jongo Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 The only viciousness has been clearly demonstrated by the boyz in Blue...and those in support of them. Considering x2 pathology reports agreed with one another I would say being attacked by a blunt instrument, considering there is no evidence of assault after the vid. The IPCC removed the Tomlinson inquiry from the City of London police on 8 April 2009, after publication of The Guardian video. An inquest opened on 9 April with Paul Matthews as the coroner, and a second postmortem, ordered jointly by the IPCC and Tomlinson's family, was carried out that day by Dr Nathaniel Cary.[56] Cary is often described as the UK's top pathologist, and is known for his work on high-profile cases, including the 2002 Soham murders, the 2007 assassination of Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto, and the 2008 conviction of serial killed Steve Wright.[57] Cary found that Tomlinson had died because of internal bleeding from blunt force trauma to the abdomen, in association with cirrhosis of the liver.[4] He concluded that Tomlinson had fallen on his elbow, which he said "impacted in the area of his liver causing an internal bleed which led to his death a few minutes later."[58] Because of the conflicting conclusions of the first two postmortem examinations, a third was conducted on 22 April 2009 by Dr Kenneth Shorrock at the request of the Metropolitan police. Shorrock agreed with the results of the second postmortem.[4] Doesnt sound like a strike to me, or are we looking at different reports like the video's ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jongo Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 So, to be clear, if at any point in the future you happen to express your disagreement in a non violent way with a police officer, you would feel you deserved to be hit with a baton and thrown to the floor? What are you on about now ? Are you now saying he was disagreeing/arguing with the police ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 What are you on about now ? Are you now saying he was disagreeing/arguing with the police ? You know exactly what I'm on about:- What would you imagine you would have to have done, if the same thing happened to you for you to turn around after the fact and say "Yeah, I deserved that"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jongo Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 You know exactly what I'm on about:- What would you imagine you would have to have done, if the same thing happened to you for you to turn around after the fact and say "Yeah, I deserved that"? I told you before, I wouldnt be in that position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 I told you before, I wouldnt be in that position. I did qualify it with "imagine". I presume then that you can't offer any justification for the treatment Mr.Tomlinson recieved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jongo Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 I did qualify it with "imagine". I presume then that you can't offer any justification for the treatment Mr.Tomlinson recieved. Well, I didnt know that I had to The coroners reports show that he died of a fall on the elbow, that and cirrhosis of the liver. Why are you and the others continuing your witch hunt for the unfortunate police officer who mis fortunately nudged Tomlinson ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 I would say after reading/watching the whole story then yes it does show how tolerant they are. At last, we agree Bozo And I really do believe that is the crux of the matter the whole story, we only seem to be getting shown the edited version and not what took place before and we don't hear what he was saying to the police either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Considering x2 pathology reports agreed with one another I would say being attacked by a blunt instrument, considering there is no evidence of assault after the vid.So you will want to congratulate the police officer involved for his expert slite of hand skills as everytime I've seen the video I can't see a blunt instrument any where in sight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jongo Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 And I really do believe that is the crux of the matter the whole story, we only seem to be getting shown the edited version and not what took place before and we don't hear what he was saying to the police either. There are a few members on here that will jump at any chance to have a go at the police, they only see what they want to see and no amount of arguing, proof, evidence, or whatever will ever change their minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splodgeyAl Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 There are a few members on here that will jump at any chance to have a go at the police, they only see what they want to see and no amount of arguing, proof, evidence, or whatever will ever change their minds. I might if I were actually presented with some Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.