It is not often I find myself agreeing with the DM, but today they detail the shocking 'career' of PC Simon Harwood who was cleared of causing the death of Ian Tomlinson. The jury were not allowed to hear about the ten complaints against Harwood, who was allowed to leave one force on 'medical grounds' (such as?) before a disciplinary hearing could be held. He was then allowed to join another force and the senior police officer in charge yesterday admitted that their vetting procedure had not been adequate.
The charges against him include punching and racially abusing a 14-year old girl, abuse of authority and using unnecessary force. He admitted going into 'red mist mode'.
Ian Tomlinson's family now plan to sue him in civil court where the burden of proof is less and the judge will know Harwood's record.

It's been a disgraceful farce. Harwood was guilty as hell as he shouldn't even have been anywhere near where Mr Tomlinson was walking. I know our police do come under fire at times for being heavy handy, but this man is aptly named when called a 'thug'.

I can't understand ths verdict after watching the video. Ian Tomlinson did nothing to warrant this police assault. I hope the family succeeds in their cvil action.

Typical case of the police closing ranks. He sounds a thoroughly unpleasant violent thug - let's hope he is out of any police force for good now.

Agree totally with all of above

Each time we witness a police officer or others in public service literally getting away with murder trust in these services is irreparably damaged . My heart goes out to Mr Tomlinsons family and I hope they are successful in the civil action. The fact he was an alcoholic has been bandied around as if it was an excuse for violence against him. What will the police force now do with this man who hides behind his uniform?

Did he get some sort of pension or payment when he left on 'medical grounds' thereby avoiding a disciplinary hearing? The following week he was re-emplyed as a civilian in the same force! Then he joined Surrey police as a policeman and eventually transferred to the Met. Seems to me he was clearly playing the system. For that officer to say 'we got it wrong' is such an understatement.

Sounds just like the Catholic method of moving guilty priests sideways out of the way....the system covering up...

For once in my life, words fail me.

From the video it is clear that Mr Tomlinson was knocked down for no reason at all. How on earth could they come up with a not guilty verdict. If this had been the other way around and it was a policeman killed, I'm sure we would have seen another verdict.

I think some of the problem may lie with the discrepancy in the pathologists' opinions, not helped by the fact the the first pathologist disposed of some evidence after his examination. The suggestion is that because of Mr Tomlinson's alcoholism, the pushing, blow to the leg and the fall may not have been the actual cause or even an aggravating factor – beyond reasonable doubt. It's one of those occasions where one wishes that the jury hadn't perhaps been quite so scrupulous.

I will have to go back and check, but I think the pathologist used was somewhat dodgy anyway and the family had to ask for another post mortem.
Harwood has been on 'gardening' leave on full pay ever since the incident!

Greatnan I think the first pathologist has actually been suspended, but not over this case so his opinion has to be considered as professional and valid as the second one.

Harwood's trial was on this case alone just as it should be in any trial. The jury found him not guilty. Police have complaints made against them all the time because of the nature of the job and the people they deal with. And all this lovey-dovey sentiment from Tomlinson's family - he was homeless for 13 years - where were they all then? Oh yes. It all sells newspapers.

So, can we take it you think PC Harwood is a shining example of a good policeman?

Nevertheless, the coroner's judgement was that Mr Tomlinson was unlawfully killed. Bit of a paradox there.

I think that until any of us have done the job we cannot totally understand.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm !!!!!

What on earth has Mr. Tomlinson's family relationships got to do with the case, other than to try to prove in some way that he deserved to be killed?
No, we don't have to have been in the police force to know that hitting an unarmed person from behind is wrong. Mr. Tomlinson posed no threat to any policeman or member of the public. Perhaps he was a bit annoying, but that hardly deserves the violence of the attack.
Even Harwood himself admitted to experiencing a 'red mist' - is that the type of person we want policing the streets?
Whether or not the jury knew of his past record, we know it now, so I am amazed that anybody would try to support him.

Well said !

It seems like everyone has an opinion and it's one side or the other. And it would appear that this is not a straight forward of right versus wrong actions.

Oh come on !

It would appear to me that it is!

AmeliaAnn and AnneMaria - I can't find any other posts for either of you.What a coincidence if you should both have felt moved to post for the first time on this subject. Apart from yourselves, there does not seem to be much controversy.

Are they "Newbies" ?