SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002   11,000+ members   72,000+ posts

Home | SE23 Topics | Businesses & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | About SE23.com | Advertising | Contact | |
 Armstrong & Co Solicitors



Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (2): « First < Previous 1 [2] Last »
Ian Tomlinson
Author Message
michael


Posts: 3,255
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #21
04-08-2010 11:02 AM

We are not splitting hairs, we are dealing with the death of an innocent man and the ability of a police officer to escape justice (for the third time as it happens). According to the conclusions of the DPP this 'innocent' police officer could be patrolling the streets of London tomorrow dishing out his own brand of law and order. However the police service are conducting a disciplinary hearing into 'gross misconduct' so he won't be on the streets - yet.

Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
michael


Posts: 3,255
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #22
04-08-2010 11:05 AM

Or at least he won't be on the streets as a uniformed officer, but he might still get involved in incidents and attempt to arrest you with 'unnecessary force' - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ia...ckground_2
Not that anything was proved as he resigned from the force before the misconduct hearing, as he may choose to do again.

Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
malcs


Posts: 15
Joined: Aug 2010
Post: #23
04-08-2010 11:32 AM

"Posted by michael - Today 10:27 AM

The reason they did not press charges of assault was due to the 6 month time limit on assault charges passing during the enquiry."


Michael, you were responding to my comments on the common assault charge - and it is that response I was addressing - which was, in my opinion, splitting hairs over the lesser charge so yes it is still splitting hairs (in my view) - so much so that it's getting off point and losing focus.

More importantly though, where on earth is your proof (or Roz's or anyone else's) any of it, at all - that the death of Mr Tomlinson is connected to being pushed? At the most, from the available evidence, PC Hayward has escaped justice for a common assault charge - which as I've already pointed out could technically be something as simple as laying your hand on someone without their permission and is a far cry from murder or manslaughter. We come back again to people making assumptions that have absolutely no foundation in fact. Iit is just as possible (and probable) that a life of alcohol abuse may have been as responsible for Mr Tomlinson's death as being struck, pushed or even hit by a car. When the evidence before you states that the DPP would have prosecuted for assault if it had been within the 6 month time limit - the people in this thread readily accept that as unassailable proof of PC Hayward's guilt. But when I point out that the exact same report states that there is not enough evidence to present a reasonably prospect of success at a manslaughter charge, you completely ignore it and aver that PC Hayward has escaped justice! You may be talking at cross purposes and your only contention is that he has escaped justice for common assault in which case we are in agreement, but it sure reads like you think he escaped justice on a murder or manslaughter charge! If so, where is the evidence? Emotive language like "the death of an innocent man" doesn't really help the argument either - stick to the facts.

As much as I am enjoying this healthy debate - it's beginning to look more and more like an internet jury to me...

Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
malcs


Posts: 15
Joined: Aug 2010
Post: #24
04-08-2010 11:37 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society

apologies if I put little stock in wikipedia entries...

Wink

Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
michael


Posts: 3,255
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #25
04-08-2010 12:19 PM

Malcs,
That section of the wikipedia entry is taken from the Daily Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finan...iries.html
Of course you are free to ignore that as well.

I'm not going to get into detailed discussion of the conflicting medical evidence, not only am I not qualified but I don't actually want an 'internet trial'. However, there is medical evidence that suggests the assault was probably the cause / a significant contributing factor to the death of this man.

It is clear that, whatever the charge that should have been brought, this officer has so far escaped justice. It is not for you or me to decide what charges should have been brought but I don't like living in a country where illegal acts that contributed to a man's death (carried out by an officer of the law who was apparently attempting to disguise his identity) go unpunished.

You find 'death of an innocent man' to be emotive language but you defend your use of 'chronic alcoholic' as purely factual - to me the two are just as emotive/factual as each other.

Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
malcs


Posts: 15
Joined: Aug 2010
Post: #26
04-08-2010 12:52 PM

Michael I have no intention of going around in circles over this so really this will be my last comment on the matter. It's a simple matter of sunbstantiating the allegations you make with facts - which no-one here who suggests the death of Mr Tomlinson was attributed to being pushed over (knocked down/brutalised/subject to a sustained attack with a rubber hose, abducted by police aliens or whatever it is conspiracy theorists think happened) have done.

I don't think it is disputed by anyone that Mr Tomlinson was a Chronic Alcoholic - happy for you to disabuse me on that of course.

whatever evidence you think exists "suggests the assault was probably the cause/a significant contributing factor to the death of this man" was clearly not strong enough - at any level - to merit a murder charge - it is interesting to see that you keep coming around to the conclusion, absent any evidence, that it must be otherwise despite the evidence.

Your best point is also your weakest one - yes the use of "chronic" is as emotive as "innocent" but "chronic alcoholism" as I understand it (and I am no medical expert) is a medically recognised condition. "Innocent man" is not.

I put even less stock in the ramblings of the Daily Telegraph than I do in wikipedia....but that is absolutely my opinion and nothing more...that said I would use neither as the basis for informing an intellectual debate...particularly an entry in wikipedia who's author probably also wrote the entry on "the Klingons".

Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redalways


Posts: 85
Joined: Mar 2007
Post: #27
04-08-2010 04:21 PM

Michael

I guarantee that this man will either be dismissed from the police force or he will be forced to resign by the Police.

Of course this is no consolation to the family who have lost their father. However a number of fair minded people are sufficiently disgusted with the verdict and the sleaze behind the process that they have contributed monies to a fund. A private prosecution before a Judge and Jury will be the only way that this officer can clear his name or otherwise.

I wouldn't be surprised if that happened ow whether the DPP changes his mind following the inquest.

Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
roz


Posts: 1,796
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #28
04-08-2010 07:33 PM

I'd like to contribute to that fund - do you have any details?

Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pages (2): « First < Previous 1 [2] Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields