Policing – Page 6 – Wis[s]e Words

a liberal is a conservative who has been twatted by the police

Published on April 23, 2009

In the light of the death of Ian Tomlinson, George Monbiot talks about his own experiences with aggressive coppers, the cozy relationship between them and the rightwing press and how this relationship has changed in recent years:

But none of this featured in the conservative press. The story was always the same: we would stagger home after our peaceful protests were attacked by uniformed skinheads to discover that we were ”Anarchist thugs on the rampage” whose attempt to destroy civilisation had been thwarted only by the calm professionalism of the police. Violent police action mutated into violent protests. The papers believed everything the police told them.

This began to change when the police foolishly attacked a Countryside Alliance march in 2004. In the spirit of impartial policing, the cops gave these reactionaries the treatment they had doled out to generations of progressives. It was grotesque, disproportionate and familiar policing, but there’s a world of difference between bloodstained hemp ponchos and bloodstained tweeds. The exposure of the lies the police then told about the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes and the shooting of Mohammed Abdul Kahar made the papers – which had reproduced the official version – feel stung.

Tomlinson’s death, as well as all the other documented police thuggery during the G-20 demo might finally have shocked the press out of its reflexive habit of trusting the police, but I wouldn’t count on it too much. It’s just too deeply ingrained.

Tomlinson died of abdominal bleeding

Published on April 17, 2009

From the press release issued by the City of London coroners court :

On 9 April 2009 HM Coroner for the City of London opened and adjourned the inquest into the death of Ian Tomlinson. In so doing he received evidence of identification and the provisional findings and opinion as to the medical cause of death from a report prepared by the consultant forensic pathologist, Dr F Patel, instructed by HM Coroner to conduct the post-mortem examination. The pathologist’s final opinion must await the completion of additional tests.

“Dr F Patel made a number of findings of fact including descriptions of a number of injuries and of diseased organs including the heart and liver. He found a substantial amount of blood in the abdominal cavity. His provisional interpretation of his findings was that the cause of death was coronary artery disease.

“A subsequent post-mortem examination was conducted by another consultant forensic pathologist, Dr N Cary, instructed by the IPCC and by solicitors acting for the family of the late Mr Tomlinson. Dr Cary’s provisional findings and his interpretation of the findings have been provided to HM Coroner in a further preliminary report (the final report once again awaiting the outcome of further tests). Dr Cary’s opinion is that the cause of death was abdominal haemorrhage.

“The cause of the haemorrhage remains to be ascertained. Dr Cary accepts that there is evidence of coronary atherosclerosis but states that in his opinion its nature and extent is unlikely to have contributed to the cause of death. The opinions of both consultant pathologists are provisional and both agree that their final opinions must await the outcome of further investigations and tests. These are likely to take some time. The IPCC’s investigation into the death of Ian Tomlinson is ongoing.”

In other words, the initial verdict of death by heart attack, widely reported even before the first coroner had reported his findings, was a lie. What’s more, the findings of the second report have been held up a week because the Independent Police Complaints Commission was afraid it could prejudice its inquiry. That’s not the end of it: the first pathologist investigating Tomlinson’s death had been reprimanded for his conduct before, once for smearing a black man who had died in police custody, once for diagnosing a murder victim as having died of natural causes, leaving the murderer to kill twice more. Why he was brought in to look at this death is unknown, but might his conduct in the first case have had anything to do with it?

Meanwhile the officer who had attacked Tomlinson minutes for his death, has now been questioned on suspicion of manslaugther. We’ll have to wait to see if anything comes from this, but at least it’s more than Jean Charles de Menezes’ family ever got. What’s also different from the Menezes case is how the media is reporting on Tomlinson’s death, much more critical of the police than they were then.

Sometimes Eddie Mair is a sycophantic w*nker

Published on April 15, 20091 Comment

The filth hit an innocent woman and all Mairs can think off is have some “police expert” on to tell how justified it is sometimes to control crowds by hitting them with batons. It’s shocking to hear this violence being normalised when the video shows the casual backhander a cop gives a woman half his size, then take his baton out and hit her on the legs as her back is turned. In some ways it’s worse footage than what was showed of Ian Tomlinson, as there the situation had already kicked off while here you had a bogstandard peaceful political protest in which the police with no reason started attacking people trying to leave.

Eddie Mairs’ disgraceful performance fits in well though with the general BBC attitude of sucking up to the police and their silencing of police outrages. Ian Tomlinson only rate a one sentence mention and was thought of as “just a London story” until the Beeb was forced to report on it through blogs and the Guardian keeping the story alive. Further back of course there’s the infamous incident in which BBC newscasts showed footage of police attacking the miner strikes in reverse order, making it appear as if the police defended themselves against the miners rather than the other way around.

Bugger the e-mail scandal

Published on April 13, 2009

This is much more important:

Police have carried out what is thought to be the biggest pre-emptive raid on environmental campaigners in UK history, arresting 114 people believed to be planning direct action at a coal-fired power station.

The arrests – for conspiracy to commit criminal damage and aggravated trespass – come amid growing concern among campaigners about increased police surveillance and groups being infiltrated by informers.

Nottinghamshire police said the raid on a school in Nottingham was made just after midnight this morning. The force said it seized “specialist equipment” thought to be linked to a planned protest at nearby Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station, a coal plant owned by the utility company E.On.

No group has claimed responsibility for the alleged demonstration.

Experienced campaigners said no group had claimed responsibility for the alleged demonstration because they could face charges of conspiracy and a possible jail sentence.

Activists said emails setting out planned action could be used by police to prove conspiracy to commit aggravated trespass and criminal damage, as could any equipment or documentation found during the arrests, or other evidence of coordinated preparations.

This is yet another politically motivated police action aimed at undermining dissent and delegitimising protest. It looks and smells like similar arrests of activists in the past, like that of the supposed anarchists in Plymouth just before the G-20 protests, or that of high profile anti-terrorist raids like those in Forest Gate a few years back, none of which amounted to much in the end but each of which sent a clear message. Keeping in mind the context in which these arrests happened, just after the police got embarassed by the killing of Ian Tomlinson and while one senior police official already having warned about “a summer of rage”. The police fears and is prepared for a year of increasing social unrest as the economic crisis begins to bite and they are attempting to head it off at the pass through actions like this mass arrest.

Yet this story’s buried under the avalanche of manufactured outrage about e-mail gate.

Tomlinson’s death a logical result of police policy

Published on April 9, 2009

The latest developments in the Ian Tomlinson case:

The territorial support group officer identified himself to his manager and the Independent Police Complaints Commission as fresh pictures suggested he had removed his shoulder number and covered his face with a balaclava before hitting Ian Tomlinson with a baton and pushing him to the ground last week.

But the officer has not been arrested on suspicion of assault or suspended from duty by the Metropolitan police.

Emphasis mine. That this officer has not been arrested or even suspended yet comes as no great surprise of course, the police defends its own. In the coming weeks and months we’ll hear a lot about this “tragic accident” and the difficulties of being a copper, as well as the most sincere apologies from the police leadership for this unforeseen tragedy. Tomlinson’s assailant might get off scott free or be thrown to the wolves, depending on public opinion and political pressure. In any case the emphasis on the part of the cops, as well as the people who will supposedly investigate their behaviour, will be that it was an accident, an incident, no more. Remember the way the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes was investigated: that will be the way this killing will be investigated.

But as the emphasised bits int he quote above hint at, this is of course nowhere near the whole truth. Everything in the runup to the demo made it clear the cops were out to riot. We had solemn warnings about expected violence, including that infamous warning about a “summer of middle class rage”, excessive safety measures put in place and last but not least, that high profile arrest of the supposed Plymouth anarchists. All this was calculated to get the bobbies on the beat in fighting mood as well as lure black bloc numpties to the demo and discourage more sane people.

Now the police are supposed to be identifiable, but Tomlinson’s assailant was able to cover up his face and remove his shoulder number, something he only could’ve done if this was alright with his superiors. Officiall police policy may say otherwise, but this has become standard operating procedure with cops handling “political” cases like anti-establishment demos. Again, this is an indicator of the fact that unprovoked violence was on the agenda, which makes Tomlinson’s death not a tragic incident, but the logical if unwished for outcome of a deliberate policy.