FabSwingers.com forum: Police Officer not guilty. Unbelievable?

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

How on earth has the PC who caused the death of Ian Tomlinson been found not guilty?

It was evident from 30 seconds of video (a clearer one than on todays BBV news item)to see what happened. An innocent man, d*unk maybe,walking away.

All this after an inquest verdict of unlawful killing.

SHAME on the members of the jury.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

is this the guy that was pushed during the riots?

maybe there wasnt enough evidence to prove that the push he received resulted in his death?

i'm not saying that the PC shouldnt answer some sort of charges if it is the case that he was walking away but if this was a case dealing with the death or Mr Tomlinson then the jury have to rule on the evidence presented for that charge

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I totaly agree with you, and i didnt like the look of that policeman or his wife either.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

Same was as John Terry is innocent

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
Forum Mod
over a year ago

God help us all if we're found guilty of something because someone does'nt like the look of us

I hav'nt read the whole story yet so I can't comment

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

i have to say i was very shocked and disgusted at the not guilty verdict.is it any wonder so many ppl have no faith in our police or justice system today

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"God help us all if we're found guilty of something because someone does'nt like the look of us

I hav'nt read the whole story yet so I can't comment"

obviously i wouldnt think someone was guilty because of the way they looked.

just saying thats all.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 18:11:49]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Apparently a police officer in full riot gear with plenty of backup feels threatened to shoulder barge a man walking away from police lines.

He had no weapon, no violent motive and was walking away from them.

Turning your back to a police officer provokes a reaction it seems.

The officer responsible is a known thug and should he have done that to someone who is bigger than him, he'd of had that stick of his shoved up his arse.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

"Apparently a police officer in full riot gear with plenty of backup feels threatened to shoulder barge a man walking away from police lines.

He had no weapon, no violent motive and was walking away from them.

Turning your back to a police officer provokes a reaction it seems.

The officer responsible is a known thug and should he have done that to someone who is bigger than him, he'd of had that stick of his shoved up his arse."

would he really???

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adgeeMan
over a year ago

Sw Scotland

"The officer responsible is a known thug "

I haven't been following this in the news of late, What else is he been found guilty of?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

was the case about the death of the civilian? if so surely only details relating to that incident are relevant?

if the case was to determine wether or not the PC should keep his job then they would be relevant

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

"
just been reading this from the telegraph...i think if this was disclosed to the jury we would have had the right verdict......guilty

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adgeeMan
over a year ago

Sw Scotland

[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 18:32:53]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

just been reading this from the telegraph...i think if this was disclosed to the jury we would have had the right verdict......guilty"

the one incident reported on the BBC website but not disclosed to the jury related to an off duty road rage incident. This was dealt with and the PC retired from the force before disciplinary hearing.

there is to be a public misconduct hearing that will deal with te failings behind the PC's re-recruitment to the force etc

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adgeeMan
over a year ago

Sw Scotland

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

Thanks

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

He's a copper! upholding the law and protecting the community!( f**king joke by the way) You didn't really expect a guilty verdict did you?

If it had been the other way round the guys feet wouldn't have touched the ground! He'd have been banged up straight away! Hail the great British justice system we have (NOT)

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

just been reading this from the telegraph...i think if this was disclosed to the jury we would have had the right verdict......guilty

there is to be a public misconduct hearing that will deal with te failings behind the PC's re-recruitment to the force etc"

Any information relating to the character of the defendant is usually liberally used by the CPS guess they missed that one

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"is this the guy that was pushed during the riots?

maybe there wasnt enough evidence to prove that the push he received resulted in his death?

If that was the case then the Coroner would not have recorded a verdict of unlawful killing.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Apparently a police officer in full riot gear with plenty of backup feels threatened to shoulder barge a man walking away from police lines.

He had no weapon, no violent motive and was walking away from them.

Turning your back to a police officer provokes a reaction it seems.

The officer responsible is a known thug and should he have done that to someone who is bigger than him, he'd of had that stick of his shoved up his arse.

would he really???

Seeing as I have seen it with my own eyes, yes they do get a bit of karma their way.

Where the sun doesn't shine is up for debate though.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

"is this the guy that was pushed during the riots?

maybe there wasnt enough evidence to prove that the push he received resulted in his death?

If that was the case then the Coroner would not have recorded a verdict of unlawful killing.

ummmm...ok....i'll take that one

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *eaboMan
over a year ago

marden

knowledge of previous incidents may unduly influence the jury so they are not allowed to be told. It would be included in the summing up after the jury's verdict was delvered but not before. He was on trial for this incident, not the others. Before anyone jumps on me, i firmly believe he is guilty of manslaughter and should be gaoled as such. No body needs people like him becoming the law instead of upholding it. He doesn't deserve to be a copper.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

This is an appalling outcome but probably the 'correct' verdict given the evidence presented and the crime he was charged with.

I have questions about how he was appointed in the first place given the record that is now emerging and why he has been allowed to retire rather than being disciplined and sacked?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *punkloverCouple
over a year ago

hatfield

yep, retire with a tidy pension no doubt !

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *g99Couple
over a year ago

Well done on the jury's behalf, not Falling under the pressure of the media, the news are showing this police officer during the day fighting with rioters! Tryin To say he was looking for trouble, it was a riot, civilians where assaulting police and damaging public property, Ofcourse he was going to be using force throughout the day! Obviously it's very sad this man died but he was in the middle of a riot walking as slow as he could after being asked to move on, he was pushed which sadly lead to his death, but the police officer was doin his job

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

"knowledge of previous incidents may unduly influence the jury so they are not allowed to be told. It would be included in the summing up after the jury's verdict was delvered but not before. He was on trial for this incident, not the others. Before anyone jumps on me, i firmly believe he is guilty of manslaughter and should be gaoled as such. No body needs people like him becoming the law instead of upholding it. He doesn't deserve to be a copper. "

Well I will have to admit that sounds like a logical reason for not disclosing it during the trial, is that the case for any jury trial? kinda sounds wrong that a serial rapist may get the benefit of the doubt on a bad day...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

A jury found him not guilty of the crime the CPS brought against him not for not killing the poor man.

It is very difficult to prove a policeman is guilty of manslaughter under those circumstances. There has not been a successful prosecution in nearly 40 years.

Partly because of this case the police stood by during the riots. People's homes and business were lost and there were some murders. At that time the cry was for a stronger hand from the police.

I wasn't in court so can't comment on the evidence presented. I do hold our criminal justice system up against any in the world though.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 19:19:10]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *g99Couple
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 19:14:57]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Ofcourse he was going to be using force throughout the day! Obviously it's very sad this man died but he was in the middle of a riot walking as slow as he could after being asked to move on, he was pushed which sadly lead to his death, but the police officer was doin his job"

'you mean 'reasonable force' in which the person has to be under imminent threat of attack from an assailant. which wasn't the case this time. He should have gone to prison'

My brother told me that. He's a Chief Inspector. he probably knows more about the law than i do

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 19:21:34]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

The system is based on proving guilt of the crime as charged not proving potential guilt because of past character. It can lead to those who are responsible being found not guilty and cases where it goes the other way. Both miscarriages of 'justice' (I know I am using the word out of legal context there before I get pulled up)but are surely better than assuming because you did something bad once you will always do something bad.

For employment in most jobs past actions and character are used to make the decision.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *g99Couple
over a year ago

"you mean 'reasonable force' in which the person has to be under imminent threat of attack from an assailant. which wasn't the case this time. He should have gone to prison'

My brother told me that. He's a Chief Inspector. he probably knows more about the law than i do

In the middle of a riot I'm sure plenty other people where pushed and told to move on the day, unfortunately it lead to this mans death, but he was doing his job and I'm sure plenty other trained police officers would of pushed that man in the same situation

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

In the bigger picture, if the copper was found guilty, then that sends several messages to the police and those they are dealing with.

Fellow officers would be more reluctant to deal with situations of public order so robustly. They are trained to take charge in those situations and be aggressive to get the job done.

Those taking part in public disorder would just play in this, even more than they do now.

It is a great shame that the man died, im not defending the copper, or saying if it was right or wrong.

Steve

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

he hit him with a baton first. while he was walking away from him.with his hands in his pockets.then he pushed him over.that's not reasonable force in any sense of the phrase or the law

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"you mean 'reasonable force' in which the person has to be under imminent threat of attack from an assailant. which wasn't the case this time. He should have gone to prison'

My brother told me that. He's a Chief Inspector. he probably knows more about the law than i do

Hmmm... not quite a phalanx but a lot of officers were in that line. Only one stepped out and pushed Tomlinson. He had walked past others who let him carry on walking. Look at the footage.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *obandruthCouple
over a year ago

wolverhampton

one law 4 them another one 4 the likes of every one else

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *g99Couple
over a year ago

"he hit him with a baton first. while he was walking away from him.with his hands in his pockets.then he pushed him over.that's not reasonable force in any sense of the phrase or the law"

The footage shows several police officers nudging him on this be his que to move on faster he didn't, then was pushed no footage of him beig struck by a baton

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 19:19:10]"

Shame someone quoted you before you deleted it isn't it?

Your post is possibly the most disgusting thing I've ever seen on here.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

"[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 19:19:10]

Shame someone quoted you before you deleted it isn't it?

Your post is possibly the most disgusting thing I've ever seen on here."

i agree

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

"[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 19:19:10]

Shame someone quoted you before you deleted it isn't it?

Your post is possibly the most disgusting thing I've ever seen on here.

i agree"

i quoted and have deleted also as he messaged me in PM apologising....lets accept a mistake was made and rectified as soon as it was pointed out

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Its easy to judge others jobs when your not doing it yourself

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *a and kaCouple
over a year ago

Leicestershire(ish)

"no footage of him beig struck by a baton "

Pardon! I could post several links to links and photos of PC Harwood striking Mr Tomlinson on the leg with his asp!

Also links to PC Harwood deliberately pushing a BBC cameraman to the ground as well as striking someone trying to help another person who was injured on the ground!

Harwood had clearly had one of his "Red Mist" moments (his words)!

Disgrace to the force!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"he hit him with a baton first. while he was walking away from him.with his hands in his pockets.then he pushed him over.that's not reasonable force in any sense of the phrase or the law

The footage shows several police officers nudging him on this be his que to move on faster he didn't, then was pushed no footage of him beig struck by a baton "

from BBC news just now

"A police officer who hit Ian Tomlinson with a baton and pushed him to the ground at the G20 protests has been found not guilty of manslaughter."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18900484

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *umpkinMan
over a year ago

near the sounds of the wimborne quarter jack!

Well I`m going to take a possibly controversial _iew here and I`m sorry if it upsets.

The majority of us have only seen the incedent and not the rest of the police officer`s working day. We haven`t seen what else he had gone through and other factors, all of which may have a bearing on how this police officer behaved. Let`s not forget that the man who died ingored instructions by more than one police officer to move away and chose to be obstructive instead, possibly his ineabreative state clouding his judgement when in normal circustances he wouldn`t have better judgement to keep away. We`ve possibly all seen how d*unken people can behave towards police without the ante being upped by having hundreds, possibly thousands of people intent on maximum disruption.

I`m not saying the force he used was right and whilst appreciating I haven`t had the training the police had I reckon in the same circumstances if it had been me as the police officer I would have been that p*ssed off I would have used more than a healthy push to get this guy to do what he needed to do for his own safety.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *b430Man
over a year ago

Tayside

no footage of him beig struck by a baton "

There is, it was shown on the news earlier this evening.

PS - I neither agree or disagree with the verdict as I haven't heard all the evidence presented to the jury!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

All i can say about this topic is we live in a great country and we spend so much of our time knocking everything about it

we are so so lucky

look around yourselfs at the rest of the world our justice may not be perfect but we are so lucky

WELL IM

proud to be britsh with all its faults

jill xx

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"no footage of him beig struck by a baton

Pardon! I could post several links to links and photos of PC Harwood striking Mr Tomlinson on the leg with his asp!

Also links to PC Harwood deliberately pushing a BBC cameraman to the ground as well as striking someone trying to help another person who was injured on the ground!

Harwood had clearly had one of his "Red Mist" moments (his words)!

Disgrace to the force!"

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

"you mean 'reasonable force' in which the person has to be under imminent threat of attack from an assailant. which wasn't the case this time. He should have gone to prison'

My brother told me that. He's a Chief Inspector. he probably knows more about the law than i do

Police officers are thoroughly trained to deal with riots and severe public disorder yet I did not other officers pulling out their batons .... 'which should only be used if the officer is facing a personal safety issue' and not for hearding the general public like sheep ...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

"[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 19:19:10]

Shame someone quoted you before you deleted it isn't it?

