[n00]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...Tomlinson.html

Anyone surprised?

[ForensicShoe]

Got away with it I think, especially considering his past disciplinary issues.

[Jack93o]

Oh dear, yet another example of the police being let off

[Mister Dead]

(Original post by n00)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...Tomlinson.html

Anyone surprised?

course not. manslaughter is perfectly OK now, dincha' know?

approaching 1500 deaths in custody or following police intervention (since 1990). has there even been a manslaughter charge yet.....

probably not. probably just very weak or clumsy prisoners

[monk_keys]

(Original post by Mister Dead)
course not. manslaughter is perfectly OK now, dincha' know?

approaching 1500 deaths in custody or following police intervention (since 1990). has there even been a manslaughter charge yet.....

probably not. probably just very weak or clumsy prisoners

Not really relevant considering he was tried by a jury of his peers.

[JamalAhmed]

(Original post by monk_keys)
Not really relevant considering he was tried by a jury of his peers.

WTH??????

[onda]

I have full faith in our justice system.

[monk_keys]

(Original post by JamalAhmed)
WTH??????

Mister Dead is using statistics to imply he got off because he is a police officer. The facts are that he had a fair trial in which the verdict was decided on by laypeople.

[Scumbaggio]

Not at all surprised, the police are generally illiterate, dishonest, lazy scum anyway.

[n00]

(Original post by monk_keys)
The facts are that he had a fair trial in which the verdict was decided on by laypeople.

acab

[crocker710]

Some police are just thugs in uniform which use it as an excuse to do what they want with the cover of the law. These are the minority. The vast majority of policemen (and women) are honest decent people. Cases like this do the police no favours with their public image and the perception that the public has of them. That being said, whilst it's all well and good that people can sit here and say 'it's a travesty that he's been let off', we've got to respect the decision of the court and the findings of the 12 members of the jury. They were in full place of the facts and the two different arguments presented. We've got to maintain faith in the criminal justice system, regardless of how the media portrays the case.

[Scumbaggio]

I find it impossible to respect the decision to be honest.

Ian Craven - left his dogs to die in a car
Mark Andrews - assaulted a woman in custody
Ali Dizaei - corrupt

These are just examples that have been in the media spotlight in recent times.

[Mister Dead]

(Original post by monk_keys)
Mister Dead is using statistics to imply he got off because he is a police officer. The facts are that he had a fair trial in which the verdict was decided on by laypeople.

it's only the miracle of modern technology that prevented the police force from covering this up by claiming no assault took place and then 'bungling' the post mortem to suit their story.

[creak]

Quelle surprise!

[n00]

(Original post by crocker710)
we've got to respect the decision of the court and the findings of the 12 members of the jury.

Which one?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13268633

(Original post by crocker710)
We've got to maintain faith in the criminal justice system

We have?

[TheHistoryStudent]

I honestly don't know how they reached that decision... just looking at the footage you can see the guy facing away from the police line, posing walking forwards posing no threat, and then Harwood hits/pushes him with his baton, he falls over, and then (although I'm not sure on this next part...will have to find a source) - he died as a result of that fall. Harwood was proved to be the policeman that hit him, the guy died as a result of it, I honestly don't see how "not guilty" was reached. Idiocy.

[monk_keys]

(Original post by TheHistoryStudent)
I honestly don't know how they reached that decision... just looking at the footage you can see the guy facing away from the police line, posing walking forwards posing no threat, and then Harwood hits/pushes him with his baton, he falls over, and then (although I'm not sure on this next part...will have to find a source) - he died as a result of that fall. Harwood was proved to be the policeman that hit him, the guy died as a result of it, I honestly don't see how "not guilty" was reached. Idiocy.

Because being the cause of someone's death isn't automatically a criminal offence.

[TheHistoryStudent]

(Original post by monk_keys)
Because being the cause of someone's death isn't automatically a criminal offence.

Hmm... I'll be honest about my ignorance when it comes to topics like law, but isn't manslaughter basically killing someone (or your actions resulting in someone being killed) without the element of malicious pre-meditation? If I'm wrong and it means something different then I might be inclined (slightly...) to agree with the jury, but at the moment, due to me thinking manslaughter is basically the above, I can't see how he was found innocent...

EDIT: Doing a quick look on Wikipedia (not the best source I know...) it sounds to me like what he would have been charged with was involuntary manslaughter... which requires 3 criteria to be met:-

. defendant must do an unlawful act (in this case presumably assault)

. act must be dangerous (assault is dangerous)

. act must result in death (again not sure here, but I think a while back after a couple of coroner's reports they said it did)

Even with that though... I'm still finding it difficult to see how he's innocent, what with the video evidence and all - perhaps someone could enlighten me?

[crocker710]

(Original post by n00)
Which one?

The criminal court. That's the one whose rulings upon the law are upmost. The coroner's declaration of unlawful killing is his decision and opinion. It clarifies legalities such as insurance payouts. It doesn't stipulate who may have committed a crime.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13268633

We have?

... If you're trying to be pedantic it's not working. If your faith in the criminal justice system is waiving you're more than welcome to move away from its jurisdiction and to a country where the mob rules.

[Tesphena]

I think, having watched the video, its pretty clear unreasonable force was used. Mr. Tomlinson was clearly moving out of the way, albeit slowly. There was no need for the police to move any faster than they already were, and indeed they didn't speed up after Mr. Tomlinson was knocked to the ground. I find it hard to believe that Mr. Tomlinson was obstructing any of the officer's views either, and he had his hands in his pockets so he was hardly posing a threat. Therefore I can only conclude that he shouldn't have been knocked to the ground, and that Mr. Harwood was negligent in doing so. For this reason I think a guilty verdict ought to have been reached.