Plod in top gear
Two weeks to ask for CCTV from a major crime scene? And then it seems to have needed Channel 4 to give them a good prod.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission has admitted there could be CCTV footage of the moments before Ian Tomlinson was struck by police officers shortly before he suffered a fatal heart attack. Last week Nick Hardwick, head of the IPCC, said there was no CCTV footage of the incident during the G20 protests and there were …
Two weeks to ask for CCTV from a major crime scene? And then it seems to have needed Channel 4 to give them a good prod.
It's not exactly fair to call this a U-turn (or to call the officer a liar), he was right in so much there were no government CCTVs and he wouldn't exactly know if private businesses would have CCTV pointing into the street that could've caught the incident.
Rather than nitpicking over everything and getting scores of conflicting reports from videos, witnesses, police and family members just wait for the report, then react to that. It didn't exactly help with the Demenzies enquiry having the press obsessively reporting on any and all information they could come across.
I'm already suspicious at the story that it was just someone on the way back from work not bothering the police when there are two videos over an hour apart both showing him getting into bother with the police.
With no particular view on Mr Hardwick's competence I would ask why did he make such a definitive statement that would have been so easy to check. Could we also have an assurance from the IPCC that THEY will collect this CCTV evidence and not members of the very group they are supposed to be investigating.
Either that email took over a week to get through to your source or the 'Major Investigation Team' are imposters.
Hasn't anyone told the City of London police that they've been taken off the case by the IPCC?
No CCTV? Is that a coincidence? or did the officer have a good look around for cameras before whacking said innocent bystander.
I bet they knew there was none on the tube as well before making swiss cheese out of brazillian electrician.
I dont care if they have a uniform, most of the Met seem to be thugs looking for a fight.
....Wait, there is a knock at the door...
Slightly disingenuous of the IPCC to say there were no CCTV's in the area in the first place, wasn't it? Given the particular area, it's London and the foot soldiers would be lying through their back teeth in an effort to cover up before they knew about the camvid.
If that punter (hallowed be his name) had been spotted taking the video, what's the betting the police would have tried to confiscate it 'under the Terrorism Act' and if he'd resisted would have assisted him down some convenient stairs?
This is going to run and run and I really really hope that the shite sticks to everyone of those lying bastards in 'authority'.
He was claimed to have been drunk and uncooperative, so did his post-mortem show he was drunk or not?
I seem to remember people saying the Brazilian Menenez, who was shot by the police, jumped the barriers, (which was false), and was wearing a padded coat on a hot day (also false), and was an illegal immigrant (false). It appeared to me that he was being smeered deliberately.
So as soon as I see comments that seek to shift the blame to the victim in a similar case, I immediately want to check those comments.
If that was a normal, low-profile crime secne they probably wouldn't go to the effort. 2 weeks is a damn good response time by plod's standards, the irony being they'll recover footage that'll later dissapear or be rendered inadmissable to protect the guilty parties.
Mine's the one with Conspiracies & Cynicism 101 in the pocket
Oh so the IPCC put their eyes up the sky and realised that the City IS covered by CCTV; and I was convinced that I finally found a CCTV free spot :-( CCTV in Bank, I still can't believe it!
I suspect that Corporation of London tapes have already been destroyed (you remember their cameras are 20 lines too short to be legal and "had to be turned off" just before the protest).
Now please read the mail carefully, it sounds a lot like: "If you plan to need any police presence or help, or just plan NOT to be harassed, please reply to firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: I already have deleted any evidence against the police. PS: If you have the identity of the NY trader/terrorist that committed the offence of filming us (sect. 76), please call us in confidence"
There are eye witness accounts on some of the independent media sites of police trying to get people to erase pictures from cameras/phones before allowing them out of 'kettled' areas such as the ill fated climate camp.
Note - despