Simon Harwood punched and racially abused 14-year old girl

Friday's Daily Mail newspaper claims that Metropolitan Police TSG killer-cop Simon Harwood "had an appalling record of complaints against him for violence", in addition to all the other innocent people he attacked during the G20 protest, before he killed Ian Tomlinson, including "a road-rage attack; racially abusing and punching a 14-year-old girl... and threatening to burn down her father’s home; punching, throttling, kneeing or threatening suspects in heavy-handed arrests; and unlawfully accessing the police national computer database". Which is of course why the Metropolitan Police chose not to pursue investigations into complaints against this piece of shit, and why the Met chose to offer him employment in the Territorial Support Group, brutalising the very protestors who care most about the financial larceny being perpetrated against ordinary members of the public and against ordinary taxpayers

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2175957/G20-death-trial-PC-Simon-Harwood-guilty-manslaughter-Ian-Tomlinson.html#ixzz216yVQBSG

The IPCC even had the cheek to say it was "staggering" that Simon Harwood had been able to remain a police officer, despite the IPCC's own role in lying to media and actively covering-up evidence relating to Ian Tomlinson's murder. The front page of Friday's Daily Mirror newspaper carries the headline "Call This Justice"?

The banks rob billions from taxpayers, rig everything and launder money for psychopathic drug criminals, the political parties abuse democracy and lie to voters, politicians are on the fiddle, kids who stole water during the riots get jail while multi-billionaire criminals get bonuses instead of arrests, and the police lied through their teeth about the G20 protestors who had the courage to actually take a stand against this bullshit

Spoken

Comments

Hide the following 8 comments

Pure scum

20.07.2012 13:02

Breathtaking how this was deliberately hidden by the cps from the minds of the jury, it's absolutely astonishing the lengths the state will go to to protect one of their own (murderers)

Disgusted

incorrect

20.07.2012 20:03

The prosecution did not "hide" any previous allegations, because the law says that you are tried for the charged crime, not your past, not hearsay, not feelings.
It also states that only CONVICTIONS can be used in court, and then only after the case has been decided.

seems that a lot of folk are getting angry, not because of the evidence but the fact that thier opinions about the defendant are biased.

Unless theres a few folk out there who dont thing trial by jury is a good idea, i mean that whole magna carta thing was so a plot by tony blair.....

a JURY of 12 members of the public, found a person NOT GUILTY based on the evidence of that day, same footage as we have all seen, on the medicals reports and evidence. the prosecution had a good go and the case was fair.
The records of the trial will be in the public records office soon, all above board.

my feelings go out to the family, but to be honest, they left him to drink himself to death and only seem interested now that a bit of compo is on the table. sooooo careing 5 years too late though

anon by right

Hippy trigger.

20.07.2012 23:43

---seems that a lot of folk are getting angry, not because of the evidence but the fact that thier opinions about the defendant are biased.---

"Never mind a world that can't see past brutality."

Ric Ocasek - 'Quick Change World' (1993)

anonymous

creating 'objects' to deplore.

20.07.2012 23:46

"---seems that a lot of folk are getting angry, not because of the evidence but the fact that thier opinions about the defendant are biased.---"

For the twat in the hat at the back who wrote that.

Let me make sense of that line so we can guess why you wrote it.

"---seems that a lot of folk are getting angry............................................................---"

anarchist

Cowards

20.07.2012 23:48

"my feelings go out to the family, but to be honest, they left him to drink himself to death and only seem interested now that a bit of compo is on the table. sooooo careing 5 years too late though"

Of course you will say that here, but you would never say it to the faces of his sons - would you, coward?

Arsenic for lemons

Why?

21.07.2012 12:12

When a jury, or any one, is overloaded with conflicting emotions and issues they can't understand, the tendency is to cling to a parent figure for guidance. For most adults, their parent figure is the state, and the face of the state is a uniformed officer.

If you want to understand this judgment, don't look at the evidence, look at the psychology.

anarchist

under the carpet

21.07.2012 12:28

Tomlinson case: Met police tried to hide PC Harwood's disciplinary record

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jul/20/police-simon-harwood-disciplinary-records

now out in the open

Why this was definitely a cover-up

21.07.2012 21:11

The courts are not allowed to consider any previous allegations, but what they should have taken into account was the string of other assaults that Simon Harwood committed minutes before killing Ian Tomlinson (and these were not "allegations" by the way, as they were all captured on film).

If some gun-nut went on a shooting spree, randomly shooting members of the public, injuring some and killing others, the court would not, in a million years, ever disregard those victims that were "only" maimed in assessing the innocence or guilt of the attacker, and only discuss the shots that actually killed people, but legal process has frankly been completely flushed in order to cover-up for a what the coroner's court has already proven to be a crime

Kello