Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.

If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?


Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson

    * Mark Townsend and Paul Lewis
    * The Observer, Sunday 5 April 2009
    * Article history

The man who died during last week's G20 protests was "assaulted" by
riot police shortly before he suffered a heart attack, according to
witness statements received by the Independent Police Complaints
Commission.

Investigators are examining a series of corroborative accounts that
allege Ian Tomlinson, 47, was a victim of police violence in the
moments before he collapsed near the Bank of England in the City of
London last Wednesday evening. Three witnesses have told the Observer
that Mr Tomlinson was attacked violently as he made his way home from
work at a nearby newsagents. One claims he was struck on the head with
a baton.

Photographer Anna Branthwaite said: "I can remember seeing Ian
Tomlinson. He was rushed from behind by a riot officer with a helmet
and shield two or three minutes before he collapsed." Branthwaite, an
experienced press photographer, has made a statement to the IPCC.

Another independent statement supports allegations of police violence.
Amiri Howe, 24, recalled seeing Mr Tomlinson being hit "near the head"
with a police baton. Howe took one of a sequence of photographs that
show a clearly dazed Mr Tomlinson being helped by a bystander.

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."

Mr Tomlinson, a married man who lived alone in a bail hostel, was not
taking part in the protests. Initially, his death was attributed by a
police post mortem to natural causes. A City of London police
statement said: "[He] suffered a sudden heart attack while on his way
home from work."

But this version of events was challenged after witnesses recognised
the dead man from photographs that were published on Friday.

An IPCC statement was due to be released the same day and is
understood to have portrayed the death as a tragic accident. However,
the statement's release was postponed as the complaints body received
information that police officers may have been more involved in events
than previously thought. An IPCC spokesman said yesterday that in
light of new statements it was "assessing" the information it had
received before deciding whether to launch a full investigation.

Part of the commission's inquiries will involve the examination of
CCTV footage from the area.

Liberal Democrat MP David Howarth said: "Eventually there will have to
be a full inquest with a jury. It is a possibility this death was at
police hands."

A police source told the Observer that Mr Tomlinson appears to have
become caught between police lines and protesters, with officers
chasing back demonstrators during skirmishes. He was seen stumbling
before he collapsed and died on Cornhill Street, opposite St Michael's
Alley, around 7.25pm.

At around 7.10pm, protesters had gathered outside the police cordon to
call for those contained inside - some for hours - to be let out.
Officers with batons and shields attempted to clear them from the
road.

Around 7.20pm, five riot police, and a line of officers with dogs,
emerged from Royal Exchange Square, a pedestrian side street. Three
images taken around this time show Mr Tomlinson on the pavement, in
front of five riot police, and in apparent distress. He had one arm in
the air, and appeared to be in discussion with the officers.

Mr Tomlinson then appears to have been lifted to his feet by a
bystander. Minutes later he fell to the ground. "We saw this guy
staggering around," said Natalie Langford, 21, a student. "He looked
disorientated. About five seconds later he fell, and I grabbed my
friends to help him."

Police have claimed that when paramedics tried to move Mr Tomlinson
away for urgent treatment, bottles were thrown at them by protesters.
He was later pronounced dead at hospital.

Branthwaite added: "He [Mr Tomlinson] was not a mouthy kid or causing
problems, but the police seemed to have lost control and were trying
to push protesters back. The police had started to filter people into
a side street off Cornhill. There were a few stragglers who were just
walking through between the police and protesters. Mr Tomlinson was
one of those."

The police tactics during the G20 protests were condemned in the
aftermath of the demonstrations. The clearance of a climate camp along
Bishopsgate by riot police with batons and dogs after nightfall on
Wednesday came in for particular criticism.

Protesters marched to Bethnal Green police station in east London
yesterday to demand a public inquiry into Mr Tomlinson's death.

On Apr 5, 9:52 am, Oppressed Subject  wrote:
> Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
>
> If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
>
> Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson
>
>     * Mark Townsend and Paul Lewis
>     * The Observer, Sunday 5 April 2009
>     * Article history
>
> The man who died during last week's G20 protests was "assaulted" by
> riot police shortly before he suffered a heart attack, according to
> witness statements received by the Independent Police Complaints
> Commission.
>
> Investigators are examining a series of corroborative accounts that
> allege Ian Tomlinson, 47, was a victim of police violence in the
> moments before he collapsed near the Bank of England in the City of
> London last Wednesday evening. Three witnesses have told the Observer
> that Mr Tomlinson was attacked violently as he made his way home from
> work at a nearby newsagents. One claims he was struck on the head with
> a baton.
>
> Photographer Anna Branthwaite said: "I can remember seeing Ian
> Tomlinson. He was rushed from behind by a riot officer with a helmet
> and shield two or three minutes before he collapsed." Branthwaite, an
> experienced press photographer, has made a statement to the IPCC.
>
> Another independent statement supports allegations of police violence.
> Amiri Howe, 24, recalled seeing Mr Tomlinson being hit "near the head"
> with a police baton. Howe took one of a sequence of photographs that
> show a clearly dazed Mr Tomlinson being helped by a bystander.
>
> 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."
>
> Mr Tomlinson, a married man who lived alone in a bail hostel, was not
> taking part in the protests. Initially, his death was attributed by a
> police post mortem to natural causes. A City of London police
> statement said: "[He] suffered a sudden heart attack while on his way
> home from work."
>
> But this version of events was challenged after witnesses recognised
> the dead man from photographs that were published on Friday.
>
> An IPCC statement was due to be released the same day and is
> understood to have portrayed the death as a tragic accident. However,
> the statement's release was postponed as the complaints body received
> information that police officers may have been more involved in events
> than previously thought. An IPCC spokesman said yesterday that in
> light of new statements it was "assessing" the information it had
> received before deciding whether to launch a full investigation.
>
> Part of the commission's inquiries will involve the examination of
> CCTV footage from the area.
>
> Liberal Democrat MP David Howarth said: "Eventually there will have to
> be a full inquest with a jury. It is a possibility this death was at
> police hands."
>
> A police source told the Observer that Mr Tomlinson appears to have
> become caught between police lines and protesters, with officers
> chasing back demonstrators during skirmishes. He was seen stumbling
> before he collapsed and died on Cornhill Street, opposite St Michael's
> Alley, around 7.25pm.
>
> At around 7.10pm, protesters had gathered outside the police cordon to
> call for those contained inside - some for hours - to be let out.
> Officers with batons and shields attempted to clear them from the
> road.
>
> Around 7.20pm, five riot police, and a line of officers with dogs,
> emerged from Royal Exchange Square, a pedestrian side street. Three
> images taken around this time show Mr Tomlinson on the pavement, in
> front of five riot police, and in apparent distress. He had one arm in
> the air, and appeared to be in discussion with the officers.
>
> Mr Tomlinson then appears to have been lifted to his feet by a
> bystander. Minutes later he fell to the ground. "We saw this guy
> staggering around," said Natalie Langford, 21, a student. "He looked
> disorientated. About five seconds later he fell, and I grabbed my
> friends to help him."
>
> Police have claimed that when paramedics tried to move Mr Tomlinson
> away for urgent treatment, bottles were thrown at them by protesters.
> He was later pronounced dead at hospital.
>
> Branthwaite added: "He [Mr Tomlinson] was not a mouthy kid or causing
> problems, but the police seemed to have lost control and were trying
> to push protesters back. The police had started to filter people into
> a side street off Cornhill. There were a few stragglers who were just
> walking through between the police and protesters. Mr Tomlinson was
> one of those."
>
> The police tactics during the G20 protests were condemned in the
> aftermath of the demonstrations. The clearance of a climate camp along
> Bishopsgate by riot police with batons and dogs after nightfall on
> Wednesday came in for particular criticism.
>
> Protesters marched to Bethnal Green police station in east London
> yesterday to demand a public inquiry into Mr Tomlinson's death.

