Sandy I never said it was more convincing. My point is that we don't have enough informed facts to start levelling accusations of mass corruption and police brutality as an endemic feature of the Met - and the qualification of "as I understand it" clearly serves to demonstrate that I acknowledge this. Roz gives the best example in his/her response that states with some authority that Mr Tomlinson was "pushed over by a police officer without due cause". Roz's previous post suggests, even more alarmingly - that the push caused Mr Tomlinson's death - assumptions both of which he/she provides no evidence for. It's these uninformed assumptions that I am really highlighting and the extradordinary interpretation of what is published (here and elsewhere) that Roz seems to arrive at. For example, one of the headlines Roz takes from my comments is that I "consider that people do not have the right to lawful protest" - and I'm not sure that asserting this an assumption means that Roz recgonises it as such. A reasoned interpretation of it would be that I do not consider that people who turn up at protests to cause trouble should be allowed to protest (and I have no problem admitting that I don't believe they should be allowed to "protest") or, more accurately, that the protesters as whole stretched the Met to their limits...which I don't think is really disputed by those who protested or the Met themselves. Just so there is no room for ambiguity - I am 100% for peaceful organised protest - even if it shuts down half of London for the day - I most certainly am not for vandalism, violence and civil disobedience to the point of endangering others. As to Roz's comments on Bloody Sunday and De Menezes - it's again interesting to see his/her interpretative skills at work - the Bloody Sunday report is relied upon as an extremely clear summation of facts that support Roz's arguments, but his/her reliance on the De Menezes inquest doesn't recognise that the accounts given of De Menezes jumping over the barrier appear to have been given by eye-witnesses and the pathologist - not the police who it seems actually briefed JCD's family that he had NOT vaulted the barriers. The police do not seem to have fabricated any such story - contrary to Roz's assertions. Nor do they address the fact that none of the officers invovled in the JCD killing were found guilty of murder - the inquest returned an open verdict - so interesting to see how Roz will rely upon one Official Report (Bloody Sunday) for one purpose but reject another (the JCD inquest findings and the Tomlinson case) when it doesn't accord with his views. It's that I take umbrage with...I am all for evidence rational debate - but reading Roz's posts on this subject was like reading the Daily Mail!