[Bill Hicks]

This footage is quite shocking considering that the man being pushed died minutes later from a heart attack, was not a demonstrator and was walking away from the police at the time of him being pushed to the ground.

BBC NEWS | England | London | Footage shows G20 death man push

This act was totally uncalled for and the officer that pushed him should face an independent enquiry!

[pandemic]

There's no audio in the footage so it's hard to know precisely why he was pushed. The policeman may have been asking him to move away, which he was doing very, very, slowly. Could have 'frustrated' the policeman to give him a push. Still we have to bear in mind, nobody could have predicted he would have a heart attack.

[smelly]

Its awful that a man died, but we have to be very careful to automatically assume its all the policemans fault. As bla5er said you can't hear what was being said, you can't see the lead up to this, and no one could have known that he would have had a heart attack. Obviously that doesn't give the policeman the right to shove anyone indiscriminately but equally they must have been under an awful lot of pressure that day.

An awful thing to happen, but is it really necessary to have to blame anyone in Daily Mail style??

[shodan]

I think an inquest will come from this. It does appear though that with a line of police officers walking towards him (and police dogs too) and he stands around in the way with his hands in his pockets and doesn't do what I think most normal people would do, get out of the way. So he gets pushed, he may have been given verbal warnings and ordered to move, or he may not have. However at the end of the footage you can see him walk away past the camera.
I heard it reported that he was just trying to get home from work but he didn't seem to be trying to hard to get home there.
Of course, all the armchair solicitors will be out in force with their opinions and demands that the Met be charged and the officer who pushed him be hung drawn and quartered etc etc....

[Steven]

Well no as it would be incredibly hard to prove any criminal liability on the part of the Met itself here. More likely a civil action, if any. More immediately possible would be for the individual officer concerned to face multiple proceedings and claims

[neilios]

Typical police bullying again ,totally uncalled for ,why not just escort the bloke across the road instead of shoving an old man hard in the back .Probably died of stress and shock being caught up in that lot.

[IronGiant]

Let's wait for the facts? If you dispute them, then please come back...

[Mep]

Originally Posted by neilios

Typical police bullying again ,totally uncalled for ,why not just escort the bloke across the road instead of shoving an old man hard in the back .Probably died of stress and shock being caught up in that lot.

without going into the rights and wrongs (but like others have said without sound it's very hard to judge......and he doesn't look in too much of a hurry) but 47 does not make him an old man.......you make it sound as if a frail old pensioner has been shoved over.

[neilneil]

Originally Posted by Mep

without going into the rights and wrongs (but like others have said without sound it's very hard to judge......and he doesn't look in too much of a hurry) but 47 does not make him an old man.......you make it sound as if a frail old pensioner has been shoved over.

Well he may well have been that frail. After all, he did die of a heart attack shortly afterwards.

-Neil

[The Dude]

Originally Posted by neilios

Typical police bullying again ,totally uncalled for ,why not just escort the bloke across the road instead of shoving an old man hard in the back .Probably died of stress and shock being caught up in that lot.

Boo to that comment.


If the organised (by whom?) protest had never hapened, then this man would almost certainly still be alive.

[Bill Hicks]

If you watch the video on the news channels as opposed to the BBC website link you can see the amount of force that was used in the push.
The man had his hands in his pockets presenting no threat to the officers involved.

If the police had verbally told the man to move quicker then that is still no excuse for the amount of force used against him.

Also the incident took place on Cornhill well away from the police cordon.

I can understand the amount of stress that these officers were under on the day, but it still does not excuse the actions of this police officer!

[Mep]

Originally Posted by neilneil

Well he may well have been that frail. After all, he did die of a heart attack shortly afterwards.

-Neil

that wasn't the point was it

[Steven]

Originally Posted by The Dude

Boo to that comment.


If the organised (by whom?) protest had never hapened, then this man would almost certainly still be alive.

I did not realise that such a presumptive approach is to be adopted by the police during protests. Thanks for the comment

[The Dude]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

I did not realise that such a presumptive approach is to be adopted by the police during protests. Thanks for the comment

Presumptuous?


Factual.



Thanks for the comment, young man.