I have for a long time wanted all police on special operations to wear
body cameras, and for police uniforms on special operations to have 6
inch high letters/numerals Identifying the officers number, they are
too anonymous, and able to do what they want.

The large font police ID no. was a conclusion/requirement descision
come to after the Seattle riot police assaulted people in a bar.

"Oppressed Subject"  wrote in message 
news:fc8fddd9-4f31-43f4-91e5-d3bccb8f9ce8@h28g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
>
> If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
>
>
> Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests

This is worth a view too:

http://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993

On Apr 5, 9:22 am, "DVH"  wrote:
> "Oppressed Subject"  wrote in message
>
> news:fc8fddd9-4f31-43f4-91e5-d3bccb8f9ce8@h28g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
>
> > If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
>
> > Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
>
> This is worth a view too:
>
> http://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993

That is what happens when all the weapons and training are on one
side. If the police can't be trusted with batons and riot gear, just
wait till they start breaking out their Tasers (and later, firearms)
more regularly.

Remember Blair Peach?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/27/newsid_3023000/3023595.stm
Derek

"Oppressed Subject"  wrote in message 
news:fc8fddd9-4f31-43f4-91e5-d3bccb8f9ce8@h28g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
>
> If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
>
>
> Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson
>
>    * Mark Townsend and Paul Lewis
>    * The Observer, Sunday 5 April 2009
>    * Article history
>
> The man who died during last week's G20 protests was "assaulted" by
> riot police shortly before he suffered a heart attack, according to
> witness statements received by the Independent Police Complaints
> Commission.
>
> Investigators are examining a series of corroborative accounts that
> allege Ian Tomlinson, 47, was a victim of police violence in the
> moments before he collapsed near the Bank of England in the City of
> London last Wednesday evening. Three witnesses have told the Observer
> that Mr Tomlinson was attacked violently as he made his way home from
> work at a nearby newsagents. One claims he was struck on the head with
> a baton.
>
> Photographer Anna Branthwaite said: "I can remember seeing Ian
> Tomlinson. He was rushed from behind by a riot officer with a helmet
> and shield two or three minutes before he collapsed." Branthwaite, an
> experienced press photographer, has made a statement to the IPCC.
>
> Another independent statement supports allegations of police violence.
> Amiri Howe, 24, recalled seeing Mr Tomlinson being hit "near the head"
> with a police baton. Howe took one of a sequence of photographs that
> show a clearly dazed Mr Tomlinson being helped by a bystander.
>
> 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."
>
> Mr Tomlinson, a married man who lived alone in a bail hostel, was not
> taking part in the protests. Initially, his death was attributed by a
> police post mortem to natural causes. A City of London police
> statement said: "[He] suffered a sudden heart attack while on his way
> home from work."
>
> But this version of events was challenged after witnesses recognised
> the dead man from photographs that were published on Friday.
>
> An IPCC statement was due to be released the same day and is
> understood to have portrayed the death as a tragic accident. However,
> the statement's release was postponed as the complaints body received
> information that police officers may have been more involved in events
> than previously thought. An IPCC spokesman said yesterday that in
> light of new statements it was "assessing" the information it had
> received before deciding whether to launch a full investigation.
>
> Part of the commission's inquiries will involve the examination of
> CCTV footage from the area.
>
> Liberal Democrat MP David Howarth said: "Eventually there will have to
> be a full inquest with a jury. It is a possibility this death was at
> police hands."
>
> A police source told the Observer that Mr Tomlinson appears to have
> become caught between police lines and protesters, with officers
> chasing back demonstrators during skirmishes. He was seen stumbling
> before he collapsed and died on Cornhill Street, opposite St Michael's
> Alley, around 7.25pm.
>
> At around 7.10pm, protesters had gathered outside the police cordon to
> call for those contained inside - some for hours - to be let out.
> Officers with batons and shields attempted to clear them from the
> road.
>
> Around 7.20pm, five riot police, and a line of officers with dogs,
> emerged from Royal Exchange Square, a pedestrian side street. Three
> images taken around this time show Mr Tomlinson on the pavement, in
> front of five riot police, and in apparent distress. He had one arm in
> the air, and appeared to be in discussion with the officers.
>
> Mr Tomlinson then appears to have been lifted to his feet by a
> bystander. Minutes later he fell to the ground. "We saw this guy
> staggering around," said Natalie Langford, 21, a student. "He looked
> disorientated. About five seconds later he fell, and I grabbed my
> friends to help him."
>
> Police have claimed that when paramedics tried to move Mr Tomlinson
> away for urgent treatment, bottles were thrown at them by protesters.
> He was later pronounced dead at hospital.
>
> Branthwaite added: "He [Mr Tomlinson] was not a mouthy kid or causing
> problems, but the police seemed to have lost control and were trying
> to push protesters back. The police had started to filter people into
> a side street off Cornhill. There were a few stragglers who were just
> walking through between the police and protesters. Mr Tomlinson was
> one of those."
>
> The police tactics during the G20 protests were condemned in the
> aftermath of the demonstrations. The clearance of a climate camp along
> Bishopsgate by riot police with batons and dogs after nightfall on
> Wednesday came in for particular criticism.
>
> Protesters marched to Bethnal Green police station in east London
> yesterday to demand a public inquiry into Mr Tomlinson's death.

