threat. Even if he did pose a threat, what good was shoving him over going to do?

If he hadn't been an innocent caught up in the chaos, but had been a suicide bomber about to take out London or pull a gun, still the idiotic actions of the officer would not have prevented any possible danger! I see no reason, none at all, apart from something hidden or secret. Or did the officer simply get out the wrong side of his bed that day? We'll never really know.

The IPCC is about as good as a chocolate teapot, and I expected nothing better from them. It's time for the police to be regulated by an agency who actualy treat complaints for what they are, complaints, instead of just a backdoor way for the police to look as if they are acting in the favour of the complainant, when infact it's all PA bullcrap.

Sorry for my long reply, but as I said, I have followed this case since the new broke, and it has shocked my nation.

Please spare a thought for Mr Tomlinson and his family, may justice be served, and soon.

~Chez



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Hawkwind.
 


and it's the 5th anniversary of jean charles de menezes' death at the hands of the good old met...

...our bobbies may not carry pistols (usually), but they do have tasers, mace, batons and a habit of killing innocent civilians...

may ian and jean charles, and all the other victims, rest in peace.

23



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join