Skip to content or view screen version

*Final, revised* letter to my MP concerning the attack on Ian Tomlinson

concerned | 13.08.2010 20:26 | G20 London Summit | Repression

Head(s) must roll

Further to my post on this last week and some useful feedback.

Below is final text of a letter to my MP concerning the CPS' refusal to bring any charges over the police assault on and subsequent death of Ian Tomlinson. It leads into suggesting that the Attorney General sacks the DPP Keir Starmer if he cannot answer questions posed satisfactorily.


Please send to your MP too - feel free to edit/abridge as you think fit.

They said the DPP Keir Starmer was big on human rights when appointed, and Monbiot writes that it is an underling of his (who also recommended no charges over de Menezes) who executed the CPS report of this particular case, but the DPP approved it. It's my understanding that the Attorney General is responsible for hiring or firing the Director of Public Prosecutions.

It's welcome that the CPS has recently decided to charge the four TSG assailants of Babar Ahmad, so it's not inconceivable the DPP might change his mind on this one.

If bold enough to email you could also cc Ken Clarke the Justice Secretary. Mr Baccy he may be, but he is said to be big on police reform and human rights and recently announced a judicial inquiry into the police killing of Azelle Rodney.


Dear [NAME OF MP] MP,

Re: The attack on Mr Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests, who subsequently died


[INSERT PHOTOS:
- 3rd result for Yahoo image search for "Ian Tomlinson G20" showing him walking with bruising around right eye
- Image from Sky News site referred to below showing Tomlinson lying on ground with large bruise on forehead]


I share the amazement of many others at the refusal by the Crown Prosecution Service to bring any charges against the PC who apparently assaulted Mr Ian Tomlinson at last year's G20 protests, shortly before his death, an assault that was captured from two directions on widely publicised private film footage.

I have read the full CPS statement on their website of why they do not recommend that any criminal charges are brought.

I feel infuriated that the Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer, who is paid £195,000+, and CPS Chief Executive Peter Lewis, who is paid £160,000+, have presided over such a crude and negligent explanation of why the CPS will not bring any prosecution, in spite of the total further resources that must have been spent on the CPS' and IPCC's investigations into the incident.

I understand that Keith Vaz MP chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee has written to the DPP Keir Starmer urging him to reconsider.

Please will you convey the following questions I have to the Attorney General, Dominic Grieve QC MP:

1. Did the Government instruct, advise, request or in any way convey a wish to the CPS against any charges being brought against the offending PC or to delay an announcement until when they did?

2. Will the Attorney General ask Keir Starmer why the CPS took well over six months to give its verdict, though all the post mortems of Mr Tomlinson were conducted in the month after his death, considering that a prosecution for Common Assault was made impossible because a six month deadline was passed, and it is the CPS' job to know such deadlines?

3. Will he ask Keir Starmer why the CPS statement made no mention or discussion of Mr Tomlinson's head impact with the ground after the assault, and head injury or injuries?

The second above picture, from Sky News, 24/4/09 ( http://tiny.cc/xn8t4), clearly shows a large bruise on Mr Tomlinson's forehead shortly after the assault. The article reports: "It is consistent with video footage that has already revealed how his head hit the flagstones after a violent push from the officer… Witnesses have said they heard a noise as Mr Tomlinson struck the ground and the sound of an impact can be heard on the amateur film… Sources have confirmed a head injury was recorded in pathology reports, though it is not thought to have contributed to his death."

On 5/4/09 the Guardian had reported ( http://tiny.cc/mzfgm): "A female protester, who does not want to be named but has given her testimony to the IPCC, said she saw a man she later recognised as Tomlinson being pushed aggressively from behind by officers. "I saw a man violently propelled forward, as though he'd been flung by the arm, and fall forward on his head… He hit the top front area of his head on the pavement. I noticed his fall particularly because it struck me as a horrifically forceful push by a policeman and an especially hard fall; it made me wince."

The first above photo also apparently shows some facial bruising, and was apparently taken immediately after he had got up from being pushed over, showing facial bruising not visible in the assault footage.

4. Will he ask Keir Starmer why Assault occasioning Actual Bodily Harm was rejected because the only injury the CPS believes can reliably be ascribed to the attack were "relatively minor" leg bruises, when the PC did not merely strike Mr Tomlinson with a baton that caused leg bruising but also pushed him hard in quick succession with this, a calculated move to cause him to fall sharply, in a manner that was likely to cause some trauma elsewhere, in this case at least facial bruising as well as the disputed internal trauma?

5. Will he ask Keir Starmer his response to the comments of Dr Nat Cary, the second forensic pathologist who examined Mr Tomlinson, quoted in the Guardian newspaper, 23 July ( http://tiny.cc/41vlb), in response to the CPS statement: "I'm quite happy to challenge that. The injuries were not relatively minor. He sustained quite a large area of bruising. Such injuries are consistent with a baton strike, which could amount to ABH. It's extraordinary. If that's not ABH I would like to know what is."?

6. In relation to the charge considered of Misconduct in Public Office, the CPS states:

- this "is committed when a public officer acting as such wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder without reasonable excuse or justification."

- this "cannot simply be used as a substitute for other offences and simply being a police officer who commits a criminal offence, even one of assault, does not, without some other aggravating factor, automatically amount to the offence of misconduct in public office",

- "The threshold is a high one requiring conduct so far below acceptable standards as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder." In addition: "It will normally be necessary to consider the likely consequences of the breach in deciding whether the conduct falls so far below the standard of conduct to be expected of the officer as to constitute the offence."

Will the Attorney General ask Keir Starmer, in relation to the issue of Misconduct:

(i) why he does not consider that the fact that the PC conducted such an attack during paid duty is an aggravating factor and a reason for more charges, not less, i.e. a charge of Misconduct in addition to any of Assault or Manslaughter whether or not the latter would succeed?

(ii) why the baton strike that the CPS elsewhere admits caused bruising was not considered as potential Misconduct, whereas the push on Mr Tomlinson was considered as potential Misconduct?

(iii) why the CPS states it "would not be able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Tomlinson's fall had caused him any injury" yet makes no mention of the facial injuries?

(iv) whether he believes it was, or was not, a likely consequence of Mr Tomlinson being felled in the manner he was that he would sustain some injury?

(v) why the CPS does not consider the likely psychological injury to Mr Tomlinson of being felled in the manner he was?

(vi) why in discussion of this potential offence, the CPS fails to mention that the PC was illegitimately not displaying his serial number, and was partially concealing his face with a scarf or balaclava, whereas his clear facial shield was in a raised position not protecting his face?

(vii) why, in discussion of this potential offence, the CPS fails to mention that the PC did not stop to see if Mr Tomlinson required medical attention?

(viii) whether the failure to stop to attend to Mr Tomlinson's potential medical needs would constitute a willful neglect to perform his duty, and so could be considered as Misconduct?

(ix) whether he believes that the actions and behaviour of the PC did not amount to an abuse of public trust in police officers?

7. Will he ask Keir Starmer why the CPS statement made no mention of any of the formal reprimands and suspensions of the first pathologist Dr Freddy Patel or investigations into his competence, which include that in 1999 he was investigated by the police over another autopsy and disciplined by the General Medical Council; that he was reported to the Home Office by the Met Police in 2004 who considered him unworthy of further work for them; that he was suspended from a Government register of pathologists in June 2009; and the announcement on July 12th 2010 that the General Medical Council were investigating Dr Freddy Patel over a total 26 charges of misconduct relating to 4 other autopsies?

8. Will he ask Keir Starmer why, having taken so long to deliberate, he is closing the door on waiting to hear the outcome of the GMC's latest investigation into Dr Patel?

9. The CPS states that a conviction for manslaughter would be unrealistic since Dr Freddy Patel as the first pathologist would be called to testify, and would testify that the death was caused by heart disease.

Will the Attorney General ask Keir Starmer

(i) whether the CPS was aware of the precedent of the 2003 Sally White murder conviction which contradicted the initial post mortem by the very same Dr Freddy Patel?

(ii) why the CPS did not refer to that case?

(iii) what is the CPS' view of its implications for this case?

In 2002, Dr Patel conducted the autopsy of prostitute Sally White whose body had been discovered by police at the home of Anthony Hardy, and reported she had died of a heart attack. This caused the Met Police to close their investigation into her suspicious death. Hardy went on to kill two more women; in 2003 he was charged with murdering all three women and pleaded guilty on all counts.

10. Will he ask Keir Starmer why the CPS states that the police line advanced down Royal Exchange, moving Mr Tomlinson on ahead of them, in order to prevent protesters getting behind police lines to Threadneedle Street, when it is clear from the footage that the line of police including dog handlers already prevented anyone from getting to Threadneedle Street via Royal Exchange?

11. Will he ask Keir Starmer why the CPS statement did not mention that Mr Tomlinson was being detained by police along with a large crowd of protesters and passers by in a 'kettle' or encirclement, a controversial police tactic often pre-planned for large protests like this, and no discussion of whether this, therefore, should be classed as a death in custody?

12. Will he ask Keir Starmer why the CPS statement did not mention of that the police operation was called Operation Glencoe, Glencoe being the site of a famous massacre, and no discussion of whether this could be considered incitement or at least misconduct by the senior officer(s) concerned?

