PC Simon Harwood Cleared

It's all a load of Cannonballs in here! This is the virtual Arsenal pub where you can chat about anything except football. Be warned though, like any pub, the content may not always be suitable for everyone.
RoscommonGooner
Posts: 2182
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 11:01 pm
Location: Roscommon, Ireland

PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by RoscommonGooner »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jul/1 ... -tomlinson
Ian Tomlinson death: Simon Harwood cleared of manslaughterMet police officer cleared over death of bystander hit with baton and pushed to the ground

Footage from CCTV cameras, broadcasters, protesters and bystanders retraces the movements of PC Simon Harwood and Ian Tomlinson on 1 April 2009 Link to this video A policeman has been acquitted of killing Ian Tomlinson during G20 protests in London by striking the 47-year-old bystander with a baton and pushing him to the ground as he walked away from police lines.

The jury at Southwark crown court on Thursday cleared PC Simon Harwood, 45, a member of the Metropolitan police's elite public order unit, the Territorial Support Group, of manslaughter following one of the most high-profile cases of alleged police misconduct in recent years.

Harwood told the court that while in retrospect he "got it wrong" in seeing Tomlinson as a potentially threatening obstruction as police cleared a pedestrian passageway in the City on the evening of 1 April 2009, his actions were justifiable within the context of the widespread disorder of that day.

Speaking outside the court, the Tomlinson family said: "It's not the end, we are not giving up for justice for Ian." They said they would now pursue a civil case.

The jury's verdict, after four days of deliberations, brings about something of a legal contradiction: 14 months ago another jury, at the inquest into Tomlinson's death, ruled that he was unlawfully killed by Harwood. The inquest ruling was made on the same standard of proof as a criminal trial, that is, beyond reasonable doubt.

Neither jury heard details of Harwood's prior disciplinary record, which can only be reported now. This includes how he quit the Met on health grounds in 2001 shortly before a planned disciplinary hearing into claims he illegally tried to arrest a driver after a road rage incident while off duty, altering his notes to retrospectively justify the actions. Harwood was nonetheless able to join another force, Surrey, before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.

He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents.

The verdict will come as a huge disappointment to Tomlinson's family, following a saga that began when the father of four, who was stepfather to his wife's five other children, collapsed as he tried to make his way home through police lines. It followed a day of protests connected to the meeting in London of leaders from the G20 group of nations. He died shortly afterwards.

Tomlinson had been an alcoholic for some years and was living in a homeless hostel. It was initially presumed he died from natural causes, a conclusion supported by an initial postmortem examination, which gave the cause as heart failure.

But six days later the Guardian published video footage, shot by an American in London on business, which showed a policeman in riot gear striking Tomlinson on the leg with a baton before shoving him violently to the pavement, minutes before his final collapse.

Three pathologists involved in two further postmortem examinations said Tomlinson instead died from internal bleeding associated with his liver and consistent with being pushed to the ground. While the officer was soon identified as Harwood, prosecutors initially decided against charging him, changing their mind only after the inquest verdict.

The trial hinged on two key questions: firstly, whether Harwood's actions amounted to a criminal assault; then, whether they directly led to Tomlinson's death.

The first issue was simple, the prosecution argued: Harwood carried out "a gratuitous act of aggression", Mark Dennis QC told the jury. Harwood had recklessly abandoned the police van he was designated to drive to arrest a man seen writing graffiti on another vehicle. Humiliated when the man wriggled free, he opted to join a line of other officers clearing a pedestrian passageway by the Royal Exchange complex.

But in his evidence Harwood said he had been separated from his van by a threatening crowd before following orders to clear the passage. He insisted his actions towards Tomlinson were correct at the time, a version of events supported by two other officers at the scene called as defence witnesses.

The issue of cause of death saw the testimony of the first pathologist, Dr Freddy Patel, who reasserted his belief that Tomlinson died from heart failure, placed against that of Dr Nat Cary, who told the court that even a relatively small amount of internal bleeding would have caused death. The jury was not told that Patel has twice been suspended by medical authorities for mistakes in other postmortem examinations and is no longer on the Home Office's register of approved pathologists.

No police officer has been convicted for manslaughter for a crime committed while on duty since 1986.
A whole new can of worms could be opened. How could this info be witheld from the jury, surely it's relevant. If a civilian is up on an asault charge I imagine that any previous would be used in evidence against him/her :?

User avatar
Dan_85
Posts: 8607
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:09 am
Location: London

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by Dan_85 »

Indeed. If you or I had done what he'd done, with a prior record like that we'd be looking at a stretch inside you'd have to think.

Police above the law? Certainly looks like it.

User avatar
the playing mantis
Posts: 4798
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:36 pm
Location: EX

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by the playing mantis »

sorry no, look at the video, the blokes clearly being obstructive. just a terribly unlucky what happened to him. 99999 times out of 100000 he would have just got up with no issue.

police are damned if they do, damned if they dont. get criticised for being hands on here, and criticised for not being during the riots of the scum.

User avatar
flash gunner
Posts: 29243
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:55 am
Location: Armchairsville. FACT.

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by flash gunner »

the playing mantis wrote:sorry no, look at the video, the blokes clearly being obstructive. just a terribly unlucky what happened to him. 99999 times out of 100000 he would have just got up with no issue.

police are damned if they do, damned if they dont. get criticised for being hands on here, and criticised for not being during the riots of the scum.
Agree with this

Althopugh he does have a disturbing record :?

User avatar
Dan_85
Posts: 8607
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:09 am
Location: London

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by Dan_85 »

the playing mantis wrote:sorry no, look at the video, the blokes clearly being obstructive. just a terribly unlucky what happened to him. 99999 times out of 100000 he would have just got up with no issue.

police are damned if they do, damned if they dont. get criticised for being hands on here, and criticised for not being during the riots of the scum.
The guy's in the way (facing away from the police, completely non-confrontational) so you beat him with a baton and shove him to the ground?! No, you give him a tap on the shoulder & ask him to move to the side...

User avatar
olgitgooner
Posts: 7431
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:39 am
Location: Brexitland

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by olgitgooner »

Dan_85 wrote:
the playing mantis wrote:sorry no, look at the video, the blokes clearly being obstructive. just a terribly unlucky what happened to him. 99999 times out of 100000 he would have just got up with no issue.

police are damned if they do, damned if they dont. get criticised for being hands on here, and criticised for not being during the riots of the scum.
The guy's in the way (facing away from the police, completely non-confrontational) so you beat him with a baton and shove him to the ground?! No, you give him a tap on the shoulder & ask him to move to the side...
I can't agree with the "non-confrontational" bit. I've watched the video many times. The guy is slowly walking in front of the cops. Trying to make a point (in my opinion). I've done similar things in my time. The cop used excessive force. He reacted badly. It doesn't mean he wanted to harm him badly. Or kill him. It's the correct verdict.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HECMVdl-9SQ

User avatar
DB10GOONER
Posts: 62156
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland.
Contact:

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by DB10GOONER »

Usually I'd be on the Law's side in these things tbh. Too many scumbags get away with riotting etc. But the other video footage Sky news showed of that cop on the day, pushing over other people (including swinging a cameraman to the ground) and his record of road rage and discipline and previous assault accusations etc says it all about the cop. He was acting the thug as much as anyone there. The guy that was killed was stupid for acting the slow walking obstructive prick but he did not deserve to be shoved to the ground so violently - he was NOT being aggressive or threatening. They should have warned him to move away and then arrested him for obstruction if he refused - they had him outnumbered 6 or 7 to 1 so an arrest would have been relatively quick and easy.

Also, how the fucking cop was allowed to go on sick leave when being investigated, basically doing a runner on the charges, and then worm his way back into the Police is appalling. The fact he then ended up working in a high stress high risk unit like riot control with his record should see some senior fucker get sacked tbh. Absolute fuck up.

arseofacrow
Posts: 6173
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:06 pm
Location: Cologne

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by arseofacrow »

The guy was walking away, albeit slowly, with his hands in his pockets, He wasn't presenting a physical threat to the officer. This officer made it his business to be overly-agressive in a situation where it was not warranted. It's the same if you attacked a guy on the street with the same amount of force but, because of some quirk, the guy dies, you should still be liable to the punishment of manslaughter. You have taken the choice to use excessive force, therefore must take responsibility for the outcome.

I believe it was the wrong verdict.

skizz_b
Posts: 1857
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:26 pm
Location: LDN

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by skizz_b »

The twat came out of court smiling and laughing, says it all. He knows full well he got away with it.

MutleyGooner
Posts: 2645
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:39 am
Location: Living next door to my neighbours

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by MutleyGooner »

Unfortunately it is scum like Harwood that give the force a bad name and sadly there are so many like him. He's a thug in a uniform, typical of the weekend warriors that kick the fuck out of lads in high streets up and down the country week in and week out. They are as guilty of portraying anti social behaviour as any of the youth today. Take away the baton, body armour and pepper spray and you will find that most of these pumped up agressors are no more than sissy bitches who wear womens underwear and shove small rodents up the arseholes. Most plod are ok though.

User avatar
the playing mantis
Posts: 4798
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:36 pm
Location: EX

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by the playing mantis »

maybe if more plod were hands on there wouldnt be so much sh*t on the streets and people thinking they are untouchable because the police are scared to get involved for fear of prosecution???

im by no means pro police as i think the force has become something of a joke, look at the number of midget and fat coppers you get these days on the beat, how are they ever going to chase anyone down or tackle em to the ground

User avatar
Bradywasking
Posts: 6249
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 9:14 am

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by Bradywasking »

Just cannot understand how relevant information on the history of the accused can be held from the jury...surely there is a pattern in there that could be taken into account.

User avatar
OneBardGooner
Posts: 48123
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:41 am
Location: Close To The Edge

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by OneBardGooner »

The plod always look after their own....

There's decent/honest cops who try and uphold the law....

And there's lying cheating dishonest scum who enjoy kicking the shyte out of someone who can't defend themselves

This particular copper is one of the latter

He probably didn't mean real harm to this poor man, but Harm he did and he should be found guilty of manslaughter.

I couldn't and wouldn't do their job...But, if they can't do it 'properly and honestly' then get the f*ck out of it.

He has used every means available to him to avoid being found guilty.....he's scum.

RoscommonGooner
Posts: 2182
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 11:01 pm
Location: Roscommon, Ireland

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by RoscommonGooner »

I'm glad most people are of a similar opinion to me. A couple of things that really annoyed me about this case were

1) Relevant (in my opinion) information about the character of the PC was witheld fro the jury

and

2) How the fuck could he go sick from one job (in the Met) when he was under investigation and walk into another (Surry) and then back to the Met? Are there no background checks done when joining the police force?

User avatar
Dan_85
Posts: 8607
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:09 am
Location: London

Re: PC Simon Harwood Cleared

Post by Dan_85 »

olgitgooner wrote:I can't agree with the "non-confrontational" bit. I've watched the video many times. The guy is slowly walking in front of the cops. Trying to make a point (in my opinion).
The bloke had been drinking all day & was pretty fucking drunk by this point, he'd been an alcoholic for years. Stumbling, trying to find his way home with little to no comprehension of what was going on around him. Harmless.

Like I said, you don't beat a guy & shove him to the ground when he's in a state like that. Give him a nudge to the side & send him on his way...

Post Reply