On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 10:29:16 +0100, "DerekF"  wrote:

>Remember Blair Peach?
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/27/newsid_3023000/3023595.stm
>Derek

I do. And did anyone ever do an FOI request into the police report on his death?
IIRC it was never published, and remains a secret to this day.

Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'

Oppressed Subject wrote:
> On Apr 5, 9:22 am, "DVH"  wrote:
>> "Oppressed Subject"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:fc8fddd9-4f31-43f4-91e5-d3bccb8f9ce8@h28g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
>>> If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
>>> Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
>> This is worth a view too:
>>
>> http://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993
> 
> That is what happens when all the weapons and training are on one
> side. If the police can't be trusted with batons and riot gear, just
> wait till they start breaking out their Tasers (and later, firearms)
> more regularly.

No wonder they want secret inquest!

This unwarranted  violence will  leave indelible marks on many more than 
the immediate victims - their partners, children, parents, friends, 
colleagues, and so on. The damage done to our country is immeasurable.

j

djornsk wrote:

> Oppressed Subject wrote:
> >On Apr 5, 9:22 am, "DVH" 
> wrote:  >>"Oppressed Subject"
>  wrote in message
> > > 
> > > news:fc8fddd9-4f31-43f4-91e5-d3bccb8f9ce8@h2
> > > 8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> > > 
> > > > Interesting and worth keeping tabs on
> > > > developments.  If true, who wants to
> > > > wager on a whitewash?  Police 'assaulted'
> > > > bystander who died during G20 protests
> > > This is worth a view too:
> > > 
> > > http://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993
> > 
> > That is what happens when all the weapons and
> > training are on one side. If the police can't
> > be trusted with batons and riot gear, just
> > wait till they start breaking out their
> > Tasers (and later, firearms) more regularly.
> 
> No wonder they want secret inquest!
> 
> This unwarranted  violence will  leave
> indelible marks on many more than the immediate
> victims - their partners, children, parents,
> friends, colleagues, and so on. The damage done
> to our country is immeasurable.
> 
> j

To some of us who remember 1984, it is just an
extrapolation of the situation then. The public
sat back and accepted the idea that the police
could beat up anyone they wished, prevent access
to the highways, manipulate the media and
suppress any criticisms.little by little, bit by
bit, this country turns to crap.

--

On 5 Apr, 10:06, freepo  wrote:
> On Apr 5, 9:52 am, Oppressed Subject  wrote:
>
>
>
> > Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
>
> > If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
>
> > Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
>
> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson
>
> >     * Mark Townsend and Paul Lewis
> >     * The Observer, Sunday 5 April 2009
> >     * Article history
>
> > The man who died during last week's G20 protests was "assaulted" by
> > riot police shortly before he suffered a heart attack, according to
> > witness statements received by the Independent Police Complaints
> > Commission.
>
> > Investigators are examining a series of corroborative accounts that
> > allege Ian Tomlinson, 47, was a victim of police violence in the
> > moments before he collapsed near the Bank of England in the City of
> > London last Wednesday evening. Three witnesses have told the Observer
> > that Mr Tomlinson was attacked violently as he made his way home from
> > work at a nearby newsagents. One claims he was struck on the head with
> > a baton.
>
> > Photographer Anna Branthwaite said: "I can remember seeing Ian
> > Tomlinson. He was rushed from behind by a riot officer with a helmet
> > and shield two or three minutes before he collapsed." Branthwaite, an
> > experienced press photographer, has made a statement to the IPCC.
>
> > Another independent statement supports allegations of police violence.
> > Amiri Howe, 24, recalled seeing Mr Tomlinson being hit "near the head"
> > with a police baton. Howe took one of a sequence of photographs that
> > show a clearly dazed Mr Tomlinson being helped by a bystander.
>
> > 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."
>
> > Mr Tomlinson, a married man who lived alone in a bail hostel, was not
> > taking part in the protests. Initially, his death was attributed by a
> > police post mortem to natural causes. A City of London police
> > statement said: "[He] suffered a sudden heart attack while on his way
> > home from work."
>
> > But this version of events was challenged after witnesses recognised
> > the dead man from photographs that were published on Friday.
>
> > An IPCC statement was due to be released the same day and is
> > understood to have portrayed the death as a tragic accident. However,
> > the statement's release was postponed as the complaints body received
> > information that police officers may have been more involved in events
> > than previously thought. An IPCC spokesman said yesterday that in
> > light of new statements it was "assessing" the information it had
> > received before deciding whether to launch a full investigation.
>
> > Part of the commission's inquiries will involve the examination of
> > CCTV footage from the area.
>
> > Liberal Democrat MP David Howarth said: "Eventually there will have to
> > be a full inquest with a jury. It is a possibility this death was at
> > police hands."
>
> > A police source told the Observer that Mr Tomlinson appears to have
> > become caught between police lines and protesters, with officers
> > chasing back demonstrators during skirmishes. He was seen stumbling
> > before he collapsed and died on Cornhill Street, opposite St Michael's
> > Alley, around 7.25pm.
>
> > At around 7.10pm, protesters had gathered outside the police cordon to
> > call for those contained inside - some for hours - to be let out.
> > Officers with batons and shields attempted to clear them from the
> > road.
>
> > Around 7.20pm, five riot police, and a line of officers with dogs,
> > emerged from Royal Exchange Square, a pedestrian side street. Three
> > images taken around this time show Mr Tomlinson on the pavement, in
> > front of five riot police, and in apparent distress. He had one arm in
> > the air, and appeared to be in discussion with the officers.
>
> > Mr Tomlinson then appears to have been lifted to his feet by a
> > bystander. Minutes later he fell to the ground. "We saw this guy
> > staggering around," said Natalie Langford, 21, a student. "He looked
> > disorientated. About five seconds later he fell, and I grabbed my
> > friends to help him."
>
> > Police have claimed that when paramedics tried to move Mr Tomlinson
> > away for urgent treatment, bottles were thrown at them by protesters.
> > He was later pronounced dead at hospital.
>
> > Branthwaite added: "He [Mr Tomlinson] was not a mouthy kid or causing
> > problems, but the police seemed to have lost control and were trying
> > to push protesters back. The police had started to filter people into
> > a side street off Cornhill. There were a few stragglers who were just
> > walking through between the police and protesters. Mr Tomlinson was
> > one of those."
>
> > The police tactics during the G20 protests were condemned in the
> > aftermath of the demonstrations. The clearance of a climate camp along
> > Bishopsgate by riot police with batons and dogs after nightfall on
> > Wednesday came in for particular criticism.
>
> > Protesters marched to Bethnal Green police station in east London
> > yesterday to demand a public inquiry into Mr Tomlinson's death.
>
> I have for a long time wanted all police on special operations to wear
> body cameras, and for police uniforms on special operations to have 6
> inch high letters/numerals Identifying the officers number, they are
> too anonymous, and able to do what they want.
>
> The large font police ID no. was a conclusion/requirement descision
> come to after the Seattle riot police assaulted people in a bar.

