Post by stavros on Jul 24, 2010 8:10:08 GMT 1
The Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer, after 15 months of careful investigation (!) has decided that no charges will be brought against PC Simon Harwood for his actions in an incident which led to the death of Ian Tomlinson. Announcing his decision this week, he said, "There is no realistic prospect of a conviction against (Harwood) for any offence arising from the matter investigated and that no charges should be brought against him."
For those of us who saw the videos, there was ample evidence of offences committed by PC Harwood, from common assault through to assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and this without any medical examination. The evidence was visible on screen, was available in 15 days thus not requiring 15 months of "careful investigation", and charges could have been brought, pending investigation into a possible manslaughter charge.
Why did it take Keir Starmer 15 months to arrive at his decision? It would be cynical to suggest that by so doing, lesser charges would be "out of time"...
Why did the DPP rely on Dr Freddy Patel's autopsy evidence, which initially gave us to believe that Ian Tomlinson died of a heart attack? Two later autopsies, by eminently qualified pathologists, state that Tomlinson died due to abdominal bleeding; Dr Patel has already been reprimanded by the Home Office for his work in three other cases, and is currently facing a disciplinary hearing before the General Medical Council for incompetence in 26 cases. Perhaps the police recommended him to the CPS, he has a reputation for being easily bent to the police point of view in his findings.
It seems that the clear message here is that the police can assault members of the public with impunity, with little or no excuse. The "Rambos" are destroying a police/public relationship which was one of the cornerstones of our society, and those in authority over them do nothing.
For those of us who saw the videos, there was ample evidence of offences committed by PC Harwood, from common assault through to assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and this without any medical examination. The evidence was visible on screen, was available in 15 days thus not requiring 15 months of "careful investigation", and charges could have been brought, pending investigation into a possible manslaughter charge.
Why did it take Keir Starmer 15 months to arrive at his decision? It would be cynical to suggest that by so doing, lesser charges would be "out of time"...
Why did the DPP rely on Dr Freddy Patel's autopsy evidence, which initially gave us to believe that Ian Tomlinson died of a heart attack? Two later autopsies, by eminently qualified pathologists, state that Tomlinson died due to abdominal bleeding; Dr Patel has already been reprimanded by the Home Office for his work in three other cases, and is currently facing a disciplinary hearing before the General Medical Council for incompetence in 26 cases. Perhaps the police recommended him to the CPS, he has a reputation for being easily bent to the police point of view in his findings.
It seems that the clear message here is that the police can assault members of the public with impunity, with little or no excuse. The "Rambos" are destroying a police/public relationship which was one of the cornerstones of our society, and those in authority over them do nothing.