[Steven]

I think you need to leave the complex outside the door and try reading my post again as it did not mean anything close to what you think it does

[lucasisking]

Originally Posted by smelly

Its awful that a man died, but we have to be very careful to automatically assume its all the policemans fault. As bla5er said you can't hear what was being said, you can't see the lead up to this, and no one could have known that he would have had a heart attack. Obviously that doesn't give the policeman the right to shove anyone indiscriminately but equally they must have been under an awful lot of pressure that day.

An awful thing to happen, but is it really necessary to have to blame anyone in Daily Mail style??

Completely agree. The footage is shocking, and if it was unprovoked then I agree the officer must be brought to book. On the other hand, it could be that the man was being deliberately awkward and possibly obstructing the officers who were trying to do a difficult job. It could well be that he was asked several times to move out of the way, and told the officers to **** ***. After a day of abuse and bottle thowing- that could have tipped the policeman over the edge.

I could be wrong about that. As there is no record of what was said, we'll never know. It's easy to be an armchair judge.

As a vietnam vet would say, 'we weren't there, man!'

[PoochJD]

HI,

All I'm going to say is that this kind of footage, does not give a good impression of the Met Police!

Irrespective of whether the man did or did not heckle or vebally attack an officer, I personally feel that police officers - by the very nature of their job - should be above violence, and should simply have escorted the guy away. Pushing or shoving of any kind was unnecessary, and there is - again, in my opinion only - no real justification for what that officer appears to do.

Surely, any police officer has to act appropriately whilst they perform their duties, even if they are being verbally abused? If the man had been violent towards an officer, then surely they should have handcuffed him? And, in all honesty, even if he had been offensive to an officer, handcuffs should have been used, rather than a seemingly violent and unprovoked thrust to the man's back?!


Pooch

[Hi-Def]

It would be really interesting to know what the same people in the thread would think if it was the other way round a person pushing over a police officer who minutes later died of a heart attack.

the person was walking along the road minding his own business in an area which was not part of the official police cordon. He may not have bent over backwards to run out of the way but at the same time he did not in any way seem uncooperative. the police have batons for self defense when they feel threatened not to randomly beat anyone who gets in their way and doesn't move within 5 seconds.

whatever happens this officer should be taken off any future riot/event/protect etc handling duties and have intensive training on how he is not above the law and that not everyone who falls before him is indeed a criminal and should treat the public how he himself would like to be treated.

[hopeless]

he wasnt just pushed but also hit on the leg with a baton

Ian Tomlinson death: Guardian video reveals police attack on man who died at G20 protest | UK news | guardian.co.uk

[Davieboy00]

It has been reported that there was no communication between any officer and Ian Tomlinson. Whether that is totally correct we will probably never know. Can't see anything on the footage.

Irrespective of any abuse that may have been hurled at the police by Ian Tomlinson or anyone else - If this action had been carried out by a member of the public , would they not be facing charges of assault ?
Since Mr. Tomlinson susbsequently died , would a member of the public not be facing murder charges ?

BBC NEWS | England | Woman, 82, dies after mugging

BBC NEWS | Wales | Murder charge after pub assault

Murder probe after assault victim dies - Chester Evening Leader

I may well need my ultra heavy duty flame suit after this but even though the police are " the law " they are not above it.

[Noggin1980]

The policeman in question should be charged with murder/manslaughter, it was an unccessary and intentional assault that almost certainly led to the mans death. If the man was walking slowly deliberatly to annoy and or insulted the officers then those are mitigating circumstances that can be heard in his trial but they don't excuse his actions and certaintly are not enough that he shouldn't be charged and tried.

The guardian video clearly shows he is trying to put the man face down into the pavement an act that could (though unlikely) result in death (though more likely from a head injury than heart attack.) It was a sucker hit from beind, with the victim having his hands in his pockets and the police man didn't just shove him in the back it was a full body lunge with a follow through after jabbing in the leg.

I'm not anti police I belive the vast majority of people who sign up to the police do so because they are good people, but when a police man commits an unnessary assault that results in death they need to be treated just like anyone else would.

[neilios]

Originally Posted by Mep

without going into the rights and wrongs (but like others have said without sound it's very hard to judge......and he doesn't look in too much of a hurry) but 47 does not make him an old man.......you make it sound as if a frail old pensioner has been shoved over.

I'm not judging i have a few mates who are coppers ,so know all about the grief they have to put up with ,but this bloke used a push which is taught in basic training and is very effective ,dressed in full body armour ,hyped up on adrenaline ,i think there is a bit of a mismatch between a skinny man trying to make his way home ,who was in the wrong place at the wrong time .

The police officer cocked up and has been caught on camera ,how ironic the use of cctv is used against the public and they have now been caught with the publics equivalent ,mobile phone camera.

[Buckster]

think of it another way

if guy had got up and then turned around and pushed that police office over ... would he be charged ?

even though incident (1) seems to be unprovoked

and (2) would have happened after provokation .. ?

Mark.

[loz]

the most likely outcome is the person that took the video will be charged under the counter terrorism act with illegally photographing police officers.

British Journal of Photography - Taking photos of police officers could be considered a crime

Set to become law on 16 February, the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 amends the Terrorism Act 2000 regarding offences relating to information about members of armed forces, a member of the intelligence services, or a police officer.

The new set of rules, under section 76 of the 2008 Act and section 58A of the 2000 Act, will target anyone who 'elicits or attempts to elicit information about [members of armed forces] … which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism'.

A person found guilty of this offence could be liable to imprisonment for up to 10 years, and to a fine.

The law is expected to increase the anti-terrorism powers used today by police officers to stop photographers, including press photographers, from taking pictures in public places. 'Who is to say that police officers won’t abuse these powers,' asks freelance photographer Justin Tallis, who was threatened by an officer last week.

Tallis, a London-based photographer, was covering the anti-BBC protest on Saturday 24 January when he was approached by a police officer. Tallis had just taken a picture of the officer, who then asked to see the picture. The photographer refused, arguing that, as a press photographer, he had a right to take pictures of police officers.

According to Tallis, the officer then tried to take the camera away. Before giving up, the officer said that Tallis 'shouldn’t have taken that photo, you were intimidating me'. The incident was caught on camera by photojournalist Marc Vallée.

Tallis is a member of the National Union of Journalists and the British Press Photographers’ Association. 'The incident lasted just 10 seconds, but you don’t expect a police officer to try to pull your camera from your neck,' Tallis tells BJP.

[Geege]

This thread is full of speculation, just like British news, we can't judge until we know the facts

[Noggin1980]

Originally Posted by Geege

This thread is full of speculation, just like British news, we can't judge until we know the facts

We know plenty of facts, there is no possible situation that makes what the police officer did acceptable, weather the guy was a protester or not, weather the guy was obstructing the police or not, weather the guy insulted the police or not none of these change that this wasn't reasonable force, it was assault and one that likely lead to his death.

[Steven]

Originally Posted by Hi-Def

It would be really interesting to know what the same people in the thread would think if it was the other way round a person pushing over a police officer who minutes later died of a heart attack.

Pretty irrelevant. The position of the law is that you take a person as you find them. That the normal person would most probably not have suffered a heart attack does not preclude criminal liability

Originally Posted by loz

the most likely outcome is the person that took the video will be charged under the counter terrorism act with illegally photographing police officers.

British Journal of Photography - Taking photos of police officers could be considered a crime

Before we jump into hysterics, whilst there is scope for abuse and I do not doubt some CSO or beat officer somewhere will (indeed already did before the change in the law), it does not apply here

[WillieCocker]

That "Plod" deserves a good kicking, then Permanent suspension for that.

[neilios]

The original story was ,police treat a man dying of a heart attack while been pelted with bottles ,by the nasty protesters the new story is the police obviously abused the man before his heart attack and then try to cover it up ,suprise ,suprise.

[Duncan G]

Originally Posted by neilios

Typical police bullying again ,totally uncalled for ,why not just escort the bloke across the road instead of shoving an old man hard in the back .Probably died of stress and shock being caught up in that lot.

Old!! He was only 47.

But the Police should not have shoved him, he was walking away from them.