Metropolitan police officer suspended over attack at G20 death vigil

OhNoYouDidn't

I would be interested to hear the opinions on here of the policing of the protests, the vigil and the investigation into the police.

IMO this looks like appaling behaviour from the officers in question.

---

Metropolitan police officer suspended over attack at G20 death vigil
Paul Lewis
The Guardian, Wednesday 15 April 2009
Article history
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/ap...on-assault-g20
Warning: this video contains swearing Link to this video
Scotland Yard last night suspended a second officer over brutality allegations after fresh video surfaced showing him striking a woman who was attending a vigil in honour of Ian Tomlinson, the man who died after being attacked by police at the G20 protests.

The officer, a sergeant, was the second person from the Territorial Support Group to be suspended in the last week.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission announced it would investigate the alleged attack by the TSG sergeant, the second time in a week the police watchdog has announced an investigation after media revelations.

The footage and series of photographs were taken at the Bank of England the day after Tomlinson's death. The latest footage appears to show the officer hitting a woman across the face with the back of his hand, and saying: "Go away."

The woman, clutching a carton of orange juice and digital camera, remonstrates with the officer. He is then seen drawing a baton from his pocket and striking the woman on her legs. The officer's badge number was concealed.

"People were there for the vigil out of respect to remember Ian Tomlinson," said Tristan Woodwards, 25, who caught the incident on film. "Police officers have to be held accountable."

David Winnick MP, a member of the home affairs select committee, said last night the footage showed "more totally unacceptable" behaviour by a police officer.

He added: "The home secretary should make a statement about events at the G20 protests. That statement should include first and foremost Ian Tomlinson's death and explain why police made a totally misleading statement about their contact with him."

The first officer to be suspended came forward after the Guardian last week published footage of his clash with Tomlinson. It is believed the officer suspended last night had not come forward, but Scotland Yard would not say how he had been identified.

The new claims of brutality came as the chair of the IPCC faced renewed criticism after he wrongly claimed there was "no CCTV footage" in the area where police allegedly assaulted the newspaper vendor before he died.

The IPCC said yesterday that Nick Hardwick had been mistaken when he said there were no security cameras around Royal Exchange Passage, a pedestrianised area near the Bank of England where an officer struck Tomlinson with a baton and pushed him to the ground.

Tomlinson, 47, had his hands in his pockets and his back to police when the attack occurred around 7.20pm on 1 April. He collapsed and died moments later.

The IPCC is investigating whether the attack caught on footage obtained by the Guardian last week was an isolated incident or the culmination of a series of unprovoked assaults on Tomlinson. The father of nine had been trying to walk home when he was confronted by police at the G20 protests.

A first postmortem concluded that Tomlinson had died of a heart attack. The results of a second examination is expected within days.

Hardwick said on Thursday there was no CCTV evidence of alleged police assaults on Tomlinson. "We don't have CCTV footage of the incident," he told Channel 4 news. "There is no CCTV footage - there were no cameras in the locations where he was assaulted."

Yesterday, after pictures were published showing cameras in the area, the IPCC said: "[On Thursday] Mr Hardwick believed that he was correct in this assertion - we now know this may not be accurate. There are cameras in the surrounding area."

An IPCC spokesperson said while there may have been cameras in the area, that did not mean the watchdog had discovered footage of any alleged assaults.

The IPCC would not comment on why, a week after it said "investigators have looked at many hours of CCTV".

City of London police manage and control the public CCTV cameras in the area, including at least one that overlooks Royal Exchange Passage.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of the rights group Liberty, said she had "serious concerns" about the IPCC's leadership, whose confusion over CCTV was "very worrying for the investigation".

"You have to ask the question: Where are they getting their information from? Are they taking [City of London] police at their word?

"If the IPCC can't grip this investigation and win back the public confidence that was lost in the Jean Charles de Menezes case, then I think patience will run out."

There were at least two cameras on or beside Royal Exchange Passage. One, on the corner of Threadneedle Street, is a City of London police camera that can turn through 360 degrees.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj9TeRQsKr0

Hooch

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

I would be interested to hear the opinions on here of the policing of the protests, the vigil and the investigation into the police.

Dont think you'll get much opinions in here on an active investigation;)

Trojan911

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

I would be interested to hear the opinions on here of the policing of the protests, the vigil and the investigation into the police.

I'm just back from a visit to London & stayed with a couple of ex collegues, who are still serving and were on duty at the G20 that day.

This is the norm for this type of allegation, officer suspended pending investigation. The officer normally goes off sick with work related stress, (the officer has just gone off sick also in this case).

All of the above is in the public domain, however, I've also been told stuff that is not in the public domain so I will not go into detail on here.

Here is an image I took while over of the type of reporting about the police...

OhNoYouDidn't

Trojan911 wrote: »

I'm just back from a visit to London & stayed with a couple of ex collegues, who are still serving and were on duty at the G20 that day.

This is the norm for this type of allegation, officer suspended pending investigation. The officer normally goes off sick with work related stress, (the officer has just gone off sick also in this case).

All of the above is in the public domain, however, I've also been told stuff that is not in the public domain so I will not go into detail on here.

So is the feeling in the Met that pushing a man with his hands in his pockets walking away from you and batoning a woman at a vigil is moody behaviour and the officers were ott or that they behaved appropriately and are the victims of a media witch hunt?

Trojan911

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

So is the feeling in the Met that pushing a man with his hands in his pockets walking away from you and batoning a woman at a vigil is moody behaviour and the officers were ott or that they behaved appropriately and are the victims of a media witch hunt?

I can't speak for the Met.

What images were flashed across tv screens/press reports forms only part of that investigation, one would have to look at the whole picture before making a decision i.e. the lead up to this apparent confrontation, which was not caught on camera etc. This is what the IPCC will be looking at as well. I suspect it will be a long and protracted investigation.

deadwood

Trojan911 wrote: »

..I've also been told stuff that is not in the public domain so I will not go into detail on here.

Then why say this?

You've got the inside line. Good man. We get it.

This matter is under investigation and it is innapropriate to discuss it here. Leave that to indymedia or AH.

OhNoYouDidn't

Trojan911 wrote: »

Here is an image I took while over of the type of reporting about the police...

Whats wrong with it?

There was a death and a policeman is being investigated for his part in it. Nothing salacious there

TheNog

deadwood wrote: »

Then why say this?

You've got the inside line. Good man. We get it.

This matter is under investigation and it is innapropriate to discuss it here. Leave that to indymedia or AH.

Agreed. Read the charter please

Thread locked