Ian Tomlinson unlawfully killed by Pc

Burnsy2023 said:
If the Police are in a public order situation and they want you to move, surely the best idea would be to move in the direction they want you to?
Click to expand...

You mean he didn't?

Oh wait.......he did.



Simple fact of the matter is, that if it had been any normal member of society then he would have been charged and jailed long ago.

Police are meant to have a HIGHER responsibility, and thus in my eyes is even more liable.
 
If a copper hits anyone with a baton then they must be guilty of something. This man was just trying to get home. I don't know how any one can condone what Harwood did.

Clearly the copper thought he was judge and jury.
 
Andy said:
If a copper hits anyone with a baton then they must be guilty of something. This man was just trying to get home. I don't know how any one can condone what Harwood did.
Click to expand...

To strike someone is a use of force. Why would you need to be guilty of anything to be subject to the use of force?

If you don't know what you're talking about, perhaps you shouldn't be voicing your opinion so forcefully on a public forum. Doesn't come across very intelligently and therefore detracts from your argument.
 
Very refreshing to see there is now some small chance that justice might be done. I wonder how Tomlinson would have been treated if he'd pushed over a PC and the cop had died?

Von Smallhausen said:
As for Pc Harwood, his actions were appalling. He and another officer could have taken an arm each and walked him away. There were no justifications for striking him or pushing him.
Click to expand...

Well said that man.

Tomlinson was not causing trouble, he was not obstructing police, he was moving in the direction they wanted him to move, he was legally entitled to be where he was, and he was legally entitled to do what he was doing. If they wanted him to move faster, why not just ask? That would be the courteous, civilised option.

There was absolutely no justification for brutality.
 
Evangelion said:
Very refreshing to see there is now some small chance that justice might be done. I wonder how Tomlinson would have been treated if he'd pushed over a PC and the cop had died?



Well said that man.

Tomlinson was not causing trouble, he was not obstructing police, he was moving in the direction they wanted him to move, he was legally entitled to be where he was, and he was legally entitled to do what he was doing. If they wanted him to move faster, why not just ask? That would be the courteous, civilised option.

There was absolutely no justification for brutality.
Click to expand...

I agree, wasnt it PC Kerry Smith who said something along the lines of the guy not understanding at first that he wasnt allowed past but did after he was repeated and show where to go? infact i think its quoted further up the page. So if this guy is a little slow in the head, or just doesnt plain understand where to go that might be way he was walking slowly, daft thing is he WAS walking away in the direction the police told him to go in!
 
nydryl said:
I disagree with the part about him not contributing to his own death. He should have simply walked quickly away, however he chose not to and we all know what happened next. It's a tragedy, the whole situation would have been avoided had he just walked away at a reasonable pace.
Click to expand...

Should? Why should? He was doing nothing illegal.

And, yes, it could have been avoided. That does not make it partly his fault. I can avoid being in a car accident by never getting in a car. I can avoid catching diseases by never seeing another human being. The ability to alter a situation by taking certain actions does not imply that one holds some responsibility for the outcome. That requires that the outcome is a reasonable result of one's actions.

Her Majesty's subjects should not expect to have to take steps to avoid violent attacks by the Police.
 
Mr Jack said:
Should? Why should? He was doing nothing illegal.

And, yes, it could have been avoided. That does not make it partly his fault. I can avoid being in a car accident by never getting in a car. I can avoid catching diseases by never seeing another human being. The ability to alter a situation by taking certain actions does not imply that one holds some responsibility for the outcome. That requires that the outcome is a reasonable result of one's actions.

Her Majesty's subjects should not expect to have to take steps to avoid violent attacks by the Police.
Click to expand...

Okay let's go down the road of ridiculous arguments.

Next time you cross the road just stand there in the middle for a while until the lights turn green. You're doing nothing illegal, stand your ground and let the cars run you over. Her Majesty's subjects should not expect to have to take steps to avoid violent attacks by a car.

The above argument is clearly stupid. Every situation is different, and we read situations every day of our lifes. Obviously you would move from the middle of the road even though you don't necessarily have to. In London that day there were riots, anyone would have been able to read the situation, realise that the atmosphere was tense, and just get out of the way of the police and let them do their job. In my opinion Ian Tomlinson chose to play the idiot by slowly wandering about in front of the police. Do I think he knew exactly what he was doing? Yes, I do. Did he deserve to die for that? No, of course not. My point is that had he not decided to act the idiot he would not have been anywhere near the policeman and he would still be alive.

It comes down to interpretation of the video. I think Ian Tomlinson was purposefully obstructing the police and should therefore have been moved out of the way. In doing so he is forcing the policeman to make a choice on how to move him out of the way. The policeman clearly chose the wrong option. Nontheless by giving the policeman a choice to make Ian Tomlinson contributed to his own death. Had he simply walked away the policeman has no choice to make and Tomlinson lives.
 
nydryl said:
Next time you cross the road just stand there in the middle for a while until the lights turn green. You're doing nothing illegal, stand your ground and let the cars run you over. Her Majesty's subjects should not expect to have to take steps to avoid violent attacks by a car.

The above argument is clearly stupid.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, it is. That's probably why I didn't make it. The point you appear to have missed is that choice does not imply culpability.

In my opinion Ian Tomlinson chose to play the idiot by slowly wandering about in front of the police. Do I think he knew exactly what he was doing? Yes, I do.
Click to expand...

I think he was drunk because, er, he was.

Did he deserve to die for that? No, of course not. My point is that had he not decided to act the idiot he would not have been anywhere near the policeman and he would still be alive.
Click to expand...

So what? What relevance does that have?

It comes down to interpretation of the video. I think Ian Tomlinson was purposefully obstructing the police and should therefore have been moved out of the way. In doing so he is forcing the policeman to make a choice on how to move him out of the way. The policeman clearly chose the wrong option.
Click to expand...

There was nothing in Tomlinson's actions that justified violence against, even if - as you say - he was in their way that does not provide any justification for the Police attacking him. That's the key point.

The Met that day behaved systematically badly; but this particular Officer went completely overboard on an innocent bystander and, as a result, caused his death. That's all there is to it.
 
From the video it looks like he was causing trouble, walking away that slowly. The push didn't even seem that bad even though it was too much force, not sure whether the officer meant to use that much force. He also had his hand in his pockets, what if he had a knife in his pocket and stabbed one of the policemen?

walking around with your hands in your pockets isn't really a good idea because if you fall over you will probably land on your face.
 
ticklemebougy said:
From the video it looks like he was causing trouble, walking away that slowly. The push didn't even seem that bad even though it was too much force, not sure whether the officer meant to use that much force. He also had his hand in his pockets, what if he had a knife in his pocket and stabbed one of the policemen?

walking around with your hands in your pockets isn't really a good idea because if you fall over you will probably land on your face.
Click to expand...

What, what are you the hands in the pocket Gestapo
 
ticklemebougy said:
From the video it looks like he was causing trouble, walking away that slowly. The push didn't even seem that bad even though it was too much force, not sure whether the officer meant to use that much force. He also had his hand in his pockets, what if he had a knife in his pocket and stabbed one of the policemen?

walking around with your hands in your pockets isn't really a good idea because if you fall over you will probably land on your face.
Click to expand...
I too thought he looked like he was on a wind-up from watching the vid, but a statement from another officer in that line (which I think may be posted in this thread) paints a very different picture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom