G20 police officer cleared of assault

Ah, red herrings. The mark of an individual who can't argue his way out of a paper bag.

no, your clutching a straws.

JCDM ran from the police, with plenty of warnings, he fitted a description of a suspect, and with the recent 7/7 bombings, the police couldn't take the chance of having another suicide bomber. result= he got taken down- GOOD.

IanT- had plenty of different routes he could have walked home, decided to get in the way of the police charge! he's a knob for doing this! got taken to the floor as with many other people I see on TV cop programs when they are dealing with potentially dangerous threatening people, I dont think the push to the floor had anything to do with him having a heart attack 1/4 mile away!!!!!
 
Last edited:
Can't wait until the people supporting the police mis-use of powers left right and center in this thread find themselves being on the recieving end of some over-zealous officer and have to accept that 'yes that police man did just assault you shock horror'
 
no, your clutching a straws.

JCDM ran from the police, with plenty of warnings, he fitted a description of a suspect, and with the recent 7/7 bombings, the police couldn't take the chance of having another suicide bomber. result= he got taken down- GOOD.

IanT- had plenty of different routes he could have walked home, decided to get in the way of the police charge! he's a knob for doing this! got taken to the floor as with many other people I see on TV cop programs when they are dealing with potentially dangerous threatening people, I dont think the push to the floor had anything to do with him having a heart attack 1/4 mile away!!!!!

Being struck and subsequently pushed to the floor could contribute to a heart attack actually. One of the pathologists found he had suffeted internal hemorrhage, this depending on the extent of this, it would put more pressure on the heart to maintain blood supply (cardiac output) to major organs.
 
Can't wait until the people supporting the police mis-use of powers left right and center in this thread find themselves being on the recieving end of some over-zealous officer and have to accept that 'yes that police man did just assault you shock horror'

I think most people are sensible enough to know when to get the hell outta dodge.
 
Can't wait until the people supporting the police mis-use of powers left right and center in this thread find themselves being on the recieving end of some over-zealous officer and have to accept that 'yes that police man did just assault you shock horror'

Will never happen to me because should I ever get caught up in a situation like Mr Tomlinson (I've been to various protests in the past), suddenly faced with a line of riot police with dogs - if indicate to me that I should move out of their way I will do so, to behave in a passive-aggressive manner would mean that they were entitled to use reasonable force against me, which would not be pleasant.

KNiVES said:
If your idea of reasonable force includes assaulting from behind hard enough to cause abdominal haemorrhaging leading to death, then you seem incredibly vicious and I would NOT want to meet you in a dark alley.

This is a vicious world in which we live, sometimes the authorities need to use reasonable force to maintain law and order. You also fail to mention that Mr Tomlinson was suffering from cirrhosis of the liver, which would mean that entirely reasonable force could have caused the internal bleeding.
 
C.P.S= Coppers Protection service. I have said this all along.

"The CPS have accepted the conduct of the officer was unlawful."

They did not even charge the guy with Common assault because
"Common assault does not require proof of injury, but it is subject to a strict six-month time limit"

So that't why they took their time. I mean come on they new this all along.

So the CPS is bent that means to me that all coppers will follow suit as they know nothing will happen to them.

Welcom to the police state....You are welcome to it.
 
C.P.S= Coppers Protection service. I have said this all along.

"The CPS have accepted the conduct of the officer was unlawful."

They did not even charge the guy with Common assault because
"Common assault does not require proof of injury, but it is subject to a strict six-month time limit"

So that't why they took their time. I mean come on they new this all along.

So the CPS is bent that means to me that all coppers will follow suit as they know nothing will happen to them.

Welcom to the police state....You are welcome to it.

So far from wrong it's almost funny.

The reason they took the time to try and decide on the charges was simple - once you are tried for a crime you can't (normally) be tried again under a different law for the same crime.
If the CPS had charged him with "simple assault" during the time limit they would have had to get it to court in a timely manner - which could have led to the officer being tried for assault before all the evidence was in (hundreds of witness statements, loads of photos etc).
If he had been tried for assault and it had reached a conclusion he then could not have been tried for a more serious offence for the same incident.

The CPS end up either not charging, or cocking up charging/prosecuting dozens/hundreds of cases every day due to lack of evidence.
 
wait so...1 out of 3 specalists said it was natural causes... the other 2 gave it to internal bleeding?

well.. i dunno but in boxing etc when u have professional adjudicators, and its a split decision dont you go with the majority instead of accepting say that no-one won?

why not try 3 fresh specialists and get their opinion?
 
wait so...1 out of 3 specalists said it was natural causes... the other 2 gave it to internal bleeding?

well.. i dunno but in boxing etc when u have professional adjudicators, and its a split decision dont you go with the majority instead of accepting say that no-one won?

why not try 3 fresh specialists and get their opinion?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10729545

yeah and the one that said it was natural causes is facing a fitness to practise hearing before the GMC
 
wait so...1 out of 3 specalists said it was natural causes... the other 2 gave it to internal bleeding?

well.. i dunno but in boxing etc when u have professional adjudicators, and its a split decision dont you go with the majority instead of accepting say that no-one won?

why not try 3 fresh specialists and get their opinion?
One said it was natural, one said it was internal bleeding, we don't know what the third said.
 
no, your clutching a straws.

JCDM ran from the police, with plenty of warnings, he fitted a description of a suspect, and with the recent 7/7 bombings, the police couldn't take the chance of having another suicide bomber. result= he got taken down- GOOD.

They did not identify themselves as police iirc.

The shooting of an innocent person can never be construed as good.

Ever.
 
the bbc does.

Dr Patel was the first pathologist to examine Mr Tomlinson. Two further post-mortem examinations contradicted his.

No charges over G20 man's death
He said that Mr Tomlinson had died from a heart attack. The two other doctors agreed that the dead man had suffered internal bleeding after some kind of blow.

lets face it ppl this is a sham of a trial. well not even a trial.

its just a sham to protect the police. the more people who blandly pretend like this thing doesnt happen every day, the worse it will become.
 
The family and Independent Police Complaints Commission organised a second examination by a second pathologist. He concluded that "blunt force trauma" had partly caused a death by internal bleeding.

This was probably Mr Tomlinson's own elbow hitting his liver after he pushed to the ground by the police officer, said the doctor.

A third post-mortem examination at the request of the Metropolitan Police agreed with the conclusions of the second.

i rek they'd have to shove you pretty hard for blunt trauma of your OWN elbow to your liver tbh
 
big fuss over a small issue

she went crazy at him
she ignores repeated warnings
he hit her causing not much damage
everyone backs off and she shuts up

move along

Did you watch the video? She went crazy at him because one of his fellow officers had just pushed another protester for no reason. The police caused this escalation and dealt with it wrongly.

IMO, the courts took the wrong decision and in doing so have lost even more respect for the authorities. He should have been convicted because any reasonable person watching that video can see that his level of force is unjustified.

Someone mentioned that both of these trials were done without juries. Is that true? Honestly?

The moment that the police are allowed to act above the law which the rest of us have to abide by is the moment that something is very very wrong. The whole 'respect for authority' argument is rubbish as well. An authority that isn't held in place with checks and balances like these isn't an authority at all. That's called a dictatorship, police state, whatever you want to call it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom