G20 protestor

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-10723274

No charges to be brought.

Good.

Right Decision.

Agree entirely. Whilst the officer overeacted, they were in a very stressful situation.

The guy involved, whilst it is a tragedy he died, was not helping himself.

I suspect if someone had pushed and killed a policeman then the outcome would be slightly different.

the rozzer should have been at least sacked for that

Appalling decision. A clear an assault as you are ever likely to get. The CPS have again lived up to their 'other name'. Criminal Protection Service. And before you think I some anti-establishment type. I served for 14 years as a policeman.

I know the workings of the self protectionism in the police system. This will further distance the police from the main body of the population, who have little or no faith in the police to do the job we all employ them to do.

I suspect if someone had pushed and killed a policeman then the outcome would be slightly different.

 

the rozzer should have been at least sacked for that

I agree. Don't really see why there was any need for it, and if he died as a result of being push, I don't see the defence.

Agree entirely. Whilst the officer overeacted, they were in a very stressful situation.

 

The guy involved, whilst it is a tragedy he died, was not helping himself.

WTF? He was walking away from the police when the officer needlessly struck him from behind. How can there possibly be any justification for that?

WTF? He was walking away from the police when the officer needlessly struck him from behind. How can there possibly be any justification for that?

I have been caught in the middle of one of these types of riots...those who claim to be "pushed around" by the police push the police to the limit....these sort of people take a dump im the fryers at maccy d's

I have been caught in the middle of one of these types of riots...those who claim to be "pushed around" by the police push the police to the limit....these sort of people take a dump im the fryers at maccy d's

I can only assume that you are 'tarring everyone with the same brush' and are not taking this case on it's own merits. A man walking away with his hands in his pockets is struck by a police officer and subequently dies. No, accusation at anytime that this man was doing anything else than to try and get home. He wasn't involved in the protest.

Appalling decision. A clear an assault as you are ever likely to get. The CPS have again lived up to their 'other name'. Criminal Protection Service. And before you think I some anti-establishment type. I served for 14 years as a policeman.

I know the workings of the self protectionism in the police system. This will further distance the police from the main body of the population, who have little or no faith in the police to do the job we all employ them to do.

Meanwhile bottletop throwing and fence rattling gets you a year in chokey.

I can only assume that you are 'tarring everyone with the same brush' and are not taking this case on it's own merits. A man walking away with his hands in his pockets is struck by a police officer and subequently dies. No, accusation at anytime that this man was doing anything else than to try and get home. He wasn't involved in the protest.

he was clearly pushing the boundries...he was hardlt clearing the area...he was being awkward.....his death is tragic..but maybe, do what the police tell you and how they tell you on days like that and you will go home safe and sound

No, accusation at anytime that this man was doing anything else than to try and get home. He wasn't involved in the protest.

No way in a million years was he casually walking past a riot on his way home.

It was not 'a riot' that term is deliberately used to infer all sorts of things. This area of the protest was not a riot it was a protest. This man was on his way home from work. The police offier involved has admitted assaulting him. Yet because of delaying tactics used by the police evidence gathering team he will not be charged

No way in a million years was he casually walking past a riot on his way home.

He was walking home from work. In the video he is walking - why do you think he was doing otherwise?

It was not 'a riot' that term is deliberately used to infer all sorts of things. This area of the protest was not a riot it was a protest. This man was on his way home from work. The police offier involved has admitted assaulting him. Yet because of delaying tactics used by the police evidence gathering team he will not be charged

simply bollix....when I got caught in the 2000 mayday riots (it was a farking riot..people crapping in the streets and smashing shops up)....I spoke to the police..(who initially pushed me around) and they let me through....and off home I went to camdem...walking most of the way I will add

as someone else said, this copper should've been banged up, while all those saints fans got sent down for rattling a fence. doesn't make any sense

A travesty. Paula Poulton's lover gets life for her murder, no weopon found and only circumstantial evidence etc but CPS said enough evidence existed to warrant a trial. A correct decision as it turned out.

Here we have a policeman on film striking someone who collapsed straight away and died soon after and what do we get from the CPS? Not enough evidence to take to trial. I suspect the last thing the CPS or the police wanted was a trial. 12 fair minded people looking at the facts would surely have found the officer guilty of manslaughter.

"do what the police tell you"

there you are folks. a model citizen. not like all you "protestors" and anti-establishment types, going around causing trouble. they get what they deserve. blair peach, liddle towers, jean charles de menezes. they all had it coming.

A travesty. Paula Poulton's lover gets life for her murder, no weopon found and only circumstantial evidence etc but CPS said enough evidence existed to warrant a trial. A correct decision as it turned out.

 

Here we have a policeman on film striking someone who collapsed straight away and died soon after and what do we get from the CPS? Not enough evidence to take to trial. I suspect the last thing the CPS or the police wanted was a trial. 12 fair minded people looking at the facts would surely have found the officer guilty of manslaughter.

he pushed him...

"do what the police tell you"

 

there you are folks. a model citizen. not like all you "protestors" and anti-establishment types, going around causing trouble. they get what they deserve. blair peach, liddle towers, jean charles de menezes. they all had it coming.

But this guy was clearly walking with his hands in his pockets and causing all sorts of trouble, it's there on the video for all the right minded to see . . . Oh, it's not.

Must have been in the Mail then.

yeah he only pushed him. what the ****. hardly worth causing a fuss over. unless, of course, he died as a result of being pushed over, in which case...

yeah he only pushed him. what the ****. hardly worth causing a fuss over. unless, of course, he died as a result of being pushed over, in which case...

you are right...he pushed him...much like someone rattled a fence or threw a bottle top after the pompey game...both are hardly "violent acts"..just one led to a serious unfortunate result....as both circumstances could...

he pushed him...

and because the man pushed a policeman, its OK for the police to strike him down and kill him? That's alright then.

Just for a second I thought that this man's assailant should stand trial and let ordinary members of the public decide whether the policeman was guilty of manslaughter? I am wrong

he pushed him...

If I was to push you in the back like that then you would more than likely turn and deliver me a swift smack in the mouth. And I would deserve it.

The least that this policeman should have been charged with, in my opinion, is manslaughter.

**Edit to clarify**

If I was to push you like that then you would more than likely turn and deliver me a swift smack in the mouth. And I would deserve it.

 

The least that this policeman should have been charged with, in my opinion, is manslaughter.

maybe....but it was a push..which im sure police are entitled to do...(maybe if a copper posts they could clarify that)

maybe people cannot see the tongue in my cheek. allow me to clarify. the cooper in question should be on a charge of manslaughter and it is a ****ing disgrace that he isn't.

there.

all clear now?

must remember not to use sarcasm anymore.

maybe....but it was a push..which im sure police are entitled to do...(maybe if a copper posts they could clarify that)

Really? the police are entitled to push people who are walking away from them forceably in the back? BTW He didn't just push he also whacked him in the back of the legs with his cosh.

Dreadful decision but what was expected.

TDD, just be glad that when you got caught up in that riot that you mentioned you were able to speak to a reasonable common sense Police officer. If you'd been unlucky you might have been told to **** off and then shoved to the ground. Reactionaries on internet forums would've said you got what you deserved.

Can anybody tell me at what point in the video clip you can see the 'riot' that the Police were controlling ? If you or I pushed a copper over we'd at the least get piled into a van and arrive at the Station with a few teeth less than we'd started with. This was an unprovoked assault, unless walking with your hands in your pockets is now an offence under Public Order regulations.

personally...I think instead of clamouring for the individual coppers to be hung drawn and quatered..questions should be asked about the operating procedures in these events...

comparing this to whacking a copper is stupid...it really is stupid....

was the copper within his powers to do what he did...had this man refused to "move on quicky"....had the police warned him that they would use a baton against him if he did not move on quickly..? they are entitled to tell you to move quickly BTW....was this man trying to be awkward....were the police trying (quickly) to clear the area but this man was not complying..?

we just dont know...although, someone does...

tragic yes...but simply saying this copper should be charged is daft...charged of what..? did this action definately cause this death..? did the copper act outside his legal powers...?

maybe, the answer is no...

How can you say that pushing someone isn't a violent act?!?! That's ridiculous- of course it is! If they wanted to move him on, take him by the arm and march him away. Do not push him from behind when he has his hands in his pockets so he can neither see you coming nor adequately stop his fall.

That was cowardly, idiotic and criminal. That policeman should be prosecuted. If someone starts a fight with me on Friday night and I push them, they fall over and smack their head on the pavement and die, I'm going to get prosecuted.

How can you say that pushing someone isn't a violent act?!?! That's ridiculous- of course it is! If they wanted to move him on, take him by the arm and march him away. Do not push him from behind when he has his hands in his pockets so he can neither see you coming nor adequately stop his fall.

 

That was cowardly, idiotic and criminal. That policeman should be prosecuted. If someone starts a fight with me on Friday night and I push them, they fall over and smack their head on the pavement and die, I'm going to get prosecuted.

you are right..david prutton should have laso been prosecuted..?

you are right..david prutton should have laso been prosecuted..?

The linesman didn't die, did he? That was assault, not manslaughter.

The linesman didn't die' date=' did he? That was assault, not manslaughter.[/quote']

 

but he should have been done though...so should everyone who pushes someone...right..?

personally...I think instead of clamouring for the individual coppers to be hung drawn and quatered..questions should be asked about the operating procedures in these events...

 

comparing this to whacking a copper is stupid...it really is stupid....

 

was the copper within his powers to do what he did...had this man refused to "move on quicky"....had the police warned him that they would use a baton against him if he did not move on quickly..? they are entitled to tell you to move quickly BTW....was this man trying to be awkward....were the police trying (quickly) to clear the area but this man was not complying..?

 

we just dont know...although, someone does...

 

tragic yes...but simply saying this copper should be charged is daft...charged of what..? did this action definately cause this death..? did the copper act outside his legal powers...?

maybe, the answer is no...

So why can't a court decide these questions? As usual the police are above the law.

you are right..david prutton should have laso been prosecuted..?

Idiotic analogy of the week award goes to.....

So why can't a court decide these questions? As usual the police are above the law.

if the copper was acting within his powers..what is there for a court to decide....? they cant change the laws can they..?

but he should have been done though...so should everyone who pushes someone...right..?

Yes, by the letter of the law they should! Obviously in the milder cases, people do not press charges and therefore nobody gets prosecuted for it. But if someone pushes someone and they die, then they should be prosecuted.

If you pushed someone tomorrow because they were squaring up to you and they fell over and died, you'd be going to prison.

if the copper was acting within his powers..what is there for a court to decide....? they cant change the laws can they..?

So basically what you're saying, is that it's within the police's powers to kill someone who's walking away from them?

So basically what you're saying' date=' is that it's within the police's powers to kill someone who's walking away from them?[/quote']

 

basically......like when a copper shots someone with a gun (that turns out to be a chair leg)...if that action and the way they carried it out, IS within the laws that govern them....then it is the laws that need looking at, not the person carrying them out..

All the discussion about whether Tomlinson was merely 'pushed' is beside the point.

The point is that a trial by jury is the accepted way of dealing with outcomes like this.

Then it would be for a jury to decide whether the 'push' was a cause of his death (in which case a manslaughter verdict is certainly a possibility, regardless of intent).

The jury would also hear the scientific evidence on which 'experts' allegedly cannot agree. The principal one of these, the pathologist who carried out the initial post mortem, is presently on a serious disciplinary charge of misconduct.

Justice must be seen to be done, not applied differentially to the police who, yet again and extremely predictably, walk away after the death of someone whose only crime appears to have been to be walking in the wrong place at the wrong time.

All the discussion about whether Tomlinson was merely 'pushed' is beside the point.

 

The point is that a trial by jury is the accepted way of dealing with outcomes like this.

 

Then it would be for a jury to decide whether the 'push' was a cause of his death (in which case a manslaughter verdict is certainly a possibility, regardless of intent).

 

The jury would also hear the scientific evidence on which 'experts' allegedly cannot agree. The principal one of these, the pathologist who carried out the initial post mortem, is presently on a serious disciplinary charge of misconduct.

 

Justice must be seen to be done, not applied differentially to the police who, yet again and extremely predictably, walk away after the death of someone whose only crime appears to have been to be walking in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Exactly. I don't understand how anyone can hold a differing view to this without maintaining that the police should have absolute power to do whatever they want.

basically......like when a copper shots someone with a gun (that turns out to be a chair leg)...if that action and the way they carried it out, IS within the laws that govern them....then it is the laws that need looking at, not the person carrying them out..

A good point well made. Either way, there's no way that he should be able to get away with that. I guess we will never know if he'd have done it if he didn't know he could get away with it.

A good point well made. Either way' date=' there's no way that he should be able to get away with that. I guess we will never know if he'd have done it if he didn't know he could get away with it.[/quote']

 

agree...and I have no doubt there are some proper ******s of police officers out there..have met my fair share...but at times, the system allows them to be like that....

you only have to look at the fella who got shot on the tube....what choice did the police on the scene have..? it was the system (again it seems) that let them down...

if the copper was acting within his powers..what is there for a court to decide....? they cant change the laws can they..?

You came up with a number of questions that wondered if or if not the Policeman was acting lawfully.

In any case the CPS didn't say he was acting within his powers but came up with some technicalities which prevent them from taking it any further.

from the beeb: "Mr Tomlinson's family solicitor Jules Carey said the family will consider whether they can appeal against the decision.

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

"We now need to find out if there has been a lack of will or incompetence, and frankly there needs to be an inquiry into that."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-10723274

 

No charges to be brought.

 

Good.

if that was one of your family you probably would see it differently

Right Decision.

He was walking home from work. Its shown in the video he is walking away ,if that was one of your family you probably would see it differently but hey its legal to murder .

the cps are a disgrace not to bring charges in this case and the general public can see it for what it is.

I suspect if someone had pushed and killed a policeman then the outcome would be slightly different.

 

the rozzer should have been at least sacked for that

This!!

maybe people cannot see the tongue in my cheek. allow me to clarify. the cooper in question should be on a charge of manslaughter and it is a ****ing disgrace that he isn't.

 

there.

 

all clear now?

 

must remember not to use sarcasm anymore.

Did one have a whoosh! moment when I posted, supportingly, in the same vein? ;-)

but he should have been done though...so should everyone who pushes someone...right..?

If it's an assault then it's an assault and surely a punishable offence?

Just watched the video again, he does appear to be walking rather slowly with his hands in his pockets when the police line comes up behind him. Almost on purpose.

We don't know what was said between him and the coppers either.

Having said that, the push was totally OTT.

You came up with a number of questions that wondered if or if not the Policeman was acting lawfully.

 

In any case the CPS didn't say he was acting within his powers but came up with some technicalities which prevent them from taking it any further.

 

from the beeb: "Mr Tomlinson's family solicitor Jules Carey said the family will consider whether they can appeal against the decision.

 

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

 

"We now need to find out if there has been a lack of will or incompetence, and frankly there needs to be an inquiry into that."

If the CPS have accepted the conduct of the officer was unlawful are they not saying that he broke the law? Or is unlawful different from breaking the law?

Or does it mean that there's not a law saying he shouldn't do it?

I often get confused, yeh I know, about a trial 'not being in the public interests'. Surely the public have a vested interest in this sort of 'unlawful act' * in that they know anyone, specially an upholder of law and order, is not going to perform an 'unlawful act'* on them?

*As accepted by the CPS in this perticular case.

Just imagine this: You're walking down the high street with your 3-year old son. Some bloke walks in front of you and treads on your sons toes (accidently? who knows) and he starts crying. You give him a piece of your mind but he ignores you and offers no apology, momentarily you lose your rag and push the bloke over. Somehow it causes him to die.

What is the likelihood that the CPS would take over one year to come to a decision?

What is the likelihood that the CPS would prevent it from going to court on some technicalities?

What is the likelihood that enough time would elapse to prevent even lesser assault charges from being pressed?

One rule for the Police.