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".