Jump to content

No charges in G20 death of Ian Tomlinson - Pc Harwood found not guilty.


Recommended Posts

Oh leave the man alone.

 

He didn't kill that man - a jury said so.

Tomlinson was unlawfully killed - that's a complete different matter.

 

"Glass jaw" principle notwithstanding, maybe he wouldn't have been in such a weakened state if he hadn't been a homeless alcoholic, or if his family had supported him when he clearly needed help.

 

The same "family" will now force Harwood to rack up an expensive legal bill defending himself from a vexatious civil suit because a) the Met will very probably dismiss him, and he may lose some pension and b) there is the prospect of a payout.

 

Harwood is not guilty of manslaughter, but I suspect his troubles are not over yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh leave the man alone.

 

He didn't kill that man - a jury said so.

Tomlinson was unlawfully killed - that's a complete different matter.

 

"Glass jaw" principle notwithstanding, maybe he wouldn't have been in such a weakened state if he hadn't been a homeless alcoholic, or if his family had supported him when he clearly needed help.

 

The same "family" will now force Harwood to rack up an expensive legal bill defending himself from a vexatious civil suit because a) the Met will very probably dismiss him, and he may lose some pension and b) there is the prospect of a payout.

 

Harwood is not guilty of manslaughter, but I suspect his troubles are not over yet.

 

What a load of Bull........

 

So, next time I'm in a bad mood, I need to look for an alcoholic homeless person to take my rage out on?!?

 

Who gives a toss if he loses his pension or his job. I hope he gets kicked out on the street and beaten to death!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope he gets kicked out on the street and beaten to death!

 

Really? You don't see the basic hypocrisy there?

 

Maybe he's a bit of a thug, maybe he's not. Maybe the use of force was disproportionate, maybe it wasn't. My point is that legally he's done nothing wrong, but that doesn't mean that he's going to have an easy life from here on in.

 

No, it's clearly not the same as you getting into a bad mood and then beating a homeless person to death. That would be a disproportionate, inappropriate and unnecessary use of force. And you would therefore probably get found guilty of manslaughter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? You don't see the basic hypocrisy there?

 

Maybe he's a bit of a thug, maybe he's not. Maybe the use of force was disproportionate, maybe it wasn't. My point is that legally he's done nothing wrong, but that doesn't mean that he's going to have an easy life from here on in.

 

No, it's clearly not the same as you getting into a bad mood and then beating a homeless person to death. That would be a disproportionate, inappropriate and unnecessary use of force. And you would therefore probably get found guilty of manslaughter.

 

What planet are you on?!

 

Have you even seen the video footage? He had his back to the officer, walking away, with his hands in his pocket!!

 

Of cause his use of force was disproportionate!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What planet are you on?!

 

Have you even seen the video footage? He had his back to the officer, walking away, with his hands in his pocket!!

 

Of cause his use of force was disproportionate!

 

No, otherwise he'd be guilty.

 

I think that using the video as your sole source of evidence is disingenuous to say the least.

 

Again, you getting angry and beating a homeless person to death is completely different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Which gets us back to your earlier incorrect comment that he wasn't attacked by a baton. The first video shows he does, regardless of how much you wish to deny, the second reinforces the first even though it wasn't needed for those not in denial.

 

No it brings us back to; because you saw an officer swing a baton on a video you assume it hit Ian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, otherwise he'd be guilty.

 

I think that using the video as your sole source of evidence is disingenuous to say the least.

 

Again, you getting angry and beating a homeless person to death is completely different.

 

The police officer hit the man on his legs, then shoved him to the ground. The man wasn't doing ANYTHING! I think that the copper is guilty. I think the copper is a nob. I think that the copper would be behind bars if it wasn't for the fact that he was actually a police man.

 

He's giving the rest of the forces a bad name.

 

I think you've got terrible judgement if you think this man is innocent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't an attack. It was a shove. It wouldn't have killed a man that hadn't destroyed his body through abuse of alcohol.

 

I'm 35. I just think people want to use this as an excuse to attack the police. They really can't win, and I think all the backbiting puts a lot of good people off from joining the force. So we end up with police that are too meek to stop rioting.

 

Correct on all counts here. Well said. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.