Wow, this is terrible.......such abuse
Wow, this is terrible.......such abuse
What is more terrible now? As Cirrus points out, the death may well be alcohol-caused, and the fact of when and where it happened perhaps something of a coincidence, the push not causing the death. (Again, this not being a get-out clause for police misbehaviour.)
V
Though the suspended police officer is now being questioned about suspected manslaughter, which suggests it's more than a coincidence.
Though the suspended police officer is now being questioned about suspected manslaughter, which suggests it's more than a coincidence.
He pushed a man wrongly, and there has been a large public outcry. I'd guess this is why the suspension. (Mind you, I haven't seen the news that death was caused by abdominal haemorrage, so I'm just posting assuming that has been revealed ...)
The video is clear enough, and it has nothing directly - and I can't see how it would indirectly - to do with the abdomin. The method of attack is close to me - at night in London, an attacker silently and totally unexpectedly 'pushed' me from behind as well, time back. But it was twenty times worse, as he sprinted as an athlete (he had previously as a jogger hit my shoulder as he ran from my front, and witnesses saw the rest) silently into me from behind as I walked, gave me a massive shove into my back, and I probably flew two yards before I hit the ground and was stunned for some moments. Point being, this was identical but twenty times worse than Tomlinson's shove, and it had no effect on my abdomin at all: you just go flying and hit the ground. In my case, I was quickly able to stand up again ..........
V
Many people are alcoholic anarchists. If they appear to be law abiding citizens merely going about their business that's just what they want you to think.
If they hit the ground violently after coming into contact with a police officer, then it's probably because they were a bit wobbly on their feet to start with. Perhaps the police officer would have been tripping over before an accidental collision. Maybe the police officer would have their baton drawn in order to support them self. Perhaps they would lash out with the baton to warn others they were falling.
If someone dies from internal injuries after such an encounter with a police officer it's probably just a coincidence, or more than likely self inflicted. All police officers are paragons of virtue, and are very sensitive. After such an incident a police officer can be very upset and will often collapse from suffering misplaced feelings of responsibility.
Many of us can be violently assaulted and feel absolutely fine afterwards, so what's the problem?
This must be true because I read it on HP, and in the National Enquirer.
Many people are alcoholic anarchists. If they appear to be law abiding citizens merely going about their business that's just what they want you to think.
If they hit the ground violently after coming into contact with a police officer, then it's probably because they were a bit wobbly on their feet to start with. Perhaps the police officer would have been tripping over before an accidental collision. Maybe the police officer would have their baton drawn in order to support them self. Perhaps they would lash out with the baton to warn others they were falling.
If someone dies from internal injuries after such an encounter with a police officer it's probably just a coincidence, or more than likely self inflicted. All police officers are paragons of virtue, and are very sensitive. After such an incident a police officer can be very upset and will often collapse from suffering misplaced feelings of responsibility.
Many of us can be violently assaulted and feel absolutely fine afterwards, so what's the problem?
This must be true because I read it on HP, and in the National Enquirer.
Hahaha... so true, Barafundle! The point, V, is not that he is suspended (that is old news) but that he is now being questioned in connection with suspected manslaughter. THAT is news.
Whatever planet anybody else may be living on, mine, or my nation, believes in innocent until proven guilty - whatever the eventual finding, nobody is guilty beforehand. That's my world, if it isn't the world of others.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6116029.ece
[COLOR="Blue"]Dr Cary’s provisional finding was that Mr Tomlinson died from an “abdominal haemorrhage”, the cause of which was yet to be determined. The coroner’s court said: “Dr Cary accepts that there is evidence of coronary atherosclerosis but states that in his opinion its nature and extent is unlikely to have contributed to the cause of death.” It added: “The opinions of both consultant pathologists are provisional and both agree that their final opinions must await the outcome of further investigations and tests. These are likely to take some time.”
Due to the high profile and public scrutiny of the Ian Tomlinson case, we may have to wait a while for a clear outcome, a clear statement of what caused his death. But I don't think we need be concerned that there will now be any ambiguity or miscarriage of justice. I'm not a coroner myself, but I do know it'll be easy and obvious to ascertain whether the abdominal bleeding was caused by an internal progressive alcoholic problem, or by any external blow (which to my knowledge there's no record, to his abdomin, of at the scene, but feel free to correct me). If a strike or even the fall caused the internal break, there's very likely to be external bruising. If the problem was internal and progressive, that will be clear as day to any coroner.
V
Insight into the victims
Since one or two parties like to get personal, clearly, here is the rider for this thread that nothing is justification for abuse by the police at the end of the day. And I do mean that. I would have thought it was a given. But the G20 riot affair has many strands to it, and IMHO it's interesting and insightful to look at other strands other than just being an anti-police bloodhound. Now the actual post:
--------------------------------------------
One could almost wish that one had oneself been there and hit by the police. Nicola Fisher, the victim Sunanda first brought to our attention here, turns out to be a heroin addict who spat at the officer before he struck her. Not a bad turn-out for her as it turns out, since she's sold her story to a paper for £50,000. (I think that was The Express as the item on her was in that yesterday.) I wonder what that £50,000 will go on?
Righto.
I also find it insightful that there's no thread or apparent interest in the pre-planned and deliberate violence against police and property by a core of protesters. Rather, replies on that subject have been to gainsay it.
There are a limited number of people on HP and who post on Current Affairs, so philosophies can be weighted.
So I just came across these alternative views:
------------------------------
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1171360/G20-officer-face-charge-killing-post-mortem-shows-protester-did-NOT-suffer-heart-attack.html
Whilst this is tragic and the video of it quite damning, I think the picture that is emerging is that the man had been going around trying to wind the old bill up. This in itself does not justify the apparent assault but it suggests there are two sides to this.
This officer can look forward to being cast out on his own by the MPS (he has already been suspended by popular public demand), unsupported except maybe by the police federation. He probably did have a panic attack as the realisation that the powers that be will go that bit further than for an ordinary Joe to charge him and he could well end up gripping the rail.
I am in the MPS and as time goes by and things like this happen when we try to do our jobs, the more I weigh up what I need to do - Do I do my duty and risk something like this and potential criminal charges and prison or do I neglect my duty and face discipline. With discipline the worst that will happen is I lose my job. You do the maths.
Anon, Essex, 17/4/2009 19:24
These rioters have got one of their intended results. Goad the police, force them into a retalitory situation & then shout FOUL. What an obvious fix up. The police had to keep law & order which they did admirably,The media need to sell their publications & will go along with anything that suits their purpose.
My advice to them is be careful to whom you give your support, these rioters may have given you something very newsworthy, but beware of Greeks bearing gifts.
--------------------------------------------
V
Many people are alcoholic anarchists.
Harry Hill: "Yeah. So far we have two victims, one an alcoholic, and one a heroin addict and admitted shop-lifter. Your new point is...?"
"G20 officer 'hit me across face' "
Via today's BBC main news page:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/8005390.stm
from which:
Ms Fisher, who is being represented by PR agent Max Clifford .....
Hmmm ... I wonder if that has anything to do with the way it's written? 😉
Holistic
Nicola Fisher, the victim Sunanda first brought to our attention here, turns out to be a heroin addict
And she was on benefits! (Thanks to The Daily Mail for the head up)
Perhaps some of these people being hit by police also had personal problems or were on benefits...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8006622.stm
Why don't the police use tear gas or pepper spray to disperse the mob? They wouldn't have to touch anyone.
Why don't the police use tear gas or pepper spray to disperse the mob? They wouldn't have to touch anyone.
Actually the 'mob' was, I believe, just a proportion (I don't know how big I'm afraid) of a large number of people who wanted to register a genuine protest.
Who watches the watchmen?
Why don't the police use tear gas or pepper spray to disperse the mob? They wouldn't have to touch anyone.
I posted on another thread about how 'good' people can find themselves unconsciously condoning actions that are evil. Those actions can always be rationalised to be in the common good. Torture? Extraordinary rendition? Imprisonment without charge? 'Justified' police brutality? We've experienced it before in Europe.
When will it be that we are considered to be 'the mob'? I've heard people say that they wouldn't think of joining any protest now out of fear of what they might suffer at the hands of the police.
When demonstrators can be described as a 'mob' for doing nothing more than gathering to register a legitimate protest, then we've got to start worrying about whether we're on a slippery slope.