Your post is possibly the most disgusting thing I've ever seen on here.

i agree

i quoted and have deleted also as he messaged me in PM apologising....lets accept a mistake was made and rectified as soon as it was pointed out"

who is not accepting the apology he sent you... he posted , you posted, we posted, he wrote to you....

cool, that he did apologise.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

"[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 19:19:10]

Shame someone quoted you before you deleted it isn't it?

Your post is possibly the most disgusting thing I've ever seen on here.

i agree

i quoted and have deleted also as he messaged me in PM apologising....lets accept a mistake was made and rectified as soon as it was pointed out

who is not accepting the apology he sent you... he posted , you posted, we posted, he wrote to you....

cool, that he did apologise."

wasnt saying anyone wasnt accepting an apology, just knowing what these forums can be like i wanted to avert a witch hunt

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ovedupstillCouple
over a year ago

mullinwire

"you mean 'reasonable force' in which the person has to be under imminent threat of attack from an assailant. which wasn't the case this time. He should have gone to prison'

My brother told me that. He's a Chief Inspector. he probably knows more about the law than i do

you say you are sure others would have, but he was surrounded by other officers, and they didnt.

in fact they didnt even make a move towards the individual, apart fromthe officer charged.

my opinion? he is a guilty as a puppy sitting next to a pile of poo.

there is your 2 tier justice system.

not only is it the rich and famous that get away with it, but those that are supposed to be in the centre of it that do also.

guess he will now be off work with stress, on full pay, then retire, get compensated for all the stress he has had to deal with in the course of it, and get a gold plated pension.

the poor man.

and, on a further bit of a rant, the fellas family all coming out crying for their lost father/husband.

where were they all when he was living in a hostel?

bloody families!!!

bet i know who will be going to the criminal compensation board...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

its rare I think a police officer will get a conviction for the death of someone...there's too much to lose as in the public face of the police...so I expected nothing less...sure the police are doing a job but there's ways of doing a job...I was arrested once for something I didn't do...and the stories the police officer made up as to what id supposed to had done were laughable...so I know from experience its not allways as it seems...there's allways 2 sides to the story...and the police side isn't allways the true one..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *g99Couple
over a year ago

The footage I've seen shows several police officers come up behind him nude him on the back then him getting pushed, not being hit with a baton but this is just one video on YouTube maybe not the one being shown on the news, even so thr push killed him, if he had done as instructed he wouldn't of been pushed...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

he was proven not guilty because he was.

all he did was push a bloke who had under lying medical problems

not forgeting a big police pressence and the bloke chose to walk infront of the police to try and wind them up.

he should have stayed out of the way

the police have a very hard job,damned if they do damned if they dont

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *essiCouple
over a year ago

suffolk

I believe the term was reasonable force used in the incident...wonder if the same would be said if any of the general public were to use reasonable force when tackling a burglar for instance....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iker BullMan
over a year ago

leeds

I wonder if the verdict would have been the same if a poilice officer died after been pushed by a protester?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *b430Man
over a year ago

Tayside

"I believe the term was reasonable force used in the incident...wonder if the same would be said if any of the general public were to use reasonable force when tackling a burglar for instance...."

Yup the law protects Joe Bloggs too if they use "reasonable force" to protect their property

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iss_tressWoman
over a year ago

London

"He's a copper! upholding the law and protecting the community!( f**king joke by the way) You didn't really expect a guilty verdict did you?

If it had been the other way round the guys feet wouldn't have touched the ground! He'd have been banged up straight away! Hail the great British justice system we have (NOT)

No...he'd have been shot!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *am sampsonMan
over a year ago

cwmbran

"you mean 'reasonable force' in which the person has to be under imminent threat of attack from an assailant. which wasn't the case this time. He should have gone to prison'

My brother told me that. He's a Chief Inspector. he probably knows more about the law than i do

You seem to forget that he tried to leave the "troubled area" several times but was prevented from doing so by the Police

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *g99Couple
over a year ago

"he was proven not guilty because he was.

all he did was push a bloke who had under lying medical problems

not forgeting a big police pressence and the bloke chose to walk infront of the police to try and wind them up.

he should have stayed out of the way

the police have a very hard job,damned if they do damned if they dont

Well said I think too many people are too quick to accuse police of using there powers to munipulate situations, which I'm sure in some cases are true but this man didn't

I've been in a similar situation myself when I was younger, at a football match at the end stupidly stayed, and it was a derby match so very big police presence trying to clear football fans looking for trouble, my friends managed to get past the police to the pub but I was grabbed and told to move on, tried to explain I'm leve going to the pub with my mates, I was pushed and this pissed me off so when the police charged to disperse the fans I walked slowly and was hit with a police shield fell over and trampled on, who's fault was it? My own

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

depends on your interpretation of reasonable force like,oh lets say,putting 8 bullets in someone's head on a tube train

and then lying about it after

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

I do remember the threads during these shocking riots and the call for firmer action, the water canons and in some posts shooting plastic bullets.... and the fact that innocent bystanders will be hurt was recognised.

It is shocking the poor man died but i can not imagine the fear going thro the heads of the police as they are outnumbered, dodging things being hurled at them from in front, the sides, the back and above.

The jury were presented with evidence, they decided...... end of.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Apparently a police officer in full riot gear with plenty of backup feels threatened to shoulder barge a man walking away from police lines.

He had no weapon, no violent motive and was walking away from them.

Turning your back to a police officer provokes a reaction it seems.

The officer responsible is a known thug and should he have done that to someone who is bigger than him, he'd of had that stick of his shoved up his arse."

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *g99Couple
over a year ago

"I wonder if the verdict would have been the same if a poilice officer died after been pushed by a protester?"

No it wouldn't because the public know the police are there to protect, the people there wernt clearing the trouble away the police where, so if a member of the public pushed a police officer over causing his death Ofcourse it would be manslaughter

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *am sampsonMan
over a year ago

cwmbran

"I do remember the threads during these shocking riots and the call for firmer action, the water canons and in some posts shooting plastic bullets.... and the fact that innocent bystanders will be hurt was recognised.

The jury were presented with evidence, they decided...... end of."

It's only the end of the court case not public opinion

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

"The footage I've seen shows several police officers come up behind him nude him on the back then him getting pushed, not being hit with a baton but this is just one video on YouTube maybe not the one being shown on the news, even so thr push killed him, if he had done as instructed he wouldn't of been pushed..."

