Justintime Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 The copper is still innocent until proven guilty. Your getting mixed up with FAIR & IMPARTIAL investigation etc these days you are guilty untill proved innocent mate. The justice system in this country is a farce. Where in your british constitution dose it say you can be tryed by a administrative court ie magistrates court for one. They are not mentioned in the constitution it says by a jury of your pears . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 The video of his earlier actions will probably support his case. Just at the end, there is clearly someone aiming a kick at the Police. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 you thought wrong! I got something entirely different tenner says he goes down Taking the evidence as it now stands, we have concluded that, even with those remaining difficulties, there is now sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of successfully prosecuting PC Simon Harwood for the manslaughter of Mr Tomlinson. That being the case, it is clearly in the public interest that criminal proceedings be brought. KW Noe 'Realistic prospect' Not the same as an overwhelming case. I'll have a quid on a not guilty verdict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horrocks Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 you also don't see the baton strike that he did so there was more to the altercation, the man probably wouldn't have fallen over had he not been 5 times the DD limit. Its all speculation on what really happened how many times he was told to move on and walking slowly infront of the police line. Realistically he should have been nicked and taken from there but if you are dealing with idiots all day which these guys were you have to work out the really drunk idiot from the rest while watching out for incoming bricks and fire extinguishers that could kill you. The day you can't push someone back in a riot is the day you might as well just let them burn and smash up London Having looked at the film the Guardian had I’d say this; Tomlinson appears slow and stumbling, drunk as we now know. The officers look like they were telling him to get a move on out of the way, something he didn’t do or at least not quickly enough. PC Harman is seen coming in from behind and pushing/hitting Tomlinson who falls to the ground rolls over and talks to some other officers before getting up (with help)and moving off. Later he has a heart attack and dies. A fitter, less frail man would probably have been alright and it would have gone no further. Tomlinson was an alcoholic, sleeping rough and obviously not much use to himself or anyone else. I’ve seen a few people in my time go a similar course and quite frankly I think it’s such a waste of life made all the more pointless in that it’s self inflicted. I’m afraid I’ve little time to grieve for such people. As an aside I see his widow is suing the Met over the incident so maybe she’ll eventually get some benefit from being married to such a waster. I see the family are now rallying round and saying what a good man/dad/step dad he was but they had kicked him out of the family home and he’d not been back for 6 months apparently, mmmm. PC Harman on the other hand might be all sorts of things but as we’ve never met I really can’t say. However on such a day when the police are trying hard to do their job (‘protect and serve’ springs to mind ) against a bunch of potentially riotous people some of whom may well be from ‘rent a mob’ out to do as much damage to persons and property as they can get away with I guess emotions and frustrations are running high. I can’t condemn PC H outright as a thuggish lout no better than some of the grunts he has to deal with because as I say I don’t know him. I do suspect he might well regret his haste in dealing with what turned out to be an ‘innocent’ man and whilst that doesn’t excuse his actions I’m not sure prosecuting him is the right way to go and let’s face it, even if he’s acquitted he and the Met will face just as much cr** as they are doing now. They can’t win. hear hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 In a magistrates court you are being tried by your peers . Magistrates are lay people . Anybody can apply to become a magistrate . Harnser . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nial Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 here's your thug at work BEFORE he attacks thomlinson http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPY4snnrRh8 KW I thought that was going to be a _lot_ worse than that. It looks like things are pretty hectic and they're trying to contain a mob. From the brief clip there it looks like he pulled the guy round and he stumbled backwards and tripped. It doesn't even look like Tomlinson tripped him. I'm not defending his later actions but IMHO that clip doesn't add much to the debate. Nial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 I thought that was going to be a _lot_ worse than that. It looks like things are pretty hectic and they're trying to contain a mob. From the brief clip there it looks like he pulled the guy round and he stumbled backwards and tripped. It doesn't even look like Tomlinson tripped him. I'm not defending his later actions but IMHO that clip doesn't add much to the debate. Nial. thats not thomlinson thats a bbc cameraman oh dear KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 nice fine upstanding pillar of the community our friendly g20 bobby? KW Pc Harwood left the Metropolitan Police a decade ago amid controversy over an alleged off-duty road rage incident, then got a job with Surrey Police, where he was accused of using excessive force. he is also the subject of an internal investigation by the Met into how he was allowed to rejoin the force despite having an unresolved disciplinary matter on his record. The married 43 year-old had been due to face a misconduct hearing over the alleged road rage incident, understood to have happened in the late 1990s, but instead retired on medical grounds. A few years later, the father of two rejoined the Met as a civilian computer worker before applying to Surrey Police for a job as a police constable in May 2003. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justintime Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 (edited) In a magistrates court you are being tried by your peers . Magistrates are lay people . Anybody can apply to become a magistrate . Harnser . The constitution says a Judge & jury of 12 of your peers not 3 unqualified yupi numpties. That aside i must congratulate you on how you discribe how a crown court works the TRUTH DONT EVEN COME IN TO IT. Its discribed as a game of chess to me by one silk the truth dont matter and its unfortunate that the truth means so little in a English court. My old dad used to say there a three versions of the truth yours theirs and the real truth lies somewhere inbetween. Edited May 24, 2011 by Justintime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 Harnser - this case won't be a Mags trial - definitely Crown Court. Charge is too serious for Mags. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest1957 Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 (edited) The constitution says a Judge & jury of 12 of your peers not 3 unqualified yupi numpties. That aside i must congratulate you on how you discribe how a crown court works the TRUTH DONT EVEN COME IN TO IT. Its discribed as a game of chess to me by one silk the truth dont matter and its unfortunate that the truth means so little in a English court. My old dad used to say there a three versions of the truth yours theirs and the real truth lies somewhere inbetween. Which part of the constitution are we looking at here? Given that it is formed from lots of fragmented bits of law it is usually difficult to be so specific. The other point is that if you dislike the outcome in the mags you can ask for the case to be reheard in the Crown Court. Incidentally, it will be Crown Court, indictable offence Edited May 24, 2011 by guest1957 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justintime Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 (edited) Harnser - this case won't be a Mags trial - definitely Crown Court. Charge is too serious for Mags. No mate he is trying to say 3 Unqualified magistrates are lawfull to try you the constitution of Great Britten says A Judge & Jury of 12 of your peers Thats why administateive courts are not lawfull under English Law Edited May 24, 2011 by Justintime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest1957 Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 No mate he is trying to say 3 Unqualified magistrates are lawfull to try you the constitution of Great Britten says A Judge & Jury of 12 of your peers Thats why administateive courts are not lawfull under English Law Under which part of English Law? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justintime Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 Try MAGNICARTER the bill of english civil libitys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nial Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 thats not thomlinson thats a bbc cameraman oh dear KW I meant Harwood as I'm sure you realised. Do you think that video adds to the case against him? Nial Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nial Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 nice fine upstanding pillar of the community our friendly g20 bobby? KW Pc Harwood left the Metropolitan Police a decade ago amid controversy over an alleged off-duty road rage incident, then got a job with Surrey Police, where he was accused of using excessive force. he is also the subject of an internal investigation by the Met into how he was allowed to rejoin the force despite having an unresolved disciplinary matter on his record. The married 43 year-old had been due to face a misconduct hearing over the alleged road rage incident, understood to have happened in the late 1990s, but instead retired on medical grounds. A few years later, the father of two rejoined the Met as a civilian computer worker before applying to Surrey Police for a job as a police constable in May 2003. AFAIK he also had two commendations for bravery, just to balance things up a bit. Nial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest1957 Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 Try MAGNICARTER the bill of english civil libitys The only relevant bit in force gives you the right to due process under the law. Trial by jury is also still available to anyone convicted at mags who wants to take their case to the Crown Court. I can assure you they are not illegal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 (edited) AFAIK he also had two commendations for bravery, just to balance things up a bit. Nial. easy to be brave with a helmet,baton, riot shield and a balaclava, seems whilst he may be good at fisticuffs his personal accounts of happenings is rather vague in his initial statement, he pronounced he had “collided” with BBC cameraman Tony Falshaw, though the latter described being “pulled” down by PC Harwood. After video footage of a occurrence was shown to the jury, PC Harwood pronounced he concluded with Mr Falshaw’s description. He told a inquisition that his balaclava and helmet marred his marginal vision, and as a outcome could not see Mr Falshaw’s camera. He pronounced he incited to “keep him [Falshaw] divided from myself”. Edited May 24, 2011 by kdubya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 I've been a bobby for around 25 years. During that time I've done major public order duties with and without a dog, given evidence in Crown, Magistrates and County Courts and worked for a while in the Coroner's Office while recovering from an injury sustained as a result of an assault at work. Believe me, this trial will not be as straight forward as some would like it to be. Crown Court is a lottery at the best of times and in many cases the verdict is decided by the better legal team not the better evidence. In this situation there is already doubt about the pathology reports, the cause of death that is worst for the defendant gives leeway for doubt and the more opinions that are given leave even more room for doubt. If kdubbya's statement about the officer's past is true then there are some serious questions to be asked of the force management. But I doubt that these questions will be raised in court or trouble those who are responsible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 easy to be brave with a helmet,baton, riot shield and a balaclava, seems whilst he may be good at fisticuffs his personal accounts of happenings is rather vague It's easy to be brave? That just shows how little you know. I've never known a bravery award be given to anyone on public order duties. I have three by the way, and none of them were earned whilst wearing body armour. Have you ever tackled an angry man or are you a just keyboard warrior? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 UK Poacher - whilst I hear what kdubya says and there isn't much to argue against, I share your view about the trial. We can all give opinions and agonise as to whether he is guilty, but it isn't worth a bean. There will be plenty of twists and turns before the verdict. I would not wager a penny on the outcome. Toss of a coin from my limited knowledge of all the facts. I suspect that might be the way the Jury will go - sadly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 UK Poacher - whilst I hear what kdubya says and there isn't much to argue against, I share your view about the trial. We can all give opinions and agonise as to whether he is guilty, but it isn't worth a bean. There will be plenty of twists and turns before the verdict. I would not wager a penny on the outcome. Toss of a coin from my limited knowledge of all the facts. I suspect that might be the way the Jury will go - sadly. I can't see M'lud allowing the jury foreman to opt for best of three. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 (edited) UK Poacher - you are beginning to sound like James Degale. :lol: Edited May 24, 2011 by Gordon R Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest1957 Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 A comedian once said that there is nothing more terrifying than being tried by a jury of 12 of your peers, I can see where he is coming from Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 It's easy to be brave? That just shows how little you know. I've never known a bravery award be given to anyone on public order duties. I have three by the way, and none of them were earned whilst wearing body armour. Have you ever tackled an angry man or are you a just keyboard warrior? oh dear yes Ive had smack or two when younger , I grew out of it, eternal bullies join the force? KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.