www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-10723274

If the CPS bottle this one then any claim they have of being HONEST will have gone.

They have the VIDEO - they have a POST MORTEM = both show that he died from a push and teh internal bleeding from that push.

The OFFICER must be charged with his murder or manslaughter - otherwise we have another CPS / POLICE assassination.

What's the guessing ?

Not enough evidence ? LOL !

I'm afraid I'm with the CPS - he was clearly killed by the police but it clearly cannot be proved.
That's the law.
Look I can prove I was out of the country when one of my conviction crimes was meant to have taken place, The Government say it's not when but whether that matters. I say in cases of consent one day - even one hour - makes a difference.
But at the end of the day the law is the law. And, I submit, an ass.

In The Know wrote:
What's the guessing ?

Not enough evidence ? LOL !

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/football/71655.stm

I seem to remember that the Fulham supporter died after banging his head on the curb, following a punch from a Gillingham fan.

Well, if they had enough evidence to charge the guy in this story, then there should be enough evidence to support a prosection of this thug copper.

Disgrace.

Proof the CPS is BENT AS THEY COME.

BAN THE CPS.

Everyone who is facing a TRIAL should now WALK OUT !!! They should say even if there is CCTV evidence of them committing a crime the jury should find them NOT GUILTY.

This is the END OF LAW in the UK

The very end.

When you think of how little solid evidence they had against JK or myself it does make you so angry.
This guy was filmed in the act,and he's not even been officially sacked!

Thanks JK, you write:

"I'm afraid I'm with the CPS - he was clearly killed by the police but it clearly cannot be proved. That's the law."

Like you, I'm a big fan of the rule of law. The law proscribes both assault and misconduct in public office. The question of proof is weighed by the court. The function of the prosecutor is to bring before the court those against whom there is at least a prima facie case.

Is it your view that there is no prima facie case of assault and that whacking people on the back of the legs as they walk away and then shoving them violently to the ground is conduct becoming of an officer?

Best Wishes,
Jim

Jim wrote:
"I'm afraid I'm with the CPS - he was clearly killed by the police but it clearly cannot be proved. That's the law."

But whilever the police "control" the situation - and control who views / films / records it ... they will also always "control" the "evidence" (and what is allowed to emerge).

British Justice is DEAD. RIP

Evidence :

1. CCTV of a brutal assault on Tomlinson.

2. Eyewitnesses to this assault

3. Tomlinson struggles down the road and collapses.

4. Eyewitnesses to this as well

5. Tomlinson dies of internal bleeding

6. Eyewitnesses to this.

7. The MET POLICE claim he had a heart attack and dont mention the assault

8. Prima Facae case for PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE against the MET - with evidence from the press briefings

9. Post Mortem claims he had a heart attack - organised by the Police

10. Second and Third Post Mortems show he died from internal bleeding proving that the Police PERVERTED THE COURSE OF JUSTICE for a second time

11. CPS decide not to prosecute.

Therefore, surely a PRIVATE PROSECUTION Of this POLICEMAN is the way forward. I will give money to a fund if they decide to go ahead. Would you ?

It is time the EVIDENCE was presented in public. The CPS now represent the CRIMINALS in society not the people. This is now proved beyond any doubt at all.

Cases go to court on ALLEGATIONS alone - needing no medical or forensic evidence. This is wrong. Totally wrong.

The POLICE are bang out of order and so are the CPS. This could lead to RIOTS in the STREETS and more MOAT situations.

JK2006 wrote:
I'm afraid I'm with the CPS - he was clearly killed by the police but it clearly cannot be proved.
That's the law.
Look I can prove I was out of the country when one of my conviction crimes was meant to have taken place, The Government say it's not when but whether that matters. I say in cases of consent one day - even one hour - makes a difference.
But at the end of the day the law is the law. And, I submit, an ass.

I think the family would have good case for a private prosecution against the police and officer. Must be done..they just get away with too much.

Thanks BR, you write:

"Therefore, surely a PRIVATE PROSECUTION Of this POLICEMAN is the way forward. I will give money to a fund if they decide to go ahead. Would you ?"

I had the same thought. I was going to contact my lawyer friend and ask just feasible it would be. I think there would be a huge groundswell of support for it.

From what little I know, there are three considerations at least. Firstly, the crown has the power to take over a private prosecution and close it down if they find it to be in the public interest to do so. I don't think they would have the brass neck to close down this one though.

Second, the money you have to stump up includes costs if you lose and the judge awards them to the accused. These can be mighty considerable by most people's standards.

Third, who to prosecute? The identity of the assailant is being cloaked, is it not?

This whole thing just makes me sick to the stomach. I know I'm not the only one.

Best Wishes,
Jim

Sorry. Forget my third point. It appears the officer's name is PC Simon Harwood. I was wrong. It's not being cloaked.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson