G20 is just a talking shop.

They are not going to do anything as usual.

Poor countries are not even invited to the table.

This is an exculsive rich man's club gathered to eat good food,
and get to know each other's wives.

Probably a lot of affairs going on behind closed doors.

That is why Sarkozy did not bring his pretty wife.

G20 police 'yet to come forward'

A police watchdog is searching for officers caught on video when a man was shoved to the ground prior to his death at a G20 protest in London.

An independent criminal probe has begun into the death of Ian Tomlinson, 47, who had a heart attack minutes after he was pushed by an officer on 1 April.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said it would also request a second post-mortem test.

Some of the officers filmed have yet to come forward, the watchdog revealed.

Mr Tomlinson's stepson Paul King said the new footage has "deeply touched" the family and said "we cannot lay our father to rest" until the relatives get justice.

.........

The video, shot at 1929 BST at the Royal Exchange Passage on 1 April, initially shows Mr Tomlinson, who was going home from work and not protesting, walking away from a group of police officers.

The footage, recorded by a New York fund manager, shows Mr Tomlinson receiving a two-handed push from an officer, landing heavily before remonstrating with the police.

Minutes later, Mr Tomlinson collapsed and died of a heart attack, after walking to nearby Cornhill where he received first aid from police.

After the new footage surfaced Mr Tomlinson's stepson Paul King has told the BBC the family "want answers".

BBC News

This has really upset me.

Yeah loads of people went along to the protests to simply cause trouble, but I think some police officers joined in.

There seem to be too many occasions where police officers abuse their power and are unnecessarily rough. Just an excuse for them to bully and act like thugs themselves... simply because they can. And they know they will get away with it. It is no surprise they are not respected.

And I am sick of hearing how they were unusual or unprecedented circumstances with 'police under extreme pressure' - what the hell are they trained for? If they can't do their job properly they should leave and get another one.

And bringing up stuff to tarnish the man and lessen blame on the police is just wrong. Whether the actions of the police caused the man's death or not, the treatment was still uncalled for and unacceptable - unnecessarily violent. A case of little boys with big toys they don't know how to handle.

Tomlinson was not assaulted as media is making it out to be.

One police officer simply shoved him to move on during G 20 protects in London.
This is done to make him get out of the way where police was lining up.
He fell got up and later died.
You cant blame his dead on anyone.

Now they are planning to spend millions of pounds to investigate this tragic accident.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6059056.ece
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7991162.stm

Omrow wrote:

Tomlinson was not assaulted as media is making it out to be.

One police officer simply shoved him to move on during G 20 protects in London.
This is done to make him get out of the way where police was lining up.
He fell got up and later died.
You cant blame his dead on anyone.

Now they are planning to spend millions of pounds to investigate this tragic accident.

Good. And rightly so. You would want an enquiry into the death of your loved one too if you thought there might have been some wrong doing.

As the video evidence shows he was clearly assaulted. There was no need for that aggression. And there were other police officers nearer to him, funny how they didn't feel the urge to move him out of the way so violently.

Despite the outcome of the enquiry the officers reaction was over the top and not necessary. An abuse of power.

What really bothes me is that the police officers only admitted coming into contact with the man after the video evidence came to light. How dishonest and irresponsible is that?

You wrote:

Saying that, at most it was probably a rush of adrenaline and a wish to get physical with Tomlinson with no intent towards serious harm. But it was not needed and it is unfortunate on the officer that it was after his assault that the person died, it may lead to some good as there have always been some allegations of systematic police brutality.

I agree it was most likely an adrenaline rush, and no intent of causing any serious harm. But all actions bare consequences. Even if the man had not died later, I would still want the officer punished and taught a lesson. What he did was wrong and he needs to know that and so do his fellow colleagues. Responsibility is key to such a job. It is so easy to get carried away, and being allowed to in such a job would lead to abuse.

Salam

Why are you always blaming the police.

This was a riot and they had to control it. Its a difficult job.

This feisty woman came along to cause trouble.

She shouted all sort of names to London Police.

Perhaps she wanted to test their metal.

So, she kept annoying the officers. Not all men can sit back and take it.

So one officer first pushed her back.

She would not go away.

She came back.

So, he slapped her across the face.

She came for more.

So he had to beat her with his baton.

It is quite clear she was asking for it.

Yet still the officer did not give it to her on the face.

He stuck her legs with his baton.

That was painful. She fell and had to be carried away by fellow protesters.

For those who dont know, that was the G20 Summit riots in London.

Omrow

But still, she did needed a good slap on the face.

The woman was deliberately annoying the officer.

I'm sure slapping someone is not one of the tactics a police officer is trained to use. And I very much doubt he would have slapped the protester had he been a guy. And that seems to make it more wrong.

Wow. A potential charge of manslaughter... :shock: Extremely unfortunate. Inshallah whatever the outcome it will lead to a significant change in the way the police exercise their power and manage such events.

Re. it being a crime to photograph or film the police is just silly IMO. Written reports can give just as much away anyway. And using terrorism as a reason to pass stuff like that everytime is now wearing thin I think.

Recently a teacher and then a hospital worker lost their jobs for secret undercover filming which revealed stark happenings which then alhamdulillah led to positive change. Although I do think it's wrong as such, it is a very good method to bring about attention and then results.

Omrow wrote:

But still, she did needed a good slap on the face.

The woman was deliberately annoying the officer.

So why wasn't she just arrested? What sort of a "man" beats a girl for "annoying" him?

And Admin: Can't we argue that filming the police officer is not intended to be of use to terrorists just the IPCC or the Court?

[URL=http://img266.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pcmac.png][IMG]http://img266.im...

The Lamp wrote:

Omrow wrote:

But still, she did needed a good slap on the face.

The woman was deliberately annoying the officer.

So why wasn't she just arrested? What sort of a "man" beats a girl for "annoying" him?

Well, a mouse certainly is out of the question. He is scared of a cat.

You wrote:

The Lamp wrote:

And Admin: Can't we argue that filming the police officer is not intended to be of use to terrorists just the IPCC or the Court?

Ofcourse you can. And you should get away with that.

But that should never be a case of "should". You should not have to argue to prove your innocence. It should be the other way around - innocent 'til proven guilty.

What if someone else gets hold of the video after you record it?

What if someone uses BBC News footage to decide to plan an attack? Should the BBC be held culpable for that? What if it was an independent news source?

The Lamp wrote:

So why wasn't she just arrested? What sort of a "man" beats a girl for "annoying" him?

He did not "beat her", he slapped her. Which was wrong.

At the same time, humans are likely to react and the police people are also humans doing a very tricky job. if someone is harassing you, I am sure you will not always have a controlled reaction.

Question is was that woman being a nuisance knowing that she was a woman and thus less likely to be confronted? possibly.

It works both ways.

Why didn't he just arrest her, rather than beat her? To me slapping and beating are exactly the same. Disguise it however much you want.

Beating women is now going to spread after this:

Our Home Secretary thinks it is neither the Home Office’s nor the police’s job to monitor people’s intimate relationships.

According to a survey carried out for the Home Office, one person in seven believes it’s okay to hit a woman if she dresses overtly sexily – whatever that means, since different people find different things sexy – in public. Obviously, this is not good news. Equally obviously, not everyone understands that hitting women is wrong. This sometimes includes women as well as men, even when, confusingly, the women are themselves victims of violence: many have been brainwashed into believing they “deserved it”.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/incomingFeeds/article5908218.ece

Omrow wrote:

Beating women is now going to spread after this:

Our Home Secretary thinks it is neither the Home Office’s nor the police’s job to monitor people’s intimate relationships.

According to a survey carried out for the Home Office, one person in seven believes it’s okay to hit a woman if she dresses overtly sexily

I don't see any crappy logical link.