Commenting on this morning's decision by the Director of Public Prosecutions that PC Simon Harwood will face criminal charges for the manslaughter of Ian Tomlinson, Ian's family said:
"We welcome today's decision to bring a charge of manslaugher against the officer. We believe this is the right decision. What we have always wanted is to achieve justice for Ian and to show that police officers are not above the law"
at 11:22
Labels: Press Statements
Related Articles:
IPCC REPORTS AND FLAWS IN THE INVESTIGATION INTO IAN TOMLINSON’S DEATH.
From the outset of the investigation into Ian Tomlinson’s death, his family expressed concerns about the use and flow of information within the Metropolitan (MPS) and City of London Police (CoLP). The family believes that a report published today by the IPCC shows that their concerns were well founded.
Before the investigation was taken over by the IPCC on 8th April 2009 the CoLP were responsible for the investigation. Two senior officers from CoLP were appointed to head the investigation and a Detective Inspector at the MPS was appointed to be their single point of contact in the Met.
The report published today by the IPCC, confirms that the MPS Detective Inspector, misled two of the pathologists who examined Ian Tomlinson’s body. He wrongly informed the pathologists that Mr. Tomlinson had fallen to the ground in a separate incident minutes before he was struck and pushed by PC Harwood in Royal Exchange Passage.
The IPCC observed that as a result of being misled by the DI, one of the pathologists wrote in his medical report that the fall (which never happened) could have caused or started the fatal internal bleeding.
In a letter dated 11 March 2011 to a Deputy Assistant Commissioner at the MPS, the IPCC state that there is ‘a total lack of evidence’ for the fall reported by the DI. The letter states:
“There is no evidence of any kind to suggest that Ian Tomlinson fell in front of a van. No media footage portrays a fall, it was not said in any Gold Group meeting, no investigator workbook documents that there was a fall, there is no email traffic revealing such a view and there is no witness evidence that he fell in front of a van.”
The IPCC have therefore found that the DI from the MPS had recklessly provided information to the pathologists and that he now has a case to answer in respect of misconduct.
New complaints about the CoLP investigators
Ian Tomlinson’s family believes that the CoLP officers who headed the investigation into his death also have a case to answer for misconduct. They have notified the IPCC of their complaints.
The inquest heard that MPS officers based in Hammersmith and Fulham were in Royal Exchange Passage and witnessed force being used on Mr Tomlinson. The officers became aware of the importance of this information after Mr Tomlinson’s death on 2nd April. On 3rd April 2009 an MPS officer informed the CoLP investigators of this new evidence. The CoLP investigators appear to have failed to pass this crucial information on to the pathologist, the coroner, the IPCC or the family until later in the investigation. The family had to wait for the video footage to be released four days later on 7th April before they knew that there had been police contact with Ian Tomlinson.
The IPCC have acknowledged that a further investigation is now required by them and have said today that they will investigate the fact that:
“On 3rdApril 2009 some officers were aware of physical contact between police and Ian Tomlinson but this information was not passed on to the family, the coroner or IPCC”.
Julia Tomlinson today said that the family was vulnerable after Ian’s death and that they found it hard to know who to trust. Julia has a copy of the statement which a CoLP officer read to her over the phone on 4th April 2009, the statement says:
“The IPCC has completed the assessment of the death of Ian Tomlinson who died near to the G20 protests on Wednesday 1st April 2009. The IPCC commissioner for London Deborah Glass said ‘Our independent investigations have looked at CCTV of the incident, examined statements and police records and spoken to independent witnesses. Based on the information at this stage the IPCC are satisfied that there is no evidence that the actions of those officers present in Cornhill contributed in any way to the sudden and untimely death of an innocent bystander. Just before 7.30pm on the 1st April 2009 Mr Tomlinson was seen by a number of witnesses in Cornhill near to the Bank of England, where some of the protests were taking place.
Witnesses describe a number of people dressed entirely in black who appeared to be running through the protesters towards the police cordons before turning and running away from the police line and running back up Cornhill.
