Ian Tomlinson unlawfully killed by Pc

Gackt · 3 May 2011 at 17:41

He should be tried for manslaughter, as his actions regardless of intent, killed someone. It would also show that even the Police aren't above the law and they must abide by it as they try to enforce it.

Regarding Ian Tomlinson's actions, if he had been actively provoking, hurling abuse or fighting with the police, then while the police officer should still answer for what he has done, it would provide a different angle and there would be motives and justification for the Pc's actions, but there is none.

Unfortunately there are many police officers out there to beat people and who use it to appease their need to feel superior and act out that superiority on innocents. But that does not apply to all - but unfortunately when Police do things such as this and seem to get away with it, it doesn't help the public opinion.

Chris [BEANS] · 3 May 2011 at 17:43

Ignore, can't be bothered.

bam0 · 3 May 2011 at 17:45

Admiral Huddy said:
A push? I wouldn't have called it heavy handed. What happened after was circumstantial.. I could argue with the Mrs and have a heart attack afterwards but it doesn’t make her a murderer..

I don't agree with any miss use of authority by the police but given the circumstances and the degree of the events unfolding I think they were right to use force to maintain control.. Our police service needs all the backing it can get, this, and it's only my opinion, only undermines their authority.

I've worked in the city when riots have been going on right on outside our front door. It's not pleasant. Ian Tomlinson knew exactly what he was doing; walking in front of a riot line is like racing over rail crossing with barriers down.

Have you head of the Eggshell Skull rule? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggshell_skull
That Tomlinson died from something that wouldn't have caused much harm to an averagely healthy person doesn't really matter, that he appears to have died as the direct result of someone's actions do.

Amnesia · 3 May 2011 at 17:46

Chris [BEANS];19045908 said:
Sadly, the next leftie bunch of separatists that decide to smash up London because they're not getting their own way are likely to be left to get on with it because the police are having their hands tied.

How many people did they kill ?

Wizzfizz · 3 May 2011 at 17:51

Justify it all you want but the officer had no right to use such force on the man, he was no threat. All it would have took was for two officers to grab his arms and move him to the side and have a word, but no.

Scum bag officer abusing his powers and throwing his weight around. It's damning for the good officers out there who actually do a cracking job.

Danthus · 3 May 2011 at 17:53

simulatorman said:
Who said that or is it just you? No they are not. Almost all are good hard working men/women and there are the very few who sully the reputation of the force by their maverick and heavy handed approach to policing. This PC is one of those few and should be dealt with accordingly.

I agree with you, there are bad apples, bad apples in a job, it isn't fair to tar all Police Officers with the same brush.

hurfdurf · 3 May 2011 at 17:57

Chris [BEANS];19045908 said:
Ignore, can't be bothered.

More like "I have had to go back and edit my post because I am clearly arguing a very foolish argument"

For further evidence see *Anime Sig

hurfdurf · 3 May 2011 at 17:59

Amnesia said:
How many people did they kill ?

Was Tomlinson one of the trouble makers? Nope
Are people saying the police should not be able to deal with trouble makers in the way they currently do? Nope
Was Tomlinson unlawfully killed and did the Police do their best to cover it up? Yes
Is covering up an unlawful killing wrong and should the Police involved be prosecuted? Yes
Will this prevent the police in any way legally dealing with trouble makers? No

Robbo · 3 May 2011 at 18:06

While the police officer in question was without a doubt heavy handed, he doesn't deserve to have his life ruined because a guy died from something that wouldn't have harmed the vast majority of people.

Also, hadn't he been warned not to go into the area by the police and chose to anyway?

Having just watched the video again, the police told him to move several times and he did not, then he got pushed (not all that hard) in the back, fell over and died as a result of it, which is just plain unfortunate, nothing else.

Chris [BEANS] · 3 May 2011 at 18:09

hurfdurf said:
More like "I have had to go back and edit my post because I am clearly arguing a very foolish argument"

For further evidence see *Anime Sig

Not at all moosh, perfectly happy with my argument.

Genius reasoning as to why my argument was 'foolish', because I have a cartoon sig!! Surely that means you're a violent man based on your sig?!

