“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.
One of the most worrying things about this terrible event is that this only came to light because a member of the public filmed it happening,without that non of this would have come to light.We can be in no dought there is a serious problem with the accountability of the Met police,there have to be calls for a full judicial inquiry. I would urge people to e-mail there MPs to show there disquiet at this terrible crime.
Regarding this behavior being ‘endemic’ in the police force, I thought it was very revealing that during his testimony Harwood said he felt justified in doing what he did (or at the very least wasn’t prepared to take one for the team string himself up as an exception):
Harwood also accepted that he had not given Tomlinson any warning before pushing him and told the court that he believed that he was entitled, as a police officer, to strike someone even if he had judged them not to pose a threat.
Ryder asked: “Does your training tell you if someone is not a threat to you or any other person it is acceptable to baton them? Is that your training? “Yes,” replied Harwood.
He also said that he did not consider his push to be any harder than that of a fellow officer who had pushed Tomlinson seconds earlier. Another officer, however, had described Harwood’s push as being “in a different league of force”.
Lets hope a prosecution is made and that the trial has the same verdict – as obviously a jury in the manslaughter case will be different. This inquest establishes facts in regarding to Ian’s death but not to whether the PC is guilty.
Jail the thug!