He was struck by the officer on the back of the knees while moving away ....the police have clearly defined rules regarding the use of a baton which relates only to a situation where there is a personal safety issue to the officer or those under his protection ...seems clear enough to me

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

The jury were presented with evidence, they decided...... end of.

It's only the end of the court case not public opinion"

of course Sam.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"its rare I think a police officer will get a conviction for the death of someone...there's too much to lose as in the public face of the police...so I expected nothing less...sure the police are doing a job but there's ways of doing a job...I was arrested once for something I didn't do...and the stories the police officer made up as to what id supposed to had done were laughable...so I know from experience its not allways as it seems...there's allways 2 sides to the story...and the police side isn't allways the true one..

I have two personal instances where police lied to avoid blame. That doesn't mean that I think all police are bad (I don't think you do either, I am just using your post as illustrative of the point).

For every story there are two sides and the truth lies somewhere between in some cases. As I have said, it was an awful outcome.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *am sampsonMan
over a year ago

cwmbran

"I wonder if the verdict would have been the same if a poilice officer died after been pushed by a protester?

The Police were not clearing the trouble - they were Kettling - which has been much criticised since

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *g99Couple
over a year ago

"He was struck by the officer on the back of the knees while moving away ....the police have clearly defined rules regarding the use of a baton which relates only to a situation where there is a personal safety issue to the officer or those under his protection ...seems clear enough to me "

Do you know how police officers are trained to use a baton during riot scenarios?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Well I`m going to take a possibly controversial _iew here and I`m sorry if it upsets.

I could not disagree with you more. he had training on how to deal with this sort of situation. His own inability to control his temper and emotions directly resulted in him attacking a member of the public, which resulted in his death.

If you or I attacked someone from behind and that person then died, we would be eating porridge for a very long time.

I long ago lost faith in the police and this sort of behaviour reinforces my feelings about them. I have been on the wrong end of a malicious coppers night stick... I wont go into details, but I will say that I never even went to court for it, but the copper left the 'service' soon after when a complaint was lodged.

Morons like this copper bring it back to being a police 'force', rather than the 'service' they try to depict themselves as.

The prosecution and the CPS should have looked at the charges they were bringing against him. You cannot blame a jury for finding him 'not guilty' if the charges brought against him were the wrong ones.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

Do you know how police officers are trained to use a baton during riot scenarios? "

I do not but I would hope they would adhere to adhere training and their 'rules of engagement' like the professionals they should be ..

unfortunately I feel the police have neither the self discipline or training that the military are blessed with in these situations ..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *g99Couple
over a year ago

"I do not but I would hope they would adhere to adhere training and their 'rules of engagement' like the professionals they should be ..

unfortunately I feel the police have neither the self discipline or training that the military are blessed with in these situations .."

Totally disagree have 5 years service in the armed services including riot training, and do not think the army would deal with it any better than the police do, yes I do think they would get the job done quicker but wit far more aggression than the police do, Whoch obviously the media woul have a field day with

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

"I do not but I would hope they would adhere to adhere training and their 'rules of engagement' like the professionals they should be ..

unfortunately I feel the police have neither the self discipline or training that the military are blessed with in these situations ..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

"I do not but I would hope they would adhere to adhere training and their 'rules of engagement' like the professionals they should be ..

unfortunately I feel the police have neither the self discipline or training that the military are blessed with in these situations ..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

The police in this country do not command the respect of the public largely due to the 'remote' nature of policing in this country they rely too heavily on cctv etc and target mainly soft issues to keep their clear-up figures looking good.

The Military still command respect and wear the uniform like a badge of honor.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I do not but I would hope they would adhere to adhere training and their 'rules of engagement' like the professionals they should be ..

unfortunately I feel the police have neither the self discipline or training that the military are blessed with in these situations ..

Aggression

: a forceful action or procedure (as an unprovoked attack) especially when intended to dominate or master

: hostile, injurious, or destructive behavior or outlook especially when caused by frustration

I somehow think that should be frowned upon when used on an old bloke with his hands in his pockets

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

"The police in this country do not command the respect of the public largely due to the 'remote' nature of policing in this country they rely too heavily on cctv etc and target mainly soft issues to keep their clear-up figures looking good.

The Military still command respect and wear the uniform like a badge of honor."

is that why some get attacked when wearing their uniform when home on leave then?

fact is this society has no respect for anyone, its a sad state of affairs and not one that has an easy resolution.

i watch almost every police programme going and the contempt for any authority figure is apalling.

lack of parenting skills, soft punishments and dare i say it...abuse of human rights laws have led to a society who believe they are above the law

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

"I do not but I would hope they would adhere to adhere training and their 'rules of engagement' like the professionals they should be ..

unfortunately I feel the police have neither the self discipline or training that the military are blessed with in these situations ..

Aggression

: a forceful action or procedure (as an unprovoked attack) especially when intended to dominate or master

: hostile, injurious, or destructive behavior or outlook especially when caused by frustration

I somehow think that should be frowned upon when used on an old bloke with his hands in his pockets"

perception is everything though....he was told to move on. yes he was doing this but was he doing it deliberately slowly to provoke a reaction? he certainly wasnt rushing was he.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

PC Simon Harwood, who was found not guilty of causing the death of Ian Tomlinson despite video evidence showing him doing it, has narrowly avoided serious injury after using what he decribed as ‘reasonable force’ to open his front door.

PC Harwood described how his front door had obstructed him in the course of getting into his house by failing to comply with his request for entry.

“The door was deliberately getting in my way,” he said.

“I asked it to open, but depite repeated warnings it continued to ignore my requests.”

“It was at this point that I took reasonable steps to gain access to my property by commandeering a double decker bus and forcing the door open at high speed.”

Pc Harwood denied that his actions were excessive by insisting that the door had been causing problems earlier in the day.

“I was cleaning up my kitchen after I smashed up the sink following an incident involving a stubborn lid on a jar of marmalade.” he explained.

“There was a disturbance coming from the hallway that sounded like a knocking coming from the door.”

“The wife had forgotten her key, so I had to throw the television set through the living room window to let her in.”

After he was found not guilty of manslaughter, PC Harwood, 45, was also involved in an altercation with a bottle of champagne.

“The cork refused to come out,” he said

“So I burned down an off license.”

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

"I do not but I would hope they would adhere to adhere training and their 'rules of engagement' like the professionals they should be ..

unfortunately I feel the police have neither the self discipline or training that the military are blessed with in these situations ..

Aggression

: a forceful action or procedure (as an unprovoked attack) especially when intended to dominate or master

: hostile, injurious, or destructive behavior or outlook especially when caused by frustration

I somehow think that should be frowned upon when used on an old bloke with his hands in his pockets"

This poor guy was not in the heart of the riots, which is where the police should have been, they waited too long and let the situation escalate to the distress of the public

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *g99Couple
over a year ago

No matter what you label 'aggression' as I'm sure it used in some way or manner to control a riot, why? Because it has to be asking someone who is obstructing police nicely who then ignores non-aggressive language the next step would be to show some aggression

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

"PC Simon Harwood, who was found not guilty of causing the death of Ian Tomlinson despite video evidence showing him doing it, has narrowly avoided serious injury after using what he decribed as ‘reasonable force’ to open his front door.

PC Harwood described how his front door had obstructed him in the course of getting into his house by failing to comply with his request for entry.

“The door was deliberately getting in my way,” he said.

“I asked it to open, but depite repeated warnings it continued to ignore my requests.”

“It was at this point that I took reasonable steps to gain access to my property by commandeering a double decker bus and forcing the door open at high speed.”

Pc Harwood denied that his actions were excessive by insisting that the door had been causing problems earlier in the day.

“I was cleaning up my kitchen after I smashed up the sink following an incident involving a stubborn lid on a jar of marmalade.” he explained.

“There was a disturbance coming from the hallway that sounded like a knocking coming from the door.”

“The wife had forgotten her key, so I had to throw the television set through the living room window to let her in.”

After he was found not guilty of manslaughter, PC Harwood, 45, was also involved in an altercation with a bottle of champagne.

“The cork refused to come out,” he said

“So I burned down an off license.”

LMFAO luv it

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *umpkinMan
over a year ago

near the sounds of the wimborne quarter jack!

"............... attacking .............. "

You mean this was un-proked?

From my experience with the police they usually leave you alone but as I have said previously, training or no training, put yourself in his position, probably weary after being under siege for some considerable time from countless idiots who were protesting and you get a stroppy d*unk who wont listen to your instructions which are given for his safety. As someone else has pointed out, the military boys would more than likely would have treated him is a much more forcefull manner.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

This happened away from the core of the riots which the police were just letting carry on ....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

And both the fire service and paramedics were left facing dangerous confrontations while doing 'their jobs' due to the lack of courage clearly displayed by the police in short 'let it happen we'll look at the cctv and catch them after

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Its also interesting to look at how Harwood got back into the Met after retiring on 'medical grounds' ahead of a disciplinary panel into previous conduct

Seems The Met fucked up and didn't do the paperwork.The bloke shouldn't have been a copper let alone in The TSG

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *eavy Metal BallzMan
over a year ago

Birmingham

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

That's what I found most unbelievable, he was up on a charge, but left the met due to ill health, joined Surrey police force, two years later transfers back to the Met, no charges disciplinary case dropped, free to kill.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

"Its also interesting to look at how Harwood got back into the Met after retiring on 'medical grounds' ahead of a disciplinary panel into previous conduct

Seems The Met fucked up and didn't do the paperwork.The bloke shouldn't have been a copper let alone in The TSG"

now this i agree with!!!!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Sorry not read all the posts but as I said in the Terry thread you can't be found innocent. You ARE innocent until proven guilty. Much as I had taken a dislike to this policeman and even more so Terry I have to believe in common justice.

Thats why a Defendants 'previous' is NOT told to the jury as that can adversely effect their judgement. Someone can have a string opf offences but it doesn't prove anything at all. However where I do think the Law is an Arse is when someone is found guilty (as this copper should have been) and dtheir previous is known to the judge the Courts still don't dish out proper sentences.

IMHO.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 19/07/12 21:13:32]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *am sampsonMan
over a year ago

cwmbran

"............... attacking ..............

You mean this was un-proked?

Under siege ? wasn't he supposed to be staying with the van

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *am sampsonMan
over a year ago

cwmbran

"Sorry not read all the posts but as I said in the Terry thread you can't be found innocent. You ARE innocent until proven guilty. Much as I had taken a dislike to this policeman and even more so Terry I have to believe in common justice.

IMHO."

sorry to correct you but you are "presumed innocent" there's a world of difference

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

there are lots of bits of this and these verdicts that doesn't it well with me...

so one jury at the inquest delivered a veridct of "unlawful killing" beyond a reasonable doubt... and then this jury decide he was not guilty of manslaughter "beyond a reasonable doubt"....

then we find out about the pc's history with regard to misconduct hearings.....

then when the two doctors who's testimony contridict each other.. we then find out the doctor for the defence of the policeman has been twice suspended for mistakes...... and is not longer on the home office patholigist list....

there are holes all over the place....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

Its called 'looking after your own' and 'one law for you lot and another for us'. And why people like me lost respect for the Police years ago.

Chuck in the Police Fderation which is one of the most anti-change and closed shop unions there is and the 'look after No 1' goes even further. And how can they get away with a 'blacks only' Police Federation? Wonder how long I would last if I started a 'whites only' truckers Union. Or a 'blokes only' Union. There would be a police helicopter, 16 Dogs, TSG and armed police sorrounding the village ffs.

This is why this copper was not found guilty. The Met had too much to hide and lose.

So thats OK then...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

"there are lots of bits of this and these verdicts that doesn't it well with me...

so one jury at the inquest delivered a veridct of "unlawful killing" beyond a reasonable doubt... and then this jury decide he was not guilty of manslaughter "beyond a reasonable doubt"....

then we find out about the pc's history with regard to misconduct hearings.....

there are holes all over the place....

Many in Blackburn, Lancashire.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

Its called 'looking after your own' and 'one law for you lot and another for us'. And why people like me lost respect for the Police years ago.

This is why this copper was not found guilty. The Met had too much to hide and lose.

So thats OK then...

But ultimately, didn't the jury decide?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago

Bristol

PC Harwood described how his front door had obstructed him in the course of getting into his house by failing to comply with his request for entry.

“The door was deliberately getting in my way,” he said.

“I asked it to open, but depite repeated warnings it continued to ignore my requests.”

“It was at this point that I took reasonable steps to gain access to my property by commandeering a double decker bus and forcing the door open at high speed.”

Pc Harwood denied that his actions were excessive by insisting that the door had been causing problems earlier in the day.

“I was cleaning up my kitchen after I smashed up the sink following an incident involving a stubborn lid on a jar of marmalade.” he explained.

“There was a disturbance coming from the hallway that sounded like a knocking coming from the door.”

“The wife had forgotten her key, so I had to throw the television set through the living room window to let her in.”

After he was found not guilty of manslaughter, PC Harwood, 45, was also involved in an altercation with a bottle of champagne.

“The cork refused to come out,” he said

“So I burned down an off license.”

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"sorry to correct you but you are "presumed innocent" there's a world of difference"

Correct me all you like its cool.

But I do think you'll find the Law says 'there is a presumption of innocence until a Defendant is found Guilty'. Not quite the same and which means they are innocent. We are all innocent until proven guilty. What other option is there?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Has nobody worked it out yet theres one rule for us and one for them. The justice system in this country is a fuckin joke, simple. It's been proven time and again.

* fUcks of BaCk to The BAr * HiC

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

the vast majority of the police do what is a difficult and hard job to a professional standard for the society we all live in..

those coppers will probably look at todays decision with surprise and dismay as they will know the guy was a loose canon and people like him give them all a bad name...

the guy was unlawfully killed, someone should be held to account...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *am sampsonMan
over a year ago

cwmbran

"sorry to correct you but you are "presumed innocent" there's a world of difference

Correct me all you like its cool.

Sorry but we are innocent or guilty of a crime because we have or not commited a crime - this occurs before and is not dependent on any lawful process

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ap AdgeMan
over a year ago

Wirral

A politcal decision to control the masses. The sheep. That are most of the UK population. No copper has. With his record should be. Serving. And yes next time you see a. Demonstation avoid I have quietly observed some in the past were some coppers were itching to get stuck in

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *b430Man
over a year ago

Tayside

"A politcal decision to control the masses.

I didn't realise the Jury was made up of just Politicians

Ye learn something new on here everyday!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *adystephanieTV/TS
over a year ago

glos

In 2001, Pc Harwood was involved in an off-duty incident with another motorist, during which he attempted to arrest the man, unlawfully, for common assault.

The driver was awarded compensation, but Pc Harwood "medically retired" from the Met days before disciplinary proceedings were due to begin.

Merely a week later, Harwood was working as a civilian office employee for the force, and in less than two years was back on the streets as a member of Surrey Police.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission's deputy chair, Deborah Glass, said on Thursday it was alarming that "police officers who have avoided disciplinary proceedings by resigning or retiring are able to come back," saying incidents like these would damage public confidence in the police.

In 2003, shortly after returning to frontline service, Pc Harwood was accused by a fellow officer of using excessive force during an arrest, allegedly grabbing a suspect by the throat and pushing him into a wooden table, causing it to break, before punching against a wall and shouting at him. One month later, Harwood applied to return to the Met Police.

Just a small part of this fine upstanding officers conduct record

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ap AdgeMan
over a year ago

Wirral

linson's family said they would now take civil action against the Met, while the force said that it would hold Harwood to account in a public disciplinary hearing.

The Met's deputy assistant commissioner, Maxine de Brunner, conceded that Harwood should never have been allowed to re-join the force.

"It is clear that insufficient recording and checks meant that detailed information regarding the officer's misconduct history was not shared at key points. We got that wrong. Since then there have been huge changes to vetting processes. Now all applicants, including officers applying to becoming police staff, as well those re-joining or transferring from other police services, are formally vetted and this involves a full misconduct intelligence check."

De Brunner did not explicitly apologise to Tomlinson's family, saying only that their "sympathies" were with them.

Outside the court, Tomlinson's stepson, Paul King, statementread a brief : "It really hurts. But this is not the end – we are not giving up on justice for Ian. There has to be one formal and final answer to the question: 'Who killed Ian?' And we will now pursue this in the civil court." He was too emotional to answer questions.

Harwood and his wife left soon afterwards, and gave no comment.

British juries are notoriously reluctant to convict police for serious alleged crimes carried out on duty. No police officer has been found guilty of manslaughter in 25 years, despite hundreds of cases in which families have alleged wrongdoing.

Deborah Coles, from the charity Inquest, called the verdict "a damning reflection of the systemic problems inherent in the current investigation system where deaths following police use of force are not treated as potential crimes".

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Unless you were in the courtroom and saw and heard all of the evidence then it is impossible for anyone to put themselves in the position of the jury. Jury duty especially in high profile case is extremely difficult the pressure is immense. The whole point of our judicial system is the presumption of innocent until proven guilty. The policeman concerned was found not guilty. For this there cannot have been enough evidence to prove his guilt.

This is why I have always felt that there should be three possible verdicts for jury's to chose from. Guilty, Not Guilty and Not Proven, pretty self explanitory really.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ideal for The TSG. I bet they love him. Makes me hanker for my teenage years growing up in Brixton and the wonderful SPG. The Police never learnt any lessons from the Scarman Report it seems

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *b430Man
over a year ago

Tayside

"Unless you were in the courtroom and saw and heard all of the evidence then it is impossible for anyone to put themselves in the position of the jury. Jury duty especially in high profile case is extremely difficult the pressure is immense. The whole point of our judicial system is the presumption of innocent until proven guilty. The policeman concerned was found not guilty. For this there cannot have been enough evidence to prove his guilt.

This is why I have always felt that there should be three possible verdicts for jury's to chose from. Guilty, Not Guilty and Not Proven, pretty self explanitory really. "

Not Proven is a verdict that can be given in Scottish Courts

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes but not in England or Wales. But because the Double Jeopardy Law is no longer in place as least someone can be retried after being found not guilty now.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

But ultimately, didn't the jury decide?"

Yes they did and that is the frustrating thing. They can only judge on the evidence. And who produces the evidence? The CPS. And who do they rely on? The Police.

I am as annoyed as anyone that this copper was not found guilty but c'est la vie.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

"Yes but not in England or Wales. But because the Double Jeopardy Law is no longer in place as least someone can be retried after being found not guilty now.

in can only be retried if there is "significant" new evidence that wasn't brought before the jury before......

in this case.. i am not sure you haven't seen everything... other than the policemans record.. and the doctors mistakes..... which are both inadmissable...

I wonder if the CPS will try to bring a charge of "corporate manslaughter" against the met police for rehiring him....

the private prosection against the policemen will be interesting as the burden of proof is a lot lower and they only have to have a high probability that he caused his death....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *am sampsonMan
over a year ago

cwmbran

"Yes but not in England or Wales. But because the Double Jeopardy Law is no longer in place as least someone can be retried after being found not guilty now.

in can only be retried if there is "significant" new evidence that wasn't brought before the jury before......

in this case.. i am not sure you haven't seen everything... other than the policemans record.. and the doctors mistakes..... which are both inadmissable...

I wonder if the CPS will try to bring a charge of "corporate manslaughter" against the met police for rehiring him....

the private prosection against the policemen will be interesting as the burden of proof is a lot lower and they only have to have a high probability that he caused his death...."

No doubt if they bring a private prosecution they will sttle out of court and there will be no guilty verdict

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The CPS don't just rely on the police they also have their own investigators. Maybe the defence did a better job of creating reasonalbe doubt!! The jury made their decision and whether we like it or not thats what it is there for.

I also believe that if someone is found not guilty in a criminal court they should not be allowed to be presecuted in a civil court. It blurs the lines between the civil and judicial systems and creates confusion

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Sorry but we are innocent or guilty of a crime because we have or not commited a crime - this occurs before and is not dependent on any lawful process"

And who decides whether a) a crime has been committed and b) if the Defendant did it and when? The Jury or magistrate.

And its worth noting the term 'Defendant'. He / she is 'Defending' his / her innocence (which is 'presumed') against a 'Charge' until they are found guilty. So the guilt is established after the trial and not before it as you infer surely?.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I wonder if the CPS will try to bring a charge of "corporate manslaughter" against the met police for rehiring him....

A better bet would be for the civil action to include a charge of failure in 'the Duty of Care' by the Met for failing to spot his history and re-employing him.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *am sampsonMan
over a year ago

cwmbran

Sorry but we are innocent or guilty of a crime because we have or not commited a crime - this occurs before and is not dependent on any lawful process

And who decides whether a) a crime has been committed and b) if the Defendant did it and when? The Jury or magistrate.

No that's not what Im infering - you are guilty if you commit a crime whether or not the court finds you guilty - nothing changes - the moment you commit a crime - you have committed it - a court case is there only to decide whether it can be proved you committed a crime in the yes of the law and then punished

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Sorry but we are innocent or guilty of a crime because we have or not commited a crime - this occurs before and is not dependent on any lawful process

And who decides whether a) a crime has been committed and b) if the Defendant did it and when? The Jury or magistrate.

Morally you are guilty once you commit a crime but legally you are not. Not until it is proven in a court of law with a jury of your peers that there is sufficient evidence proving beyond resonable doubt that you committed the crime. Therefore there is the presumtion of legal innocence until that verdict is given.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *amschwingerzCouple
over a year ago

West

How on earth has the PC who caused the death of Ian Tomlinson been found not guilty?

I thought this was this weeks 'really easy quiz' arriving a couple of days early

Answer: Cos he is a copper!

Disgusting verdict, and one really nasty piece of work who has an history of misconduct and dishing out a few digs when it comes to dealing with people it seems.

The jury should have hung their heads in shame once that came out. He is obviously one of the hit first (from behind) ask questions later brigade

Almost as sickening, after it happened one of his senior officers had the cheek to say it could have been a demonstrator in disguise!!..yeh, or an alien maybe

Another victim of wonderful British justice.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *amschwingerzCouple
over a year ago

West

"yep, retire with a tidy pension no doubt !"

Yep..one stress card coming up..makes a change from 'accidentally' falling over and 'injuring' their back before I spose..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *uyuksno1Man
over a year ago

poole

i think if you want anyone to blame it is the cps that is responsible for the verdict its like anything in this country the police cant do right for doing wrong in this case and knowing what i have read about said policeman he was in the wrong and over zealous in the case of the unfortunate man that lost his life you have to ask if he was so ill of health and such a good citizan what was he doing walking in front of a row of police with riot sheilds and rioting going on all that said it is up to the cps and internal affairs that should have bought a satifactory case against this man and in my opinion i think they failed the family of the man that died

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs

Sorry but we are innocent or guilty of a crime because we have or not commited a crime - this occurs before and is not dependent on any lawful process

And who decides whether a) a crime has been committed and b) if the Defendant did it and when? The Jury or magistrate.

"
+1

Surely the only person or persons who know if a crime has been committed are those who commit and those it was committed against? And unless it's been confessed to its upto the police to investigate and present the evidence to the cps to decide if theres a case to answer and then to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime had occured by the accused.

Any act can be interpreted differently, its down to perception of those _iewing.

Any death is tragic and interestingly no one has mentioned the 3 guys that were killed by the car and the defendants who walked free from court today

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

the man had a bad heart and it was only a push to get him moving on. put your self in the place of the police and see how or what you would have done, and sorry for the loss to the family.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"the police officer was doin his job"

Unless his job is to attack people who are not comitting any crime, then I don't think he was to be fair.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ap AdgeMan
over a year ago

Wirral

Read the papers today and see what a travesty it was. And people should read more about economics to see its only the start.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *amschwingerzCouple
over a year ago

West

"the man had a bad heart and it was only a push to get him moving on. put your self in the place of the police and see how or what you would have done, and sorry for the loss to the family. "

'Only' a push?...ok, go up behind a copper and do the same and see where it gets you..

I loved the defence that he was in a hostile environment, scared for his safety...yeh along with a dozen other robocops, covered in riot gear, with sticks tear gas etc..

Against a load of hippies

if one of them had done them same to a copper he would be doing a 20 stretch as we speak

He was in the TSG its what they do (and enjoy doing otherwise they wouldnt be in it) they are well trained and thrive on situations like that.

They also specialise in handing out sly digs at football matches but get away with it because they do it to 'football hooligans so thats ok.

Not so brave during the riots of last summer though when they were running from gangs of teenagers..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *umourCouple
over a year ago

Rushden

And everyone of the posters on this thread who are "angry" about the verdict would be on the phone to the police ad soon as someone did something to them!

Except of course those who are so tough, they would deal with it themselves.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"And everyone of the posters on this thread who are "angry" about the verdict would be on the phone to the police ad soon as someone did something to them!

Except of course those who are so tough, they would deal with it themselves.

Fail to see the relevance of this. Of course people would call the police,they're there to uphold the law.Except when they're not or when Coroners juries decide they're breaking it.