What a foolish way to to think

Gazza123 · 3 May 2011 at 18:17

Redman said:
I know I often go for a stroll in the middle of a riot.

Don't take the **** with riot police, do what you're told, and then they're not able to push you now are they.

If you read the story then you would know he was a newspaper vendor trying to get home. His route was blocked by the riot police.

Amnesia · 3 May 2011 at 18:21

Robbo said:
because a guy died from something that wouldn't have harmed the vast majority of people.

Looks like a pretty forceful shove to me, the guy has his hands in his pockets and his back to the police officer. Shoving someone over like that when they have their hands in their pockets and don't expect it seems pretty dangerous, they may not get their hands out of their pockets in time to defend their face/head getting smashed into the pavement so I don't agree that it wouldn't harm the majority.

Tute · 3 May 2011 at 18:23

I don't really know what to think about this whole story.

a) I agree with Huddy in that IT was a plonker, and from the video, was certainly at least un-cooperative. Now that doesn't deserve what happened, but then he could have avoided what happened through a bit of common sense.

b) The officer who shoved him did use unreasonable force, and should be held accountable for it. He could have been led away and let go elsewhere. But to call it murder is ridiculous - i've been shoved harder than that in the past and it didn't kill me. There's clearly an underlying health problem somewhere.

Punish the officer by all means, but I expect this is just going to bring out the pitchfork wielding anti-Police ****heads we have in GD in droves.

Robbo · 3 May 2011 at 18:27

Amnesia said:
Looks like a pretty forceful shove to me, the guy has his hands in his pockets and his back to the police officer. Shoving someone over like that when they have their hands in their pockets and don't expect it seems pretty dangerous, they may not get their hands out of their pockets in time to defend their face/head getting smashed into the pavement so I don't agree that it wouldn't harm the majority.

You wouldn't expect someone to die if you shove them in the back like that. He does get his hands out but you can't see him hit the floor directly so its difficult to gauge.

The officers intention was not to injure him, it was to encourage him to move on as, lets face it, he was being uncooperative and refusing to move.

Tute said:
Punish the officer by all means, but I expect this is just going to bring out the pitchfork wielding anti-Police ****heads we have in GD in droves.

Indeed, this is what annoys me no end.

Amnesia · 3 May 2011 at 18:30

Robbo said:
You wouldn't expect someone to die if you shove them in the back like that. He does get his hands out but you can't see him hit the floor directly so its difficult to gauge.

You wouldn't expect him to die but you know full well if his hands don't manage to escape his pockets in time that serious injury could be caused.

Robbo · 3 May 2011 at 18:35

Amnesia said:
You wouldn't expect him to die but you know full well if his hands don't manage to escape his pockets in time that serious injury could be caused.

So from now on, all criminals facing riot police will have their hands in their pockets so they cant touch them?

He should have moved out of the way, not effectively stood still in front of a row of riot police screaming at him to move. He only has himself to blame.

Amnesia · 3 May 2011 at 18:37

Robbo said:
He only has himself to blame.

Don't think he is in a well enough state to do that.

Robbo · 3 May 2011 at 18:41

Amnesia said:
Don't think he is in a well enough state to do that.

Fine. He only had himself to blame.

lunarwolf · 3 May 2011 at 18:46

good that the cop will be held accountable for excessive force, he needs to be punished. although i think the death is accidental. then again a drunk driver gets thrown in jail for accidently running over someone.

now time to put behind bars the cop(s) who shot Jean-Charles de Menezes seven times in the head. that was cold blooded murder and deserves 25 to life.

Stupot_ · 3 May 2011 at 18:46

I think it's pretty clear from the video that tomlinson was stalling, intentionally trying to be in the way. Why would he have his hands in his pockets?

I think the officer was right to remove him, however it was too heavy handed. He could have just been guided off to the side or been given a talking to.

So... I'm not sure what the right course of action is really! In my mind they were both being idiots

I don't think the officer should face criminal charges but if it ends up with him losing his job and police tactics are changed, then I think that's a just outcome.

They do need all the support they can get though, I think we can take pride in the way the majority of the police force conduct themselves when compared to many other countries.