Police should wear body cameras all the time they are out of the
station.

On 5 Apr, 09:52, Oppressed Subject  wrote:
> Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
>
> If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
>
They always get away with it.

http://inquest.gn.apc.org/data_unlawful_killing.html
>
> Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson
>
>     * Mark Townsend and Paul Lewis
>     * The Observer, Sunday 5 April 2009
>     * Article history
SNIP

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
One man's democracy is another man's regime.

On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 15:14:04 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
 wrote:

>Police should wear body cameras all the time they are out of the
>station.

Alternatively, WE should be the ones wearing the body cameras!

MM

On Apr 6, 9:09 am, MM  wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 15:14:04 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
>
>  wrote:
> >Police should wear body cameras all the time they are out of the
> >station.
>
> Alternatively, WE should be the ones wearing the body cameras!
>
> MM

We have already seen where cameras have gotten us. More mistrust, more
surveillance and more bureaucracy. Has pervasive CCTV helped us?

The video DVH posted on police brutality must surely have been
captured on one of our nations' many CCTV cameras. Where is the
outcry? Where is the independent inquiry? Are the police being brought
into the dock?

Anyone should be in a position where if they are physically assaulted
by anyone from a high court judge, policeman to a yob they should be
able to pull out a gun and retaliate.

The UK is not in a position where more technology or laws will save
us. Rather, we are in a position where a paradigm shift in attitudes
is needed.

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 02:58:57 -0700 (PDT), Oppressed Subject
 wrote:

>On Apr 6, 9:09 am, MM  wrote:
>> On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 15:14:04 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
>>
>>  wrote:
>> >Police should wear body cameras all the time they are out of the
>> >station.
>>
>> Alternatively, WE should be the ones wearing the body cameras!
>>
>> MM
>
>We have already seen where cameras have gotten us. More mistrust, more
>surveillance and more bureaucracy. 

Is that because of more cameras, or is it because the cameras are all
operated by the state, the councils etc.?

I personally dislike the number of CCTV cameras which plague this
country. Recently though I've become more disturbed by the treatment
of ordinary people who want to take pictures. 

>Anyone should be in a position where if they are physically assaulted
>by anyone from a high court judge, policeman to a yob they should be
>able to pull out a gun and retaliate.

I'm not anti-gun ownership, but it'd take a lot to convince me that
the solution to the problems last week is for everyone to have taken a
firearm.

Equality when it comes to surveilance would be a good step - allow the
police to take pictures of protesters. Allow the protesters to take
pictures of the police. I think it would be very healthy to have cases
thrown out of court on the grounds that the police were allowed to
gather evidence but noone else was. 

On a side-note, the current fad for members of the public complaining
about photography is, I think, counter-productive. The authorities get
away with CCTV by claiming it reduces crime and that people's privacy
isn't infringed because the images are not generally available.
Private individuals or groups would have a hard time using the same
arguments to defend their photography - and so it seems to me that
things like the outrage at google for taking photos in the street is
seriously misplaced - the end result will be that the only legitimate
users of surveilance will be the police. Not a good thing.

"Gareth Erskine-Jones"  wrote in message 
news:t80kt45rmc7n95360hnjmrergmk2d47tv6@4ax.com...
> Private individuals or groups would have a hard time using the same
> arguments to defend their photography - and so it seems to me that
> things like the outrage at google for taking photos in the street is
> seriously misplaced - the end result will be that the only legitimate
> users of surveilance will be the police. Not a good thing.
>
I would like the Police to be under surveilance at all times.  If they were 
forced to wear small body-mounted cameras the buggers could be brought to 
justice for assaulting people.

On Apr 6, 1:32 pm, Gareth Erskine-Jones  wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 02:58:57 -0700 (PDT), Oppressed Subject
>
>  wrote:
> >On Apr 6, 9:09 am, MM  wrote:
> >> On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 15:14:04 -0700 (PDT), PeterSaxton
>
> >>  wrote:
> >> >Police should wear body cameras all the time they are out of the
> >> >station.
>
> >> Alternatively, WE should be the ones wearing the body cameras!
>
> >> MM
>
> >We have already seen where cameras have gotten us. More mistrust, more
> >surveillance and more bureaucracy.
>
> Is that because of more cameras, or is it because the cameras are all
> operated by the state, the councils etc.?

Granted most cameras ATM are operated by the government and its
appendages but if you accept that ordinary citizens can put as many
cameras as they want anywhere, then you also have to accept that what
is good for the goose is good for the gander with regard to the state
doing the same.

That said, as I believe in a minimal legal society, I don't think
there should be any regulation of cameras at all. Let everyone have as
many or as little cameras as they see fit. It may be that if everyone
respected each other because of the possibility of the other guy being
armed and there was a feeling of empowerment among the citizens to
intervene if they see a crime, then people might not feel inclined to
have the false sense of security that pervasive surveillance
engenders.

> I personally dislike the number of CCTV cameras which plague this
> country. Recently though I've become more disturbed by the treatment
> of ordinary people who want to take pictures.

I think this country's slide into a police state is both inevitable
and well underway. However I am of the age that I may well be no
longer around when the next generation picks up what we borrowed from
them. Not only have we messed up the economy with the biggest state-
sanctioned Ponzi debt scheme ever, we have also granted the government
way too much power for their own good.

> >Anyone should be in a position where if they are physically assaulted
> >by anyone from a high court judge, policeman to a yob they should be
> >able to pull out a gun and retaliate.
>
> I'm not anti-gun ownership, but it'd take a lot to convince me that
> the solution to the problems last week is for everyone to have taken a
> firearm.

For a start I think everyone would have been more measured and
cautious if they were aware that the opposing group was armed.

It is a fact that you only get massacres when there is a significant
disparity in capability between two (or more groups), such as one
being armed and the other being unarmed. Note that the police were
fully armed and armoured (and probably had firearm squad backup on
close stand-by) while the protesters could not even carry a tyre iron
or crowbar (legally).

Finally, do not be averse to situations when two troublemakers self-
Darwinise. It is the natural order of things.

> Equality when it comes to surveilance would be a good step - allow the
> police to take pictures of protesters. Allow the protesters to take
> pictures of the police. I think it would be very healthy to have cases
> thrown out of court on the grounds that the police were allowed to
> gather evidence but noone else was.

Why stop there? Equality should be possible at all levels beyond
surveillance. Equality in law (such as police not being allowed to
collude before cases, unlike us plebes) and equality in arms.

> On a side-note, the current fad for members of the public complaining
> about photography is, I think, counter-productive. The authorities get
> away with CCTV by claiming it reduces crime and that people's privacy
> isn't infringed because the images are not generally available.

Databases are only as good as the people operating them. It is child's
play to get hold of "sensitive" data if you either know the right
person or grease the right palms.

> Private individuals or groups would have a hard time using the same
> arguments to defend their photography - and so it seems to me that
> things like the outrage at google for taking photos in the street is
> seriously misplaced - the end result will be that the only legitimate
> users of surveilance will be the police. Not a good thing.

Introducing privacy laws and then policing them would add unnecessary
bureaucracy and tax to what is already a bloated system.

How about you tell your neighbour politely not to film you if you
don't film them? Or just build a high fence or grow a high hedge? Why
do you need laws against that?

