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 
Ian Tomlinson
Author Message
malcs


Posts: 15
Joined: Aug 2010
Post: #1
04-08-2010 12:32 PM

"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

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Messages In This Topic
Ian Tomlinson - ForestHillier - 23-07-2010, 09:38 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - Snazy - 23-07-2010, 10:01 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - Redalways - 24-07-2010, 09:50 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - dbboy - 24-07-2010, 10:17 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - Poppy9560 - 24-07-2010, 11:31 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - Redalways - 24-07-2010, 02:01 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - lillam - 25-07-2010, 12:00 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - roz - 01-08-2010, 02:37 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - malcs - 02-08-2010, 02:18 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - sandy - 02-08-2010, 02:30 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - roz - 02-08-2010, 08:00 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - malcs - 03-08-2010, 12:12 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - roz - 03-08-2010, 09:18 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - Redalways - 03-08-2010, 10:38 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - malcs - 04-08-2010, 08:10 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - malcs - 04-08-2010, 09:11 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - michael - 04-08-2010, 10:27 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - malcs - 04-08-2010, 10:46 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - Redalways - 04-08-2010, 11:27 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - malcs - 04-08-2010, 11:45 AM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - michael - 04-08-2010, 12:02 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - michael - 04-08-2010, 12:05 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - malcs - 04-08-2010 12:32 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - malcs - 04-08-2010, 12:37 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - michael - 04-08-2010, 01:19 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - malcs - 04-08-2010, 01:52 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - Redalways - 04-08-2010, 05:21 PM
RE: Ian Tomlinson - roz - 04-08-2010, 08:33 PM