sickening police violence

[soapboxstuart]

engage brain before posting.

brick = hit to head, death from brain injury. All provable and all linkable.

Did he suffer from brain injuries, possibly caused by an earlier fall?
Had he been drinking? What was his medical history?

Of course all this would be proved or disproved in court - with the help of expert opinion as already stated.
Of course we should also take into account all these thousands of people spontaneously haemorrhaging from the abdomen for no good reason, man they're everywhere.
Take brain out of reverse before posting or have you been hit by a brick recently?

 

[Glaucus]

Did he suffer from brain injuries, possibly caused by an earlier fall?
spontaneously haemorrhaging from the abdomen for no good reason, man they're everywhere.
?

Where did I say brain injury? where did I say spontaneous injury?

Witnesses have come forward saying he was beaten up before that push. what is more likely a haemorrhage due to being beaten up or a haemorrhage due to a fall?
And no not everything should go to court, it depends if their is enough evidence to charge.

 

[newbiejim]

hmm , some interesting footage from channel 4 tonight

Yes, very interesting, very gung ho the officer in question, in the interests of balance it was also disgusting to see the policeman getting punched, he also looked totally innocent and not engaged in any antagonistic behaviour. In addition if that was indeed the officer in question (and Channel 4 say the believe it to be) he was certainly agressive when banging that protester's head off the police van door, further evidence of reckless aggressive behaviour?

 

[SexyGreyFox]

So you can't explain what it means - ok now i know.

I don't really have to explain it - it was a cheap dig at footballers but you have made something up in your mind.
I suggest you go and read my post.

 

[soapboxstuart]

engage brain before posting.

brick = hit to head, death from brain injury. All provable and all linkable.

Where did you say brain injury?
Erm just at that bit where you said brain injury ????? Can you see it now - just up there?

 

[fini]

Having now read this report, it seems to me that it was the first attack (which was not film), not the second, that is most likely to have killed him.

Anna Branthwaite, a freelance photographer, said: “He grabbed his back and charged him and threw him forward. Ian landed on his left side and bounced because of the force of the impact. He looked absolutely petrified. Clearly had no idea what was happening.”

Ms Branthwaite, 26, says she then saw the officer strike Mr Tomlinson with his baton twice on the torso or upper legs. “Ian was scrambling to get up and was half up when the same police officer grabbed him again and threw him forward. He took a couple of steps forward, stumbling, and started trying to run away. He was in total shock.”

It was only after this that he seemed to be walking strangely - well there's you reason. Torso strikes do not sound good. Interestingly though, this was by the same group of police officers who later assaulted him. If it was in fact the same police officer, it makes it ever more likely that he is responsible for his death.

 

[Glaucus]

Where did you say brain injury?
Erm just at that bit where you said brain injury ????? Can you see it now - just up there?

That was in relation to a case that would stand up in court. Really try reading.

 

[Glaucus]

Having now read this report, it seems to me that it was the first attack (which was not film), not the second, that is most likely to have killed him.
.

Exactly, but most people are still calling for manslaughter charges for the video one. which would be a total waste of money as it can't be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[soapboxstuart]

Where did I say brain injury?

That was the question you asked - I merely answered it.

 

[Glaucus]

That was the question you asked - I merely answered it.

I didn't ask a question. Go back and read both of our posts. Then come back.

This is very annoying.

 

[fini]

hmm , some interesting footage from channel 4 tonight

Is this available online yet? I can't find it on the Channel 4 news website.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

I didn't ask a question. Go back and read both of our posts. Then come back.

This is very annoying.

Soapboxstuart has now become my favourite poster - he doesn't read what people post which will make for some good threads.

 

[soapboxstuart]

Where did I say brain injury?

That is a direct quote from your post. It clearly asks a question, the give away is the fact that you put a question mark after it.
Are you saying you didn't say that?

You are right about it being annoying though. So I'm willing to leave it now.

 

[fini]

Exactly, but most people are still calling for manslaughter charges for the video one. which would be a total waste of money as it can't be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

To be completely fair, the first one seems to have got almost no media attention and thus I, and probably many others, were relatively oblivious to it until I read that article. If it was the same officer (which is possible and potentially even likely given it was the same group of officers) then the two incidents combined, I would say, is pretty compelling evidence that the police officer caused his death.

 

[Glaucus]

To be completely fair, the first one seems to have got almost no media attention and thus I, and probably many others, were relatively oblivious to it until I read that article. If it was the same officer (which is possible and potentially even likely given it was the same group of officers) then the two incidents combined, I would say, is pretty compelling evidence that the police officer caused his death.

It's been said in this thread a lot.

 

[soapboxstuart]

Soapboxstuart has now become my favourite poster - he doesn't read what people post which will make for some good threads.

Ah yes you're the guy that links a footballers injury to a man being pushed over and struck by a baton by the police.
One of my favourite posts.

 

[Glaucus]

That is a direct quote from your post. It clearly asks a question, the give away is the fact that you put a question mark after it.
Are you saying you didn't say that?

You are right about it being annoying though. So I'm willing to leave it now.

Therefore we cannot be sure that the rogue building site brick was the cause of death.

engage brain before posting.

brick = hit to head, death from brain injury. All provable and all linkable.

Now look at the police case.

Haemorrhage from fall = unlikely (but not imposable)
Man looking unwell in video = possible injury already sustained.
witness have come forward saying he was beaten up before this incident = enough to suggest that their is serious doubt as to if the push/fall caused the fatal injury
Summary = manslaughter charge fails.

You then relate that brain injury with this incident as I said re read the posts.

 

[soapboxstuart]

You can't leave it can you?
You did ask a question regardless of what post or what it was referring to?
Here it is again:
'Where did I say brain injury?'
THAT is a question regardless of the context.
Doesn't matter where I related it to - it's still a question.

 

[newbiejim]

Is this available online yet? I can't find it on the Channel 4 news website.

Channel 4 + 1 is ure friend

 

[SexyGreyFox]

Ah yes you're the guy that links a footballers injury to a man being pushed over and struck by a baton by the police.
One of my favourite posts.

You still don't get it - how sweet