Tomlinson inquest verdict: Unlawful killing

“We’ve got a long way ahead of us. We’ve been let down for two years … We’re grateful that we’re going a step further than we did two years ago … [Hearing the verdict] was nice; a bit of closure for the family. It feels like something is being done by the right authority and I hope we’ll get some answers. It’s been proven that he was killed unlawfully. [Now] we’d like to go to court and continue with the manslaughter charges.” (Paul King, Ian Tomlinson’s son)

The jury from the Tomlinson inquest came back today with an “unlawful killing” verdict.

What was the name of the deceased?
Ian Tomlinson.

What was the cause of his death? Injury or disease?
Abdominal haemorrhage due to blunt force trauma to the abdomen in association with cirrhosis of the liver.

If the person died of injury, what were the circumstances?
Mr Tomlinson was on his way home from work on the 1st of April 2009 during the G20 demonstration. He was fatally injured at around 19.20pm on Royal Exchange Buildings … This was the result of a baton strike from behind and a push by the officer which caused Ian Tomlinson to fall heavily.

The jury said both the baton strike and the push were “unreasonable”.

“As a result, Mr Tomlinson suffered internal bleeding which led to his collapse within a few minutes and his subsequent death.” The jury decided that at the time of the strike and push Tomlinson was was walking away from the officer and “posed no threat”.

What is the jury’s conclusion as to the death?
Unlawful killing.

I must admit when I saw the verdict on the Guardian website I cheered (I was meaning to go back to the inquest but couldn’t make it in the end). The family of Ian Tomlinson have faced an almighty uphill struggle to seek justice; from the lies peddled about his death initially, to a botched postmortem by Freddie Patel where his findings were contradicted by another postmortem, ineptitude shown by the IPCC and to add insult to injury the DPP wouldn’t prosecute Harwood. And now the jury has accepted that the attack that led him to fall “caused internal bleeding” which led to his death. The jury has also said that Tomlinson posed no threat.

The DPP will have a “thorough review” of the evidence. Let’s hope charges will be brought this time and also a public inquiry into the overall policing of the G20 protests as Harwood isn’t just one “bad apple” instead there are barrel loads of thuggish and violent cops. Behaviour like his and countless others are endemic within the police force, a culture of violence and brutality. Harwood’s “evidence” damned himself as he had to admit he lied, lied and lied again. His tangled web of deceit caught up with him as the video evidence contradicted him. He also, shockingly, had the audacity to ask the IPCC to investigate Ian Tomlinson. Trying to pin the blame on a dead man. How low and devious can someone get!

Today’s verdict is only the start. Justice has been denied to the countless people who have died in police custody and no cop has faced criminal charges. And the lack of justice for Blair Peach, Harry Stanley, Jean Charles de Menezes…. all dying at the hands of violent cops. Yet no accountability or responsiblity just cover-up after cover-up.

This cannot go on. For starters, disband the TSG… they are no better than the hated SPG. And the reality of a “unlawful killing” means, to reach an unlawful killing conclusion, the jury were required to have been satisfied to a higher burden of proof than the other possible verdicts, which could have been reached “on the balance of probabilities”.

But to reach the unlawful killing verdict, the jury had to be convinced “beyond reasonable doubt”, the same threshold used in criminal trials.

Let’s hope justice will be served.

This isn’t justice

So the monster has been slain. Is the world a safer place? No. Is this something we should celebrate. No. I agree with the StWC statement about the killing of Bin Laden. I mean, ask yourself, will the assassination of Bin Laden lessen the “war on terror”… Absolutely not. Assassinating Bin Laden has created a kind of martyrdom status him and also this brand of rough justice, death by the bullet is simply not justice. I watched the celebrations in New York on the news last night and it is disturbed me. I can understand why people felt the need, and also the collective release it gave hearing the death of Bin Laden but it still disturbed me. A terrorist attack in the New York where thousands of ordinary people were killed, injured and traumatised but the response by the West was to further instigate bloodshed and death. Revenge, euphemistically known as “war on terror”. But while we are distracted by jubilation and celebrations, ask yourself, who created Bin Laden and al-Qaida? The seeds of al-Qaida were sown by the West during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. With the West supporting and financing them against the Soviets Afghanistan fell. And parallels with Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden turned his attention towards the West (though I doubt whether Bin Laden, a Saudi rich man, gave a damn about the Palestinians before) but this gave him the excuse to wage war against the West. He bit the hand that fed him during the war in Afghanistan. What also has amazed me is the length of time it has taken to track down Bin Laden. With all the specialist techniques, finance, and gadgets that secret service have they still couldn’t find him, it is kinda akin to the Keystone Cops. What took so long?

Also, it also shows how the West, in this case the international imperialist police officer USA, go into Pakistan and execute Bin Laden. Does it worry me? Yes. He may have been a thoroughly nasty piece of work but that thoroughly nasty piece of work was created by the West and given the opportunity to organise. It also exposes the way the West believes they can trample in any other country under the guise of liberation and justice. There are plenty of war criminals and terrorists in this world (and the West is rather selective) with blood on their hands roaming free some worry about the countries they visit due to extradition treaties but nevertheless they don’t have to look over their shoulder expecting the assassin’s bullet. Rather double standards there. Regardless of this I would have preferred to have seen Bin Laden in the dock not shot and dumped in the sea.

A parent who lost his son in the Twin Towers said that he didn’t believe justice had been done. Justice for him would have been for the Special Forces to have apprehended Bin Laden and tried him in a court of law. Though I want to see Blair, Kissinger, Bush….and so in that dock too for all the murder and bloodshed they have unleashed all in the name of liberation and justice. This is not how I define justice, certainly not by the assassin’s bullet and also question the legality of this mission. I would have preferred to have seen Bin Laden tried and convicted of his crimes with life imprisonment as death just creates martyrdom. What also worries me is with this execution what will happen now? UK is supposed to be on alert regarding terrorist attacks, does that mean as well more legislation that will fundamentally attack our civil liberties and freedom? Paying the price of the West’s gangsterism and imperialism? I won’t cheer the death of Bin Laden as this just further proves the West’s own distortion of justice.