Im not being funny and my opinion is probably going to land me in some hot water. The officers behind him are clearly asking him to do something. There are two or three of them looking towards him, and them saying commands to him. In that kind of situation, if a Police Officer asks you to jump, you say "How High". You dont ignore them and carry on walking directly in front of them with your hands in your pockets. Which looked to me as though he was purposely trying to obstruct the Policemen's paths to the crowds behind the camera. Brings back memories of the person who got shot while running for his train. If you put yourself in the dead persons shoes, if someone is pointing a gun at you and telling you to get down you dont carry on running for the train, and from the officers perspective, if you think he has a bomb, you arent going to let him run to a point where there are hundreds of civilians to detonate it, you are going to do something about it.

Technically, that video itself is breaking the law. It is against the law in the UK to take a picture or a video of a police officer. Im not condoning what the Police did in this situation, but i am stating the facts. You can "See" the policeman strike the back of his leg with a baton, which is routine for stopping someone or putting them to the floor. The policeman behind the asp did not know that the man had a weak heart, and was it the fact that it was a fit and healty individual, there would not be as such media hype about it. Yes, it is unfortunate that the man died, and i am sorry to his family that have to cope with the grief, but i dont see how what was shown in that video caused him to collapse.

Another hole in this evidence is that it does not show what happened prior to the policeman striking him with his baton and pushing him to the floor. To me, solely on that video, as i stated earlier, it looks like he has been moved along by the Policemen who are clearly trying to clear the area they are walking from (A line of them walking down in sync), and he is clearly trying to hinder them in any way he can. It also does not show you what happened afterwards - the mob of people that werte there stopped the paramedics from issuing first aid - no wonder he died.

I do know that office workers were told to wear plain clothes, but how do we know that this man was in fact an office worker, and even if he was, how in fact do we know that he was not protesting as well as the others present and had not caused damage to property, hinderence to the police in an attempt to make sure that the G20 Summit went off without a hitch and being a general annoyance. We have all seen the pictures earlier spread over the papers of the yobs destroying the RBS. I'm not saying that this man is a crook, or that he has done anything wrong, but what i am saying is this; Why does the media not show you any footage prior to this event, why would you continue to walk, with your hands in your pockets in front of a line of policemen? I know what i would damn well do, i would try and move out of the way and let them get on with the jobs they are doing.

I think people need to ask themselves how it has been swung in the papers. There were near to 100 arrests that day, a lot of them from roudy protesters. I am betting that the majority of them were put to the floor to arrest and didnt come quietly. Why should this man be treated differently in the eyes of the law because he has an underlying health problem that the officers in that siutuation did not know about. At the end of the day, the Camera crews at that point, and the protesters were breaking the law. It is the Police Force's job to stop them. I ask you; What caused the massive police and uptight security on the streets? The goddamn protestors in the first place. If they were not there, then this would not have happened.

Which brings me smoothly onto my next point. Why would you protest about a meeting in which World Leaders are meeting to discuss fixing the economy? FTo discuss getting people back into work, to discuss generally making the world a better place. Surely this is a good thing. At the end of the day i think the protestyers should be held responsible for this. It is there fault that the Police Service was there in the first place and i am completely disgusted by the utter bias that is present within the papers about this story.

Totally, cause governments never exploit people to their own gain, right?

Time and time and time again, countless times throughout history, those with power have shown us that given the oppertunity, they will exploit us.
Whether that's the police, the army, or people elected into government, it can and does happen, all the time.

To an extent, I agree with you about the 'You say jump, I saw how high' arguement. I've been in a few similar situations, and I pretty much always kept my mouth shut and did what I was told, cause otherwise you get taken into the back of the van and get beaten senseless, a night in the jail and bad reputation with the local police. I've seen it happen to plenty of my mates who were a little too gobby for their own good, and then there's the night I saw an 18 year old girl get pepper sprayed in the eyes because she told a fine outstanding officer of the law to shut up. Generally, it's better to shut your mouth.

However, this doesn't mean that it's RIGHT for this to happen. Abuse of power is like poverty in Africa. We all know that we could do more to help other people out, but real world considerations comes in to it. It shouldn't be likr this, but it is. And the longer we continue to let it go on, the worse it will get. It's pretty bad as it is. Britain is one of the most surveilled states in the world. Civil liberties are continually infringed upon. Last year the government tried to sneak through a bill which would in effect make any form of private data encryption illegal. Right now there's a trial of hiding microphones in our streets in certain cities to detect 'aggresive noises' so that the police can dispatched to respond appropriately. Details of all VOIP and emails sent in the UK are now kept by ISPs at the behest of our government. The government has continually tried to abolish our right to a fair and free trial, considered fundamental to any kind of free and open society. Our government assists the CIA in transporting illegally held detainees to foreign countries so they can be tortured.The police encourage us to spy on our neighbours, always on the watch for terrorism.



Ok, so this turned in to a bit of a rant, but my point is that we shouldn't allow vicious, abusive policemen like the one in the video to get away with blatent abuses of power. Did he know the guy had a frail heart? No, of course he didn't. Does that make it ok for him to strike a clearly non threatening and most likely well meaning citizen with a baton then shove him to the ground? No!
We pay these fuckers wages with our hard earned tax money, and we pay them to protect us.
There are plenty of decent police officers out there, I know one or two personally. But just because someone is dressed in the clothes of law, it doesn't make them immune to punishment or moral obligation.

One more thing - your point about it being illegal to video or photograph a police officer?
I don't know whether or not thats true or not, but if it is, I know exactly why.
Because its usually about the only way that a police officer can be held accountable for his actions, and they are threatened by it.
The police always stick together.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/7975178.stm

police bahh!! most are f***n scumbags, i have no time for any of em, they abuse their position to their own needs. try to pick fights with people by egging them on.

All the tosser had to do was get another tosser to apprehend the guy and frog march him, but why not? it's easier to put the boot in when there's a crowd of tossers together.

My uncle is a police officer, and both my grandparent were police officers. Thanks a lot Bob.

So? Mention it in your first post if its so important instead of trying it to pin it on bob afterwards.. How the hell is he supposed to know that?

If so many of your family are police officers you should know there are a lot of people who aren't satisfied with them. That's just how it is, and will always be, taking it personally is just silly.


And regarding it being illegal to film or take photos of the police, must be the stupidest thing I've ever heard of..

btw wolfy, my uncle also is in the CID, me an the wife are out for a dinner, who is sitting in the bar?. my uncle drinking, he has the car,
you aint gonna drive home i ask!!, lol, he pops out warrent card, who's gonna stop me he says!!!!!!


i didn't say all police if you read what i said "most" . you have you're opinion i have mine end of...

My great grandad was one, and my uncle is actually a 'very important' officer, so what?

Care to respond to my post rather than making some pointless flaming post?

I would but there is no point. Like bob said, we both have differing views, theres no point in getting irate with each other about it. Just lets agree to disagree.

Wow.

There was a vigil for Ian Tomlinson - and this happens

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUtoOsoDXRA


You'd think they'd be on their best behaviour eh?