PDA

View Full Version : No charges over G20 man's death



KeithD
22nd July 2010, 18:59
Fix... Fiddle ... Cover-up :xxaction-smiley-047

If any of us had pushed over a copper and he had died, would it have taken over 12 months to think about charging use, especially as they had video evidence???? :NoNo:

Doc Alan
22nd July 2010, 19:51
The first Home Office Pathologist said the cause of death was a heart attack ; the second and third said it was internal bleeding :yikes: The Crown Prosecution Service said they would be unlikely to prosecute "successfully" because of the conflicting medical evidence. I have to say in this case I simply can't leap to the defence of these highly trained specialists. For a start, second and third postmortem examinations are technically difficult. But more importantly, the man died after being pushed over ...common sense (with no medical background) would suggest cause and effect rather than "natural causes" :yikes:

keithAngel
22nd July 2010, 20:39
perhaps being pushed over by a policeman is now considered "natural causes":yikes:

KeithD
22nd July 2010, 21:49
...strange the CPS seemed to 'forget' the 6 month limit for the charge :doh

stevewool
22nd July 2010, 21:54
i think its a tuff job being a police man these days , so differant toyears ago seeing a police man asking advice and having the respect for them too, it seems todays police when in gangs of 3 or more they become just like a bunch of thugs themselves bullies, and knowing that they have the force behind them too,:NoNo:

KeithD
23rd July 2010, 09:04
..... and knowing that they have the force behind them too,:NoNo:

Luke ..... May the Force be with you :xxgrinning--00xx3:

aromulus
23rd July 2010, 10:23
The first Home Office Pathologist said the cause of death was a heart attack ; the second and third said it was internal bleeding :yikes: The Crown Prosecution Service said they would be unlikely to prosecute "successfully" because of the conflicting medical evidence. I have to say in this case I simply can't leap to the defence of these highly trained specialists. For a start, second and third postmortem examinations are technically difficult. But more importantly, the man died after being pushed over ...common sense (with no medical background) would suggest cause and effect rather than "natural causes" :yikes:

FACT - The first pathetic pathologist has been discretited over some dodgy post mortem reports. :doh

johncar54
23rd July 2010, 16:26
About 25 years ago I investigated the death of a man who had been punched by another. The man died of a heart attack. As it happens the man who died was a very big guy, grossly over weight and unfit (rather like it would appear the man in this case) and the one who hit him much smaller. The big man died of a heart attack.

I submitted the paper to our prosecution dept and was told that as the man died of natural causes, a heart attack, we could only charge the assailant with causing actual bodily harm.

Just because it was a police officer who pushed this guy, does not change the law, albeit that possibly those more cynically minded of 'us' would like it to be different !

Doc Alan
23rd July 2010, 17:17
... possibly those more cynically minded of 'us' would like it to be different !This is not a medical forum, and I am talking neither cynically nor as a pathologist here :NoNo: If someone dies minutes after being pushed over, common sense links the death with that assault !:xxgrinning--00xx3:( Even if there was found to be a heart attack, the event triggering that event (death of an area of heart muscle by a thrombus / "clot" in a coronary artery, with a fatal abnormal heart rhythm) was the assault. Other events may also contribute to a heart attack). The condition may be natural but the underlying cause is not !
The second forensic pathologist, who is well respected, described injuries sufficient to support a charge of ABH (actual bodily harm), consistent with a baton strike (whether or not there was also a heart attack). I rest my case.

johncar54
23rd July 2010, 18:02
Doc Alan, as I said in the case I investigated, I was instructed that in Law when a person dies of natural causes, a heart attack, this does amount to justification for a criminal charge. If however, an otherwise healthy person were subjected to such stress that they suffered a heart attack, the facts in that case might be judged to be different from the case I investigated, and this case.

I think you may agree that a person who, due to life style or general level of health, may be liable to suffer a heart attack, may do so at almost any time. If that happens to occur at a time when they are subject to any stress, it would be difficult for a pathologist to establish that the incident was the cause of the heart attack, and thus the death.


Quote: The second forensic pathologist, who is well respected, described injuries sufficient to support a charge of ABH (actual bodily harm), consistent with a baton strike (whether or not there was also a heart attack). I rest my case.

I do not know if you are in possession of all the facts regarding what actually happened 'consist with a baton strike' would also be consistent with a blow from almost any blunt instrument. To justify a criminal charge, it would be necessary to prove what actually happened, and that that amounted to a criminal offnce.

Without being in possession of all the facts. I, nor probably any legally trained person, would be tempted to explain why a charge was, or was not brought in any case.

Doc Alan
23rd July 2010, 18:42
I think you may agree that a person who, due to life style or general level of health, may be liable to suffer a heart attack, may do so at almost any time.

I do not know if you are in possession of all the facts regarding what actually happened...

It's a small world and I know the third pathologist in this sad case, who agrees that the cause of death was an abdominal haemorrhage (internal bleeding) which resulted from the fall to the ground as a result of the push by the police officer. At the end of the day this is two expert opinions, and experts can be wrong. Common sense in this case suggests they are right!
But this is a filipinouk forum and most members have only a passing interest in such matters so I don't intend to comment further:)

aromulus
23rd July 2010, 18:46
John.....

We keep hinting that the police ain't what it used to be, and operate anymore...:NoNo:

I found Ulster defence league paramilitaries in full gear and sidearms, a hell of a lot less intimidating...:doh

Have you had a look a one on the beat lately....???:Erm:

They go out loaded for bear....:doh

KeithD
23rd July 2010, 18:55
...... grossly over weight......!
:Erm: No he wasn't

johncar54
24th July 2010, 08:04
:Erm: No he wasn't

What I said was , 'About 25 years ago I investigated the death of a man who had been punched by another. The man died of a heart attack. As it happens the man who died was a very big guy, grossly over weight and unfit (rather like it would appear the man in this case) and the one who hit him much smaller. The big man died of a heart attack.

In the case I investigated I too thought that the assailant should be charged with murder and maybe convicted of that or manslaughter, but as I said, the QC who reviewed the case decided that in Law, as in the Tomlinson case, there was not sufficient evidence to prove that the victim's heart attack was caused by the assault. I accepted the QC's decision. I do know of any reason why I would question the decision of, probably a QC, in the Tomlinson case. To be able to make an informed judgement (rather than 'lets just attack the police') one would need access to all the facts including the PM reports. To make any decision without that information is just a wild guess in the dark.

A warning, albeit from a non medical man, if one is over weight, smokes, has a 'drink problem' has a poor diet, has an unhealthy lifestyle and does no exercise, you are at a higher risk of a heart attack and should have a chat with your doctor. Logic, would seem to suggest, that physically fit people are less likely die if they are pushed over, fall over or face a stressful situation ( maybe like demonstrating in a riot).

bornatbirth
24th July 2010, 09:53
A warning, albeit from a non medical man, if one is over weight, smokes, has a 'drink problem' has a poor diet, has an unhealthy lifestyle and does no exercise, you are at a higher risk of a heart attack and should have a chat with your doctor. Logic, would seem to suggest, that physically fit people are less likely die if they are pushed over, fall over or face a stressful situation ( maybe like demonstrating in a riot).

A warning from another non medical man, if one is over weight and leads a bad lifestyle prone to heart attacks try not to get pushed over by policeman :Erm:

KeithD
24th July 2010, 09:56
Surely if you are that over weight you'd just wobble and not fall down :D

johncar54
24th July 2010, 09:57
A warning from another non medical man, if one is over weight and leads a bad lifestyle prone to heart attacks try not to get pushed over by policeman :Erm:

Not getting involved in a violent, illegal, demonstration might contribute to that.

KeithD
24th July 2010, 09:59
Not getting involved in a violent, illegal, demonstration might contribute to that.
It wasn't though? :Erm: Only a few arrests from a small minority of right-wingers, it was legal and authorised, and the guy wasn't involved anyway, he was trying to get home from work.

johncar54
24th July 2010, 10:07
It wasn't though? :Erm: Only a few arrests from a small minority of right-wingers, it was legal and authorised, and the guy wasn't involved anyway, he was trying to get home from work.

I bow to your superior knowledge (especially as I was not there and therefore cannot know first hand what happened) and I will ignore the reports on the internet which say otherwise.

aromulus
24th July 2010, 10:12
What I said was , 'About 25 years ago I investigated the death of a man who had been punched by another. The man died of a heart attack. As it happens the man who died was a very big guy, grossly over weight and unfit (rather like it would appear the man in this case) and the one who hit him much smaller. The big man died of a heart attack.

In the case I investigated I too thought that the assailant should be charged with murder and maybe convicted of that or manslaughter, but as I said, the QC who reviewed the case decided that in Law, as in the Tomlinson case, there was not sufficient evidence to prove that the victim's heart attack was caused by the assault. I accepted the QC's decision. I do know of any reason why I would question the decision of, probably a QC, in the Tomlinson case. To be able to make an informed judgement (rather than 'lets just attack the police') one would need access to all the facts including the PM reports. To make any decision without that information is just a wild guess in the dark.

A warning, albeit from a non medical man, if one is over weight, smokes, has a 'drink problem' has a poor diet, has an unhealthy lifestyle and does no exercise, you are at a higher risk of a heart attack and should have a chat with your doctor. Logic, would seem to suggest, that physically fit people are less likely die if they are pushed over, fall over or face a stressful situation ( maybe like demonstrating in a riot).

I understand and admire your, somewhat, at times, misguided, loyalty to your old mason's circle of colleagues, but I starting to think that the blinkers you are wearing will need to be removed sooner or later, surgically...:NoNo:

Please do come back for a couple of months on a fact finding tour of modern police procedures and hidden agendas...:xxgrinning--00xx3:

johncar54
24th July 2010, 10:17
Aromulus, I am surprised that you seem to have chosen to insult me rather than make an inteligent comment.

Despite 'stick and stones etc' for obvious reasons, I will refrain from any further comment on this thread.

KeithD
24th July 2010, 10:20
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/07/video-g20-police-assault This is the official accepted version. You can see in the video he's not with the protesters, and he was heard asking to get through as he was trying to get to the train station.

aromulus
24th July 2010, 10:27
Aromulus, I am surprised that you seem to have chosen to insult me rather than make an inteligent comment.

Despite 'stick and stones etc' for obvious reasons, I will refrain from any further comment on this thread.

Sorry if you feel offended by my tongue in cheek comment, and apologize, but you have to realize that times have changed, and so has the interpretation of the law, including justice dispensing...:doh

It is not as you remember it anymore, please do wake up to it.

KeithD
24th July 2010, 10:29
You have to make an appointment for the police to visit you now!!! :doh