Coppers are telling me he should have gone to prison.They've got a point

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"And everyone of the posters on this thread who are "angry" about the verdict would be on the phone to the police ad soon as someone did something to them!

Except of course those who are so tough, they would deal with it themselves.

whilst not 'angry' about the verdict, i think its the wrong one but thats down to the evidence presented and maybe the CPS pursuing the wrong charge..

this verdict and the actual assault by the copper does untold damage to the image of the Police who tell us they 'Police by consent'..

justice should be done and it should be seen to be done lest it gives the impression of 'one rule for them and not for us'..

i think people have every right to be angry when things like this occur or when someone dies in custody or when within the duty of care of the Police...

the copper was out of control and out of order in hitting the guy who was no threat whatsoever..

i could not do that to you nor you to i..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"And everyone of the posters on this thread who are "angry" about the verdict would be on the phone to the police ad soon as someone did something to them!

Except of course those who are so tough, they would deal with it themselves.

Fail to see the relevance of this. Of course people would call the police,they're there to uphold the law.Except when they're not or when Coroners juries decide they're breaking it.

Coppers are telling me he should have gone to prison.They've got a point"

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *amschwingerzCouple
over a year ago

West

"And everyone of the posters on this thread who are "angry" about the verdict would be on the phone to the police ad soon as someone did something to them!

Except of course those who are so tough, they would deal with it themselves.

Fail to see the relevance of this. Of course people would call the police,they're there to uphold the law.Except when they're not or when Coroners juries decide they're breaking it.

Coppers are telling me he should have gone to prison.They've got a point"

Fail the see the relevance also..of course people would go to the police if someone did something to thing to them...you dont have the choice really, they are the police, thats what they are there for..

But given the choice I would have rather got hold of the smack head who burgled our daughter while she was eight months pregnant and give him a thoroughly good fucking kicking..

Because that would have given me a lot more satisfaction than seeing him get let off by the court.

Nothing to do with being 'so tough' either..its a shame some people can not be handed a bit of real justice..it might just deter them from doing it again.

Yes you have to go to the police, they are the law..that doesnt entitle them to go around doing what Harwood did

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *amschwingerzCouple
over a year ago

West

Now the dust has settled I find it amazing that Harwoods over zealous past could not be brought up in court (I hope the jury are really proud of themselves now they know the truth) but it was deemed appropriate to do it in the Steven Lawrence trial..and the press were given a free hand to print whatever they wanted about the two that (rightly so) got done..

Strange..why do you think that was?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *lassic1Man
over a year ago

bellshill

Also remember that the great phone hacking scandal was origonally chucked out by our wonderful police as there was "no case to answer"....wow was that a massive cover up or not. Nobody taken to task on that one either.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *enturianMan
over a year ago

Bideford

At the end of the day, he was found not guilty by a jury, who sat and heard all the relevant evidence, and who know far more about the case than any of us, so who are we to question their verdict?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

just been reading this from the telegraph..."i think if this was disclosed to the jury we would have had the right verdict......guilty""

which is precisely why it isnt presented in court. the jury are trying that single charge and not whether he did something in past or not.

those facst would have swayed their decison and it would have been a decision based on potential charactor and not the facts of the case.

i am not defending him as i hav'nt seen the case or heard all the facts, but your statement that ..."i think if this was disclosed to the jury we would have had the right verdict......guilty"

exactly illustrates why from a legal standpoint it wasnt..

juries have to make a decision based on the facts of that case and not the history of the defendant.

i have sat on jury service twice and it is avery hard job as you have to convict 'beyond all reasonable doubt'

i know its hard to swallow sometimes but we have to stick to the due process of law.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

just been reading this from the telegraph..."i think if this was disclosed to the jury we would have had the right verdict......guilty"

which is precisely why it isnt presented in court. the jury are trying that single charge and not whether he did something in past or not.

those facst would have swayed their decison and it would have been a decision based on potential charactor and not the facts of the case.

i am not defending him as i hav'nt seen the case or heard all the facts, but your statement that ..."i think if this was disclosed to the jury we would have had the right verdict......guilty"

exactly illustrates why from a legal standpoint it wasnt..

juries have to make a decision based on the facts of that case and not the history of the defendant.

i have sat on jury service twice and it is avery hard job as you have to convict 'beyond all reasonable doubt'

i know its hard to swallow sometimes but we have to stick to the due process of law."

That's the way it should be judged on the incident itself not on what happened years ago. With this guy though It does make you wonder if they got it right.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"This police officer had 10 previous complaints indicating violent behavior one complaint was upheld, the jury were not informed of the officers record ....

just been reading this from the telegraph..."i think if this was disclosed to the jury we would have had the right verdict......guilty"

which is precisely why it isnt presented in court. the jury are trying that single charge and not whether he did something in past or not.

those facst would have swayed their decison and it would have been a decision based on potential charactor and not the facts of the case.

i am not defending him as i hav'nt seen the case or heard all the facts, but your statement that ..."i think if this was disclosed to the jury we would have had the right verdict......guilty"

exactly illustrates why from a legal standpoint it wasnt..

juries have to make a decision based on the facts of that case and not the history of the defendant.

i have sat on jury service twice and it is avery hard job as you have to convict 'beyond all reasonable doubt'

i know its hard to swallow sometimes but we have to stick to the due process of law.

That's the way it should be judged on the incident itself not on what happened years ago. With this guy though It does make you wonder if they got it right.

i agree, and it seems it may have been the wrong decision but we werent there to hear the evidence..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 24/07/12 15:12:37]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *amschwingerzCouple
over a year ago

West

"At the end of the day, he was found not guilty by a jury, who sat and heard all the relevant evidence, and who know far more about the case than any of us, so who are we to question their verdict? "

Indeed..but my point is that his past was not read out and the pair found guilty of Steven Lawrences murder was...why?

Was it because one was a 'race related' motiveless killing of a young lad with his future in front of him killed by working class white thugs and the other a bloke down on his luck, heavy drinker, lived rough scratching his beer money together from selling papers?

Oh and I think the fact that no copper has been done for manslaughter for 25 years apparently might have a baring too..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well the media made the fucker look pretty guilty. But the same media hacked phones and produce more bullshit than a Texas beef farm so you take it with a pinch of salt. He was tried by a jury, they had all the info and let him off. Fuck they had the facts so hang the angry mob i say.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *enturianMan
over a year ago

Bideford

+ being guilty of 1 or 100 other crimes does not make you guilty of the one you are being tried for....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread