police brutality

[Elton]

The human body is a weird thing. My cousin, on tour with the Paras in Northern Ireland, was kicked and beaten unconscious by a gang of locals. He had virtually every rib broken, had to have his jaw wired up and had fractures all over the place, yet lived to tell the tale. In fact, he's been in plenty of fights since and always seems to bounce back.

 

Yet this poor bloke died from one fairly trivial-looking push

[Guest Brumagem Phil]

The human body is a weird thing. My cousin, on tour with the Paras in Northern Ireland, was kicked and beaten unconscious by a gang of locals. He had virtually every rib broken, had to have his jaw wired up and had fractures all over the place, yet lived to tell the tale. In fact, he's been in plenty of fights since and always seems to bounce back.

 

Yet this poor bloke died from one fairly trivial-looking push

 

Quite!

 

It would be nice if the law took account of this as it should do. (was it steve who posted the relevant link to the law?)

[kleinboet]

What I cannot understand is that people are actually siding with the police!!

My understanding of the law and the actions of police - especially RIOT police - is that they must be in control of THEMSELVES at all times!! Look at how many times NO action has been taken because "in the opinion of the police, any action being taken will only exacerbate the situation"??????

What are the police here for!! If they can attack a man (drunk or sober) and kill him, slap a woman across the face - and then come back and hit her across the legs with a baton!! What chance does the man in the street have? Are they in control of anything, not just themselves?

[captain cojones]

What I cannot understand is that people are actually siding with the police!!

If they can attack a man (drunk or sober) and kill him, slap a woman across the face - and then come back and hit her across the legs with a baton!! What chance does the man in the street have? Are they in control of anything, not just themselves?

 

you dont know that he killed him. until the medical evidence is put together,no-one does.

So he hit her with a baton?Thats what they are for......give it a week, and some people will be on here complaining about the police"not fighting crime" etc. seems to me they cant do right for wrong in britain.

As ive said before,the police in britain are like social workers to those in other countries.

[kleinboet]

Have you watched the video??

This man was hit in the legs (which appears to be standard OP) and the pushed violently to the ground - FROM BEHIND!!!

As for not knowing what killed him -

""A subsequent post-mortem examination was conducted by another consultant forensic pathologist, Dr Nat Cary, instructed by the IPCC and by solicitors acting for the family of the late Mr Tomlinson.

 

"Dr Cary's opinion is that the cause of death was abdominal haemorrhage. The cause of the haemorrhage remains to be ascertained.

 

"Dr Cary accepts that there is evidence of coronary atherosclerosis but states that in his opinion its nature and extent is unlikely to have contributed to the cause of death."

 

 

Since then, the officer has been questioned again under a manslaughter charge!!

[captain cojones]

""Dr Cary's opinion is that the cause of death was abdominal haemorrhage. The cause of the haemorrhage remains to be ascertained""

 

The above is a cut and paste from your own post.

Note the part................

 

The cause of the haemorrhage remains to be ascertained..

That is why i said you cannot yet claim the police officer killed him.

[kleinboet]

That cutting is an old one - it is since then (the police and relatives have known the results for over a week before the last cut and paste!) that the police have cautioned the officer, under caution for manslaughter. That's why I make that assumption!!

[captain cojones]

i presume you mean he was questioned under caution.

as it stands,he has not been charged,nor found guilty.

Im just trying to point out you need to be careful in claiming "the policeman killed him"

As you say,you are making an assumption.

If he isnt convicted,your statement is clearly libellous.

Just because you write it on a forum,doesnt make it less so.

[Guest Brumagem Phil]

What I cannot understand is that people are actually siding with the police!!

My understanding of the law and the actions of police - especially RIOT police - is that they must be in control of THEMSELVES at all times!! Look at how many times NO action has been taken because "in the opinion of the police, any action being taken will only exacerbate the situation"??????

What are the police here for!! If they can attack a man (drunk or sober) and kill him, slap a woman across the face - and then come back and hit her across the legs with a baton!! What chance does the man in the street have? Are they in control of anything, not just themselves?

 

For once KB i'm in agreement with every single word you say!

 

Seems ok for a copper to backhand a bird for giving him a bit of lip but should I do the same to my missus, I'd be charged (quite rightly) with assault.

 

Regardless of whether this copper is found to have killed the fellah or not, he should be charged with assault. He wasn't using appropriate force, in fact it appeared to be unprovoked. On that basis he stepped outside the law, and should be dealt with accordingly.

Edited April 18, 2009 by Brumagem Phil

[kleinboet]

It would appear that the police have made a right hash of things, no matter who sticks up for them:

 

"The IPCC is already investigating events leading up the death of newspaper seller Ian Tomlinson on April 1 and an allegation of an assault on Nicola Fisher on April 2.

 

A Scotland Yard spokeswoman said: "We can confirm that a third complaint has been referred to the IPCC."

 

Am I making that up too?