13. Will he ask Keir Starmer why, although the CPS statement refers to a "sizeable minority" of protesters not being peaceful, and to 30 police injuries sustained that day, it makes no mention of how many members of the public got injured, nor of how many complaints were made to the IPCC of police-initiated violence that day, nor of how many attested cases this included of injuries caused by police or police dogs, nor of considerable film footage apparently showing police-initiated violence?

14. If Keir Starmer's answers are seriously inadequate then will the Attorney General dismiss him?

15. In view of how much needs to be done to improve confidence in police forces and the justice system, will the Government also make it its policy to introduce elected Police Commissioners?

Yours sincerely,

[NAME]

concerned

Comments

Hide the following 9 comments

problem solved

14.08.2010 07:21

will rest easy knowing youve written to your mp once this has been read im confident the police will stop abusing there powers straight away you my friend are a true class warrior and here

anon


Spot on

14.08.2010 08:25

well done ...just right

Spike


Probably best not to mention Keith Vaz

14.08.2010 11:45

There has never been a more crooked, self-serving, slippery, illegal, corrupt MP than Keith Vaz. It pains me everytime i see him jump on a bandwagon to get himself some limelight. When he hit the top 3 position for most expenses claimed i wasnt in the least bit surprised. Who needs 500 chairs paid for by taxpayers in their own house

Terrance


HA HA HA!

14.08.2010 14:18

You are living in la-la land

!!! writing a letter to an MP!!!


If not for this case, the next one

14.08.2010 16:34

Do not underestimate the effect of writing to MPs. It means they can see there is an issue people are concerned about. We all know police forces will be brutal till the end of time. What other course of action do you recommend? In the 1990's the protests over Tories' roadbuilding did not stop any live project but John Gummer persuaded the rest of the cabinet to wind up the programme as a result and the trunk road that would have cut a swathe through the thickly wooded hill visible from London Climate Camp 2009 was shelved as a result.

If I write to my MP, in a case like this I think it will have more impact than blowing a whistle outside the CPS.

Re Keith Vaz. In the filmed proceedings of the Home Affairs committee, he comes across as a very skilled chairperson and this sort of thing wouldn't go unnoticed in Westminster village.

concerned


Stop being picky

15.08.2010 08:46

Concerned has not suggested that the only thing people should do is write to their MP so please stop being so negative. This is a perfectly valid tactic especially if it goes along with people doing demos, civil disobedience etc. Back in 1994 I wrote to my MP about the CJA, he saw me and then within a couple of weeks was in the back of a sab' van finding out for himself what went on, he arranged a press release in the House of Commons in conjunction with the HSA and spoke out against the CJA. Was it worth spending 30 minutes writing to him? I think it was, he could have binned the letter but apparently 3 letters on any given subject causes MPs to show concern so I was once told, if not for their constituents then at least for their seats. My Current MP Peter Luff is pro hunt and we do not see eye to eye but occassionally we squabble via the post which I admit is not very productive in my case. This letter concerning Ian Tomlinson, however transcends such differences and I am sure that there are some MPs who want to stop a slide into a police state. The only way to find them is to write to them and then when they do speak up they can safely say that their constituents are concerned about this issue. An MP who stands up in the commons with no evidence that those s/he represents give a shit about the issue s/he is talking about will not be as convincing as an MP with letters galore about the same topic with anecdotal evidence about how people are affected by something.
I am not saying that Parliament is in any way a noble institution, far from it, but it is here, it will not go away for some time whatever we do. We can use it whilst we are dismantling this sick society to good ends. Furthermore there are a few (very minute) number of MPs who do care about people at least some of the time.

Lynn Sawyer


Write to MP and more

15.08.2010 09:15

Writing to your MP only costs a stamp. VERY worthwhile. I wrote to mine, and to Keir Starmer, Dominc Grieve and while I was at it, the "liberal" Nick Clegg, simply to register my disgust at the cowardly decision of Keir Starmer not to charge PC Simon Harwood with manslaughter, and to demand justice for Mr Tomlinson, and to demand that Harwood is charged with manslaughter.

Cost me four stamps.

I wrote very simple letters. You can see samples and contact addresses on the site I have put up to help get justice for Ian Tomlinson:  http://justiceforian.com

Charles Sweeney
mail e-mail: charles@charlessweeney.com
- Homepage: http://justiceforian.com


politicians = cops

15.08.2010 10:50

fuck your democracy

fuck your english values

fuck your activism

wait and see


You're wasting your time

15.08.2010 21:38

The DPP is the permanent secretary of the CPS. He cannot be fired by his minister, who also has no role in appointing him.

Bad news