It was during this charge and retreat that Mr Tomlinson has seemed to have been caught up in the crowds and a number of people describe seeing him ‘collapse and fall to the ground’.
In an immediate response a number of police officers including two medics moved toward where Mr Tomlinson lay and formed a cordon around the victim facing a group of protesters whilst the medics gave first aid.
A number of witnesses describe cans and bottle being thrown in the direction of the police cordon whilst it was protecting Mr Tomlinson and the medics. In an effort to move the medics away from the immediate danger the medics moved Mr Tomlinson on a stretcher some 50m back behind the police cordon. Mr Tomlinson was then taken to hospital by ambulance but was pronounced dead on arrival.
A post-mortem examination carried out last night [by Dr Patel] showed that Mr Tomlinson died as a result of a heart attack. He had no other injuries that would have contributed to his death.
The City of London Police will continue with their investigation into the death of Mr Tomlinson. If during the course of the investigation further information comes to light that causes concern then the matter will be referred back to the IPCC”.
Julia says “I cried after the statement was read to me. Now I feel that I was misled. The day after the City of London Police investigators received information from the Met that police witnesses had seen Ian struck by a police officer; a City officer read this statement to me. It made me believe that the protesters were somehow responsible for Ian’s death. This is wrong and I do feel angry that I was misled like this””.
Paul King, Ian’s stepson said: “from the statement that was read to my mum by the City of London Police officer, it looks like the investigation into Ian’s death was all over on the 4th April despite the evidence from the Met police officers who saw the push. If that video footage hadn’t come out then the truth might never have come out, even Deborah Glass says this in her statement today”.
at 13:45
Related Articles:
Commenting on the inquest verdict, Ian’s son Paul King said:
Family solicitor Jules Carey of Tuckers Solicitors said:
After two years we are really grateful that the inquest process has made such a strong statement about how Ian died. We are grateful to the coroner and the jury and we think that the jury finding speaks for itself. We hope that the DPP will consider what the jury has said and the evidence that has come out and we are looking forward to the next stage in our search for justice for Ian.
Deborah Coles, Co-Director of INQUEST, said:
Today’s decision is a huge relief to Mr Tomlinson’s family. To many, today’s verdict will seem like a statement of the blindingly obvious; however this fails to take account of the significant and many obstacles faced by the family over the last two years to get to this decision. The CPS will now review whether a prosecution will be brought following today’s verdict and the way in which the evidence has been clarified during the inquest process.
Press release from INQUEST
The damning finding of the jury that excessive and unreasonable force unlawfully killed Ian Tomlinson must result in an urgent review by the DPP of the new evidence that has emerged. For too long there has been a pattern of cases where inquest juries have found overwhelming evidence of unlawful and excessive use of force or gross neglect and yet no police officer has been held responsible. It is vital that the rule of law is upheld and applies equally to all, including police officers, and that they do not believe that they can act with impunity. This jury’s findings in this case demonstrate the vital importance of a properly conducted and resourced inquest process.
The inquest jury's decision today, known as the inquisition, was as follows:
Statement to follow shortly
Time, place and circumstances at or in which injury was sustained:
Mr Tomlinson was on his way home from work on 1st April 2009 during the G20 demonstrations.
He was fatally injured at around 19.20 in Royal Exchange Buildings (the Passage), near to the junction with Cornhill, London EC3. This was as a result of a baton strike from behind and a push in the back by a police officer which caused Mr Tomlinson to fall heavily.
Both the baton strike and the push were excessive and unreasonable.
As a result, Mr Tomlinson suffered internal bleeding which led to his collapse within a few minutes and his subsequent death.
At the time of the strike and the push, Mr Tomlinson was walking away from the police line. He was complying with police instructions to leave Royal Exchange Buildings (the Passage). He posed no threat.
Conclusion of the jury as to the death:
Unlawful killing.
Ian Tomlinson Family Campaign © 2009 | Design: KB
