Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: razzo on 19 July 2012, 17:27:40
-
of manslaughter, surprising as the Coroner recorded a verdict of unlawful killing
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18900484
-
Well why does that not surprise me >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
The bloke is nothing more than a thug with a warrant card >:(
2001 ish, he jumps (retires) before he is pushed after act of road rage then is re employed as a civvy by the same force.
He leaves and joins the surrey force as a copper then he rejoins the met.
During those riots, he tried to arrest some bloke who managed to escape.
Next he is seen putting a camara man on his arse.
Ian Tomlinson was not acting in a agressive manor and he was walking away with his hands in his pocket when he was struck across the back of the legs with a batton then shoved to the floor :o
That was manslaughter and the scumbag should be locked up tonight >:(
-
Without knowing the precise wording of the charge put to Constable Harwood this is another instance where the law can be easily misunderstood, leaving the findings of a jury and the subsequent direction of a judge open to criticism.
I happen to think that the Constable acted excessively and inadvisably in the circumstances, however the subsequent prosecution of any defendant, the conduct of their trial and the findings (if any) of the jury should be based on the evidence tested on foot of the precise nature of the charge/s placed against the defendant.
In this case there are differing definitions of manslaughter - some requiring greater proof to convict (or affording greater leeway to acquit) than others.
-
The bloke is nothing more than a thug with a warrant card >:(
2001 ish, he jumps (retires) before he is pushed after act of road rage then is re employed as a civvy by the same force.
He leaves and joins the surrey force as a copper then he rejoins the met.
During those riots, he tried to arrest some bloke who managed to escape.
Next he is seen putting a camara man on his arse.
Ian Tomlinson was not acting in a agressive manor and he was walking away with his hands in his pocket when he was struck across the back of the legs with a batton then shoved to the floor :o
That was manslaughter and the scumbag should be locked up tonight >:(
Our own thoughts and opinions are by and large, immaterial without hearing the whole case and circumstance in court under legal guidance.
Those viewing the matter outwith a court case are, I suggest, biased by their thoughts, bolstered by news reportage and last but not least, their interpretation of the snapshot of the easily viewable (and edited) footage on youtube.
-
The bloke is nothing more than a thug with a warrant card >:(
2001 ish, he jumps (retires) before he is pushed after act of road rage then is re employed as a civvy by the same force.
He leaves and joins the surrey force as a copper then he rejoins the met.
During those riots, he tried to arrest some bloke who managed to escape.
Next he is seen putting a camara man on his arse.
Ian Tomlinson was not acting in a agressive manor and he was walking away with his hands in his pocket when he was struck across the back of the legs with a batton then shoved to the floor :o
That was manslaughter and the scumbag should be locked up tonight >:(
Our own thoughts and opinions are by and large, immaterial without hearing the whole case and circumstance in court under legal guidance.
Those viewing the matter outwith a court case are, I suggest, biased by their thoughts, bolstered by news reportage and last but not least, their interpretation of the snapshot of the easily viewable (and edited) footage on youtube.
If you look at the information made available too ourselves,then in my opinion the man was guilty,but like you say if you are a juror and hear all the information,then you are the only person who can make the correct decision,but then how can the coroner who also had all the information say "unlawful killing/murder".It's a bit strange.. :-\
-
Was the jury descision unanimous or by a majority? How long did they take to decide? :-\
-
Its not good news by any means :( should have been locked up >:(
-
The jury were required to be SURE ...beyond reasonable doubt ... that his actions were directly responsible for the death, and their reasoning had to be based solely on the evidence presented to them in court.
None of us know, as we were not in court, what evidence was presented, how that evidence was presented, and what the prosecution and defence arguments were.
ALL we do know, for certainty, is that sufficient numbers, maybe all, of the jury, were NOT SURE to a sufficient level to find him guilty.
That is the basis of UK law ... not OOF vigilante guesswork.
-
All very true,but on the face of it,its a bit difficult to marry up the coroners unlawful killing verdict,with the juries not guilty verdict. :-\
-
The jury were required to be SURE ...beyond reasonable doubt ... that his actions were directly responsible for the death, and their reasoning had to be based solely on the evidence presented to them in court.
None of us know, as we were not in court, what evidence was presented, how that evidence was presented, and what the prosecution and defence arguments were.
ALL we do know, for certainty, is that sufficient numbers, maybe all, of the jury, were NOT SURE to a sufficient level to find him guilty.
