It may not be murder, but at the very least it’s assault.
I’m guessing that a court of law may well have difficulty establishing a causal link between being shoved to the ground by the police officer and his heart attack a few minutes later. It could be impossible to prove that the two weren’t coincidental.
Also, I’m guessing that the officer involved had no intention to kill or even cause serious injury to Ian Tomlinson.
But that doesn’t make it okay. The officer is clearly shown striking to the ground a man who was walking away with his hands in his pockets. At the very least, it’s assault and battery, and the officer should be prosecuted for it.
My initial reaction – is to not react.
But I have watched the video – and considered my response.
I agree there was probably no intent in the officers actions to cause harm.
Was it excessive use of force? .. is difficult to determine in the face of this short footage. I do not know the precursors to the act and that is why we have investigations.
I will state tho –
I think the Grundian is doing no one any favours by playing up the ‘victim’ role claiming he was ‘trying to get home from work’ – you do not walk through a violent protest with a heavy police presence to do so. You go around.
I also think their biased reporting is enough to fuel controversy and covertly incite more rioting – and sell more papers.
Walking with hands in pockets may be seen as an act of passivity – but I remember being taught “if you can’t see the hands you don’t know what’s in them”.
He was not merely walking away with his back to them – he was belligerently sauntering in front of them. In the context of the situation – that is a provocation to impeding the police in the course of their duties.
Last night police, who still had several hundred protesters penned in the square outside the Bank of England, used batons to beat away attackers after they ripped apart metal crowd control barriers and began hurling them at officers
That’s not to mention the police are also heavily concerned for terrorist presence and looters – and not forgetting the usual general run of the mill rape, murder, burglary, homicide….
His death was unfortunate – and perhaps avoidable given a string of potential unknown contributory variables and one unfortunate decision.
I will not hold the officer personally responsible for the death tho. I am sure he will have enough burden on his conscience.
If excess and unwarranted force is found contributory to the death of Ian Tomlinson – it’s involuntary manslaughter.
But if Ian Tomlinson was at risk of heart attack then he had a duty to himself to keep him out of harms way – not in the front line of a riot.
I am not justifying the extent of force used – or saying ‘tough luck’ to the poor deceased – But I see no ‘justice’ in pursuing a criminal conviction of any sort against the officer.
How long ago was it we were telling everyone to back off the Haringey social workers who did an appalling job – in appalling circumstances?
Yet now we want to jump on the police?
I’m not buying into it.
The difference between this case and Baby P is that the Haringey social workers weren’t filmed running up to someone who was sauntering (belligerently or otherwise) away with his hands in pockets, whacking him in the back of the leg with a baton and then shoving him to the ground.
As far as I’m aware, “bellligerent sauntering” is not a crime.
There is a contextual issue – anyone who was in that vicinity runs a risk of being considered a hostile participant.
How many times have we debated the ‘suicidal’ person and determined that only a very small slice of them may be making a ‘rational decision’ – and that’s enough for you to say “well then let’s not take the risk of being wrong as the cost is too great”.
What cost a police officer who does not treat every participant as equal threat of harm to property or person?
And what of social responsibility? The coin has two sides.
I hear it was going off a bit over there – so is the wise thing to do for Jo P to go have a sticky-beak and hang about – or just avoid it?
In such volatile events – and I don’t condone police or protestor violence – then everyone should just go home. I’m sure the police wouldn’t mind that. Just as they don’t mind a lawful peaceful protest.
But looting, rioting, arson, hurling metal barriers at the police…. are not likely to get them on your side nor likely to set the local constabulary to be all happy about having to face a number of threats to their own lives.
The police are responsible for maintaining law and order.
They cannot simply turn away form damage being done and say “well the banks deserved the damage” – or “the people are right to be angry” – tho I dare say a number of police officers are likely in the same personal circumstance as the genuine protestors and equally unhappy.
I’m not sure how the police are responsible for the mess of the country/world – and thus the focus of all the angst – but I know when someone goes to the ward having a bad day – to impede the work of the staff when dealing with a hostile ward – I mean the kind where you’ve got 6 or 7 patients plotting to take keys off a nurse by force to escape – would be considered less than helpful.
Doing so will likely get you a ‘baton’ of the liquid kind as a precautionary prevention.
I know. I’ve done it.
It’s a scary place to be.
Belligerent sauntering in the context of an unruly gathering has numerous potentials – and in a split second risk decisions making of harm to self or others –
If it isn’t explicit compliance – it is hostile.
If it isn’t explicit compliance – it is hostile.
See, I don’t want to live in a world where that’s the assumption. That’s horrific. We’re not in a police state here, and it is not okay for someone to be attacked for the way they’re walking.
Someone deserving police intervention because they’re supposedly acting oddly, or in the wrong place at the wrong time? We’ve been here before, and a Brazillian electrician got shot.
And to haul this on-topic, I’m terrible at social cues and petrified of crowd situations. My body language gets all cornered-wounded-animal, and I really cannot be bothered worrying about that when trying to breathe is taking all my concentration. I would like to exercise my right to protest without worrying that somebody is going to decide my body language is a good reason to attack me.
that’s a false comparison Mr Ian… your experience sounds definitely scary, hope you weren’t coping with that alone…
hidden hands in a control environment may be an unknown and therefore a threat – same as your regular american traffic stop, but this guy wasn’t carrying (they knew, they’d had prior contact with him) the cop/’perp’ ratio was like 7:1 and everyone was kitted up for action – he wasn’t.
i admire your solidarity with fellow frontline workers but i think it’s completely misplaced here. the UK police has a history of lying, prevarication, obfuscation (great word) and systemically smearing victims of Use Of Force actions in above and below-the-line media briefings in the minutes and hours after an event. it’s disgusting really, but it held as true fro Blair Peach and JCDM as it does for Ian Tomlinson.
As a society, we should hold the police accountable – and if the police STOP LYING, they may find society very sympathetic to the ridiculous pressures that officers are put under, the balance of public safety, split second decisions and the wildcards of bad communication and pilot error.
right now, they’re losing the public confidence – it’s a very bad situation
*beakie agrees with Mr Ian shocker*
With a few caveats – first being that the “belligerent saunter” may possibly have been due to some pre-MI symptomatology. I’m none too clever about hearts and their disorders, but he does look a little woozy to me – possible O2 sats or BP problems?
I also think he might not have been able to walk round the demo without going massively out of his way. He was trying to get home from work.
But I agree with the main thrust that we shouldn’t be piling in on the police.
After the day I’ve had – the LAST thing I need is you agreeing with me!
xx
I was at the protests elsewhere. I absolutely agree that we shouldn’t be blaming the police officers in the video, because their approach was exactly in line with what was happening elsewhere, with people *running* away, sitting round chatting, or otherwise being no threat at all, were repeatedly truncheoned and kicked with no warning whatsoever.
The police force shouldn’t be allowed to get away with claiming that these were one or two ‘bad’ people in an otherwise well-policed protest. I feel desperately sorry for the officers in the video, since I suspect they’ll become a scapegoat to cover up wider failings.
Ps – Ref the hands in the pockets concern –
If someone pushes you over – what’s the first thing you do to protect yourself?
Thanks Z, All we needed was the view from the bedroom. If anything Beakie gets out less than you and even he, Mr Myopic, has a more objective view.
Human beings aren`t good at crowd control. Didn`t the US National Guard shoot a load of students in some civil rights demonstration. We all know what happened when the Paras tried it in the Bogside of Londonderry. There`s any number of examples of it all getting out of control. It may be theoretically easy in the bedroom but it`s actually rather difficult. Mr T should have got his head down and scuttled away sharply.
Now we`ll have a report “systemic, institutional unfitness for purpose…..” and even more coppers concluding that they`re better off sitting on their arses in the station.
At the risk of being simplistic and childish, how difficult is it NOT to attack someone? I manage it every day! There’s a person going by… and I haven’t shoved him to the ground. There’s another one… nope, still upright. And a third… gloriously unimpeded by any violence from me.
Was the person a threat to property or life?
And was it your job to contain that threat?
The more I think about it – the more I support the officers intervention.
If Tomlinson was carrying a knife, pepper spray or even a knuckle duster – that officer would have saved his colleagues from serious harm or worse.
I watched the video again – and what struck me was I bet none of you can spot the guy who actually was carrying a concealed weapon.
What I suspect will happen, Mr Ian, is that this officer will be made the scapegoat in a case that is going to be crawled all over by the opportunists of the RESPECT/Stop The War/We Hate Everything But Don’t Have An Alternative contingent.
Nothing will happen. If an entirely innocent Brazilian can be shot dead and no one loses their job nothing will happen over a man being pushed over. Then dying, hopefully due to unrelated causes.
Was there not another report about police going to aid a man who had collapsed (same person?) and getting assaulted by protesters?
It was indeed the same person, but the stories turned out to be untrue.
Was the person a threat to property or life?
And was it your job to contain that threat?
No, he wasn’t. This is the main point. It was their job to protect him, and instead they attacked him. End of, as far as I’m concerned. No citizen should have to fear random violence from the people whose job it is to keep them safe.
Protect him from whom?
And what are they permitted to do to protect him?
They were already protecting the law and order as we ask them to.
There are laws – we know this.
But those who enforce and uphold those laws do so at our request – our consensus.
If you are in the proximity of an unlawful or dangerous event then
I permit the police to use reasonable force.
If someone stands in their way – I empower them to remove them.
If they genuinely believe they are at risk of harm – I condone them defending by attack.
Protect him from whom?
Well, from violent premature death, for a start. This is my fundamental problem with the whole business – the intervention of the police should’ve made it possible for him to go about his business safely, and instead it killed him. To my mind, this is unacceptable and should spark a major investigation into why it happened and how to make sure it doesn’t happen again.
To be fair Lorna, you’re probably not regularly tasked with the job of keeping order in the midst of a highly volatile situation involving large crowds of people.
True
Still… aargh. I’m bothered by the supposed volatility of the situation, and the supposed difficulty of the police’s job there. Before it even took place, people were saying that the police were overreacting and that their insistence that there was gonna be violence was probably going to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, if anything.
Yes, violent tossers at demos often try and blame the cops for their violent tosser-ness.
I’ve attended enough demos to know that there ARE tossers who go along, behave like idiots and then whine about police brutality when the police try to stop them behaving like idiots – I have particular memories of the guy who tried to maintain his sit-down protest in the path of an ambulance with blue lights flashing.
But here’s the thing, I’ve also seen police who’ve dealt with these idiots with a remarkable degree of restraint and professionalism. That implies to me that the police are perfectably capable of dealing with the tosser element of public demos without whacking them to the ground. Therefore there’s no excuse for officers who fail to do so.
Think about it this way. If a patient on a ward starting sauntering sulkily away from nurses with his hands in his pockets, would that be grounds to immediately restrain and rapid-tranquilise him? I’d hope the answer would be “absolutely not”.
Z – I’m not disputing that some cops can overstep the mark, but I think, given the profession we’re in, we shouldn’t rush to judgement about this particular officer’s actions until all the facts are in.
A patient on a ward sauntered up to a colleague of mine with his hands in his pockets then took one out and put my colleague in hospital. A year or so later he had a stroke at the age of 30.
At least in the secure unit we can be fairly sure he didn’t have lighter fuel in one pocket and a lighter in the other. Not so sure in the open streets.
Pushing him over is a tactic – and having seen the video I think the police were warranted to do so.
It’s unfortunate he later died.
If he’d pulled a concealed weapon out and killed or maimed an officer – what would we be saying then?
It’s straight forward and simple – if you are in the mix – you are part of the problem. The police cannot discern who is and isn’t a threat in such circumstance.
This is a good point, Mr Ian. I get rather fed up with armchair police commanders judging the cops for their actions in highly charged and potentially dangerous situations that most of us would run away from at speed. The death of Jean Charles de Menezes being a case in point.
Fair enough Ian, but as you say this patient was sauntering towards your colleague. Ian Tomlinson was sauntering away from the police. That’s where the difference lies.
He was sauntering across the front of them – hence – belligerently
From that footage; he was deliberately walking in a direction that wasn’t directly away and taking his time about it – we call that passive aggressive.
Had he been walking the town on any other night window shopping the behaviour would be less than negligible. And the police would have simply walked around or not bothered.
However, in the given scenario which was of the highest potential risk, anything that is not outright compliance is defiance.
We`re all over the place here. Beakie`s supporting the police. So he should. They take the trouble to enqire whether it`s a homophobic or bullying incident every time they answer the phone, they follow his agenda, he should reciprocate with a bit of solidarity. Meanwhile, Lorna think it`s valid to compare her daily life with that of a police officer on crowd control duties. What rot ! As ever you`re all missing the point.
We need a police FORCE. Those tasked with patrolling the streets should, primarily, be big and intimidating blokes. They should be accessible to old ladies but make Joe Bloggs feel a tad uncomfortable ( likewise courtrooms should be imposing places you would rather not be in ). They should exude the attitude ” I am not expecting or willing to tolerate trouble”. All this paramilitary clothing and ridiculous stab vests have to go. The copper involved seemed to be wearing a helmet and had half his face concealed. It dehumanises people. It gives them anonymity and an almost hoodie mentality. We want big, smart, imposing coppers with big sticks. People who make the likes of Mr. T think “I`m better off elsewhere”. As usual this type of nonsense is a secondary problem caused by the fact we are entirely unable to get the fundamentals right any more.
The problem with any post of yours, OSB, is that reading it feels like I’m sitting in the pub with some bloke roaring at me, inches from my face and foaming at the mouth. I suggest finding a way to tone down the aggression. (You’ll doubtless reply by saying I suggested you act like one of the servants in a Victorian Drama, no, just try being less bloody aggressive).
Meanwhile, Lorna think it`s valid to compare her daily life with that of a police officer on crowd control duties. What rot
Silly, I’ve acknowledged twice it wasn’t a great point to make, once before I made it and once in reply to beakie. Still, thanks for catching up.
DeeDee, Beakie told me something similar, don`t be upset ( I was going to use the word offended but I`m bored with everybody being offended all the time ) if I ignore your input as I ignored his. People too readily forget that one of the main purposes of blogs is for those who want to to have a rant. I like ranting. The likes of Beakie`s dullard comments fully deserve a ranting response.
I`m very rarely found in a pub, sadly. If you`re that bothered stay away from the Old Dungeon Ghyll in Langdale. I love it there and Crippen frequents it too.
‘Didn’t the US National Guard shoot a load of students’?
The incident referred to was the random shooting in 1971, of 2 students at the Kent State University by the Ohio National Guard. They were peacefully protesting about the Vietnam war – they have, in fact, been immortalized in song – ‘Driving Through Mythical America’ by Pete Atkin and written by Clive James (yes that Clive James) This is but one incident whereby the police have, for no apparent reason, opened fire on peaceful protesters.
Three weeks ago was the 25th anniversary of the miner’s strike and after witnessing the behaviour of the police over that period, I no longer believe protestations from them when they justify their actions by asserting they perceived there was a threat.
This protestor isn’t about to start having a go at the police in the video – because they were behaving in exactly the same way as the other police at the demo.
I don’t think they are any more culpable because the person they hit happened to be unexpectedly vulnerable.
Basic social psych suggests that the problem was not with the individual police, but a wider systemic issue – the same just-following-orders groupthink that allowed them to badly beat up many peaceful protestors, me included (http://g20police.wordpress.com/ http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2.....ce-actions etc etc).
Here’s a question: If the police officer involved was just doing his job under difficult circumstances, why had he removed his shoulder epaulettes (the ones that have his ID number on it) and covered his face?
Z – you seem now to be insinuating that the officer deliberately organized things specifically so he could attack a member of the public with impunity. That’s edging dangerously close to paranoid conspiracy theorizing as were all his colleagues and senior officers in on it as well? They’d have to be in order for him to escape identification, wouldn’t they?
As it is, he’s been identified and suspended while the investigation goes on.
I heard 40 riot police being told ‘leave your numbers in the van’, and saw many police with no numbers and a balaclava. Not that I expect anyone to believe this, but again it did seem to be almost routine.
It’s pretty clear in the video that the officer is not wearing his numbers and is wearing a balaclava. I’ve no idea if this is some sort of standard practice, but it certainly looks a bit iffy.
I don`t live in an inner city, where I imagine things are a lot worse, but around here police are routinely intimidated by major drug dealers. One even had to move house as his family were threatened. This is the joke our police service, not to mention criminal justice system has become. Then we wonder why police engage in the, wholly unacceptable, practice of wearing balaclavas. More WPC`s anyone ?