Mr X wrote:

> 
> "Gareth Erskine-Jones"  wrote
> in message
> news:t80kt45rmc7n95360hnjmrergmk2d47tv6@4ax.com.
> ..
> > Private individuals or groups would have a
> > hard time using the same arguments to defend
> > their photography - and so it seems to me
> > that things like the outrage at google for
> > taking photos in the street is seriously
> > misplaced - the end result will be that the
> > only legitimate users of surveilance will be
> > the police. Not a good thing.
> > 
> I would like the Police to be under surveilance
> at all times.  If they were forced to wear
> small body-mounted cameras the buggers could be
> brought to justice for assaulting people.

No, it would result in the rate of failures from
these small cameras would go through the roof.

--

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 14:51:58 +0100, "Mr X"  wrote:

>
>"Gareth Erskine-Jones"  wrote in message 
>news:t80kt45rmc7n95360hnjmrergmk2d47tv6@4ax.com...
>> Private individuals or groups would have a hard time using the same
>> arguments to defend their photography - and so it seems to me that
>> things like the outrage at google for taking photos in the street is
>> seriously misplaced - the end result will be that the only legitimate
>> users of surveilance will be the police. Not a good thing.
>>
>I would like the Police to be under surveilance at all times.  If they were 
>forced to wear small body-mounted cameras the buggers could be brought to 
>justice for assaulting people. 

And of course you believe that ALL the cameras would be available,
intact, for the IPCC to inspect, yes?

MM

"MM"  wrote in message 
news:rpkkt4d3lgr46g4tmad1k72sm4uvo6u9kn@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 14:51:58 +0100, "Mr X"  wrote:
>
>>
>>"Gareth Erskine-Jones"  wrote in message
>>news:t80kt45rmc7n95360hnjmrergmk2d47tv6@4ax.com...
>>> Private individuals or groups would have a hard time using the same
>>> arguments to defend their photography - and so it seems to me that
>>> things like the outrage at google for taking photos in the street is
>>> seriously misplaced - the end result will be that the only legitimate
>>> users of surveilance will be the police. Not a good thing.
>>>
>>I would like the Police to be under surveilance at all times.  If they 
>>were
>>forced to wear small body-mounted cameras the buggers could be brought to
>>justice for assaulting people.
>
> And of course you believe that ALL the cameras would be available,
> intact, for the IPCC to inspect, yes?
>
Yes.  They would transmit and the recording station would be run by someone 
other than the Police.

DerekF wrote:
> Remember Blair Peach?
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/27/newsid_3023000/3023595.stm
> Derek
> 

Well, the difference in this case is that the victim was not involved in 
fascist activities, unlike Blair peach.

-- 
Moving things in still pictures!

On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 01:52:21 -0700 (PDT), Oppressed Subject
 wrote:

>Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
>
>If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
>
>
>Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
>
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson


There is now  a video of the incident on the Guardian site:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/07/video-g20-police-assault

Judith Smith wrote:
|| On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 01:52:21 -0700 (PDT), Oppressed Subject
||  wrote:
||
||| Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
|||
||| If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
|||
|||
||| Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
|||
||| http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson
||
||
|| There is now  a video of the incident on the Guardian site:
||
|| http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/07/video-g20-police-assault

Absolutely disgusting behaviour from the lying cowardly cunts.

-- 
Rob

"Judith Smith"  wrote in message 
news:qc5nt495ms2glo4mn6qeur7lfk8049j4ir@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 01:52:21 -0700 (PDT), Oppressed Subject
>  wrote:
>
>>Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
>>
>>If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
>>
>>
>>Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
>>
>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson
>
>
> There is now  a video of the incident on the Guardian site:
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/07/video-g20-police-assault
>
>
Disgusting.  Send the cunt to jail where be belongs.  Such a thug shouldn't 
be on the streets.

On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:05:59 +0100, Judith Smith
 wrote:

>On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 01:52:21 -0700 (PDT), Oppressed Subject
> wrote:
>
>>Interesting and worth keeping tabs on developments.
>>
>>If true, who wants to wager on a whitewash?
>>
>>
>>Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
>>
>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson
>
>
>There is now  a video of the incident on the Guardian site:
>
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/07/video-g20-police-assault

Looks really bad for the police. The footage was on C4 News.

MM