That is the basis of UK law ... not OOF vigilante guesswork.
well said nige,ive always said that a policeman can have a good career and it takes one accident or occurance and the media strike and taint his existence.as h21 said people have only seen the hyped videos on youtube and the media edited footage and as you have said its down to the courts and jury :y
-
All very true,but on the face of it,its a bit difficult to marry up the coroners unlawful killing verdict,with the juries not guilty verdict. :-\
Nope ..
The coroner said he was unlawfully killed ... one man's opinion although based on the law.
The jury decided they were not sure that the PC was directly responsible for the death .. 12 peoples opinion of the evidence placed before them.
Different courts, different evidence, and in the trial barristers arguing their points, cross examining witnesses etc etc ..
which I don't believe occurs in the Coroners Court ... as I've never been to one of them ..
-
Could be argued that they are both supposed to be arms of the British justice system and one is almost contradicting the other.
The coroners isnt just one man,he is the man charged with making a judgement (on behalf of the state presumably) on why someone died,after having studied the facts and evidence.
I dont claim to have any real knowledge of how these things work at all,just a layman who is left slightly confused by the different arms of the legal system. Still seems somewhat strange to me.:-\
-
Was the jury descision unanimous or by a majority? How long did they take to decide? :-\
From the information I have been able to glean .. a unanimous verdict after 4 days of deliberation ... although that is NOT confirmed, but is correct to the best of my knowledge.
HTH
-
Could be argued that they are both supposed to be arms of the British justice system and one is almost contradicting the other.
The coroners isnt just one man,he is the man charged with making a judgement (on behalf of the state presumably) on why someone died,after having studied the facts and evidence.
I dont claim to have any real knowledge of how these things work at all,just a layman who is left slightly confused by the different arms of the legal system. Still seems somewhat strange to me.:-\
Just to try and explain it better ... the verdict of "unlawful killing" by the coroner will generally ensure a police investigation with the aim of gathering sufficient evidence to identify, charge and prosecute those involved.
This was done, and the CPS prosecuted the PC (so he was identified and charged) but that prosecution failed, in other words .... the CPS failed to make the jury SURE that the charges were met ...
It is not different "arms" of the legal system, it is a step further along the path ... coroner, 1 person with perhaps a small amount of evidence.. then Jury, 12 people with the all the evidence AFTER the police investigation.
-
All very true,but on the face of it,its a bit difficult to marry up the coroners unlawful killing verdict,with the juries not guilty verdict. :-\
This will show how my son;
The Coroners Act 1988 requires a coroner to hold an inquest where there is reasonable cause to suspect that the deceased died a violent or unnatural death, a sudden death of which the cause is unknown, or has died in prison. The purpose of an inquest is to establish who the deceased was, where and when the deceased died, and how the deceased came by his or her death.
www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN03981.pdf
Thus, an in inquest is not a trial held to adduce the guilt or innocence of any person suspected to have been responsible for, or involved in, the demise of the deceased.
-
All very true,but on the face of it,its a bit difficult to marry up the coroners unlawful killing verdict,with the juries not guilty verdict. :-\
Nope ..
The coroner said he was unlawfully killed ... one man's opinion although based on the law.
The jury decided they were not sure that the PC was directly responsible for the death .. 12 peoples opinion of the evidence placed before them.
Different courts, different evidence, and in the trial barristers arguing their points, cross examining witnesses etc etc ..
which I don't believe occurs in the Coroners Court ... as I've never been to one of them ..
When I did jury duty it was more like 11 people forming an opinion of the accused based purely on what they look liked like and how they behaved in court. And in one jurors opinion, " he looks very sorry for himself, I think we should let him off "
As for any evidence from either side it was complely dismissed or not heard by the jury.
In my 2 weeks of it I did 2 cases, one lasted one day and one lasted all of 1 minute, 12 of us where wheeled in to a court room and the bloke nearest the judge was asked to stand. The judge then told the man to say not guilty, the man repeated not guilty and we where wheeled out again. Everday I had to turn up and for what appeared to me to be a complete farce.
This is just my own experience of it and I am sure others have done there duty properly.
-
well said nige,ive always said that a policeman can have a good career and it takes one accident or occurance and the media strike and taint his existence.as h21 said people have only seen the hyped videos on youtube and the media edited footage and as you have said its down to the courts and jury :y
read the reports about this 'officers' career highlights
-
well said nige,ive always said that a policeman can have a good career and it takes one accident or occurance and the media strike and taint his existence.as h21 said people have only seen the hyped videos on youtube and the media edited footage and as you have said its down to the courts and jury :y
read the reports about this 'officers' career highlights
yeh i know that about this officer but i wrote policeman meaning in general policeman or (should also have woman) :y
-
well said nige,ive always said that a policeman can have a good career and it takes one accident or occurance and the media strike and taint his existence.as h21 said people have only seen the hyped videos on youtube and the media edited footage and as you have said its down to the courts and jury :y
read the reports about this 'officers' career highlights
I agree an appalling record .. but remember .. that record would NOT have been put before the jury, as from an evidence viewpoint it had nothing to do with what happened on the day.
I am as surprised as anyone else that he was found not guilty, but my whole point is .. we do not know why ... I'm lead to believe his defence was that IN HIS MIND, AT THE TIME, HE ONLY USED REASONABLE FORCE...... if he was able to convince the jury of the truth of that ... ....
-
All very true,but on the face of it,its a bit difficult to marry up the coroners unlawful killing verdict,with the juries not guilty verdict. :-\
The verdict in a coroners court is different, numbers wise, from a crown court as I understand it and there is a distinct difference in legal application - but there again, I have no knowledge of the English system, particularly as there is no such animal as a coroners court in Scotland!
-
I find it hard to believe he was retired from the Met on medical grounds & some years later returned to Met as a serving officer
bit long winded but not the most glittering of careers
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/pc-simon-harwood--10-complaints-in-12-years-for-the-red-mist-officer-7959576.html
-
It's not the first time that someone has died after an interaction with plod, and I doubt it will be the last.
A friend of ours died in custody at Hounslow police station in 1986 after being hit on the head with a truncheon and placed in a "choke hold" for good measure. He was then left lying unconscious on the custody room floor for over an hour before they decided to take him to hospital, but by then it was way too late.
The DPP also didn't help matters by saying that there would be no prosecution regardless of the outcome of any subsequent inquest and investigation.
Until plod learns to punish the ones that are doing wrong instead of sweeping it under the carpet they will never have any respect from the public.
-
This is not a swipe at the police in general.
If we are all honest, we all know that they have a sh*t job to do which is made harder by so called human rights lawyers and do gooders but read this link below
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Christopher_Alder
I have been led to belive that 2 of these tossers was re employed by humberside police after they had left the force.
Imho, the police have very little respect nowdays from the public because they point blank refuse too sort out there own problems.
-
I think there are two areas that do need to be addressed:
1. A serving police officer who is subject to internal disciplinary proceedings, can have these terminated, by resigning from the police force. These should continue even if he resigns and his police record should contain the results of the disciplinary hearing.
2. More careful vetting if an officer has been previously a police officer of why he previously left the force and any other disciplinary proceedings.
This will help stop police officers who have a bad record being able to repeat the same failings, which will also help improve how the police are perceived by the public. Sadly, in all organisations the 1% who are bad tarnish the 99% who are good.
-
It would appear that some of those points have already been addressed ..
Last 3 paragraphs
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18851486
The whole article is worth a read, as if true, it is somewhat horrendous ... I know 20;20 hindsight is a wonderful thing .. but there were some pretty basic errors made there IMHO .. :(
-
cps oppsup i'd say ..brought the wrong charges maybe..was always going to be hard to prove that shove brought on the heart attack......
similar case in leeds and in no way do i condone the behaviour of the boxer...but it is stated that the victim would most likely have survived if they hadn't hooked him up to a faulty ventillator starving his brain of oxygen and blood....maybe if the boxer had been a copper he's have been aquitted ::)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2176545/Pro-boxer-Clifton-Ty-Mitchell-jailed-seven-years-killing-Leeds-student-single-punch.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2176545/Pro-boxer-Clifton-Ty-Mitchell-jailed-seven-years-killing-Leeds-student-single-punch.html)
-
cps oppsup i'd say ..brought the wrong charges maybe..was always going to be hard to prove that shove brought on the heart attack......
Yes, they perhaps should have gone for a lesser charge. It was clearly not an obvious sequence of events that a shove resulted in death, but, I guess, had there been a lesser charge brought there might have been some recognition by the jury that he was being unnecessarily heavy-handed.
Let's just hope his Police career is finally over, at least.
-
cps oppsup i'd say ..brought the wrong charges maybe..was always going to be hard to prove that shove brought on the heart attack......
Yes, they perhaps should have gone for a lesser charge. It was clearly not an obvious sequence of events that a shove resulted in death, but, I guess, had there been a lesser charge brought there might have been some recognition by the jury that he was being unnecessarily heavy-handed.
Let's just hope his Police career is finally over, at least.
Aah, it seems that Mr W, in developing BBK's theme, has been the only contributor up to the moment to highlight something not immediately obvious to the baying masses and that is of course ------- well, if that one can't be worked out, there’s little hope for the chattering classes and those august organs commonly referred to as the main stream media. :-X :-*