F*cking Old Bill get Away With It Again!!!!

[northbankbren]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11015705

The pathologist at the heart of the decision not to prosecute over the death of a man at the G20 protests should not have been registered to investigate suspicious deaths.

Dr Freddy Patel, 63, appeared on a Home Office register despite failing to meet its criteria, the BBC has learned.

Ian Tomlinson collapsed and died minutes after being pushed by a police officer. Dr Patel said he died from coronary artery disease.

But two other doctors disagreed.

Instead, they concluded that newspaper seller Mr Tomlinson, 47, had suffered internal bleeding, probably from his own elbow hitting his liver after he was pushed to the ground.

In July, the Crown Prosecution Service said it could not bring a charge of manslaughter against PC Harwood due to the conflict in evidence.

'Lone practitioner'

The Home Office Register of Forensic Pathologists is a list of doctors accredited by the Home Office to perform post-mortem examinations in cases of suspicious death.

To appear on the register, a pathologist must work alongside other pathologists as part of a group practice and they must have an official arrangement to work for at least one police force in England and Wales.

Dr Patel is currently the subject of a GMC fitness to practise hearing
Dr Patel's practice has not had an arrangement with any police force since 2004 and he has not worked as part of a group practice since 2006.

The Home Office Register is maintained by the National Policing Improvement Agency.

In a statement, the Agency said: "Although police and coroners are not obliged by law to instruct a forensic pathologist on the Home Office Register, it would be most unusual not to do so and could adversely impact on a prosecution."

The BBC asked the Home Office why Dr Patel had not been removed from the register when he did not meet the conditions of registration.

A Home Office statement said: "The requirement to be a member of a practice was introduced in 2006 as part of a programme of improvements. Safeguards were introduced to ensure those providing services to the police were maintaining the required standards.

"These would have identified pathologists who were working but not part of a practice. However, where a pathologist was not working for the police the safeguards would not have identified a problem."

Peer review

Dr Nat Cary, who performed the second post-mortem examination on Mr Tomlinson, said making pathologists work in groups meant their work was checked by their colleagues.

"People have to work in groups and this avoids the opportunity for baseline drift of people's practice. They also have to be involved in peer review, so checking one another's reports to make sure, in particular, that the evidence of fact is consistent with the conclusions," he added.

Continue reading the main story LISTEN TO THE REPORT ON RADIO 4You can hear the full report on Radio 4 on Thursday, 19 August at 2000 BST
The Report homepageDownload The Report podcast
Dr Patel was the first pathologist to examine Mr Tomlinson and concluded he had died from natural causes due to coronary artery disease.

Two other pathologists, Dr Cary and Dr Kenneth Shorrock, concluded at subsequent post-mortem examinations that Mr Tomlinson died from internal bleeding following an injury to his abdomen, in combination with cirrhosis of the liver.

In his first report Dr Patel recorded that he found three litres of "fluid blood" in Mr Tomlinson's abdomen. In a second report, produced a year later, Dr Patel used a different form of words, stating that he had found three litres of "fluid with blood".

The conclusions of the second and third post-mortem examinations depended on Dr Patel's initial findings. None of the fluid in question was retained by Dr Patel for later examination.

Director of Public Prosecutions Kier Starmer said the case collapsed due to "an irreconcilable conflict between Dr Patel on the one hand and the other experts on the other as to the cause of [Mr Tomlinson's] death."

Professor Sebastian Lucas, head of histopathology at King's College London, said Dr Patel's history meant he was unsuitable for a case so much in the public eye.

"It's a high-profile death and the pathologist appointed to do it was not up to the mark. Cases that are high-profile, with public interest, really do need to be done by people who will do a first-class job, the first time around, without second or third examinations.

"Dr Patel's track record doesn't include those characteristics."

Dr Patel is currently being investigated by the General Medical Council at a fitness to practise hearing.

He faces charges of misconduct and deficient professional performance in relation to four other cases unrelated to Mr Tomlinson's death.

[CraigPollard]

My personal belief is that the officer should have been charged with manslaughter.

Due to him being a police officer he got away with these charges.

If you or I had done that, we would have been charged with manslaughter.

Thats not the case.
As has been covered multiple times so far, the post-mortem results were inconclusive, as a result, there is reasonable doubt surrounding the circumstances of his death.
Had you or I done this and there was the same level of reasonable doubt, then we would have been cleared of all Manslaughter charges.

As it happens, i have never been man-handled, battered, hit etc by a member of the police force. I put this down to 2 things, 1) general respect for the law enforcement officers of this country, and 2) never putting myself in a situation where this may happen.

With regards to this situation, there may be other things to consider that have not been reported. For example, if this guy was on his way home, was he taking his usual route? If he diviated from his usual route home, then he went purposely looking to be "Charlie big potatoes". If this was his usual route home, then having worked in London all day, he would have been more than aware of what was happening in the surrounding area and he could have taken preventative measures to ensure he didnt find himself in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Again, i dont know exactly where he lived, but had it been me, i would have avoided the situation completely. And had a copper asked me to move, i would have.
If he had no reason to be there.... why was he?

[northbankbren]

Now that its been passed as "unlawful" killing, he should be put up for manslaughter charges....if he doesnt get jail....than its pure injustice.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2011/ ... -live-blog

[OneBardGooner]

Now that its been passed as "unlawful" killing, he should be put up for manslaughter charges....if he doesnt get jail....than its pure injustice.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2011/ ... -live-blog

+1 abso fucking lutely

[northbankbren]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13519281

Pc to be prosecuted for death of Ian Tomlinson

A police officer is to be charged with manslaughter over the death of newspaper seller Ian Tomlinson during the 2009 G20 protests.

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer, said there was now a "realistic prospect" of convicting Pc Simon Harwood.

An inquest earlier this month returned a verdict of unlawful death on the 47-year-old.

Mr Tomlinson's family said they were "more than happy" about the decision.

The officer is due to appear before magistrates on 20 June.

The inquest heard Mr Tomlinson collapsed and died after he was hit by a baton and pushed to the ground by Pc Simon Harwood in central London on 1 April 2009.

'Conflicting medical evidence'

The officer said after the inquest he had not intended to push him over.

Pc Simon Harwood gave evidence to the inquest over three days
Mr Starmer said: "The difficulty facing any prosecution in relation to the death of Mr Tomlinson lies in the conflicting medical evidence about the cause of death. That difficulty remains."

But he said new medical evidence had been presented at the inquest, and the medical opinion of pathologist Freddy Patel had been tested in extensive questioning at the inquest.

He said this had allowed "a degree of clarity to emerge".

Mr Starmer said the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had taken the legal opinion of a senior barrister, Tim Owen, QC.

He said: "Taking the evidence as it now stands, we have concluded that, even with those remaining difficulties, there is now sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of successfully prosecuting PC Simon Harwood for the manslaughter of Mr Tomlinson."

Ian Tomlinson collapsed at the G20 protests in London two years ago
Mr Tomlinson's stepson, Paul King, made a statement on behalf of the family: "We welcome today's decision to bring a charge of manslaughter against the officer.

"We believe this is the right decision. What we have always wanted is to achieve justice for Ian and to show that police officers are not above the law."

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson said: "This is clearly a very, very serious matter for all concerned."

He added: "I have got to be very, very concerned at an inquest verdict that returns a verdict of unlawful killing involving, as the inquest did, one of my police officers.

"My sympathies continue to be with the Tomlinson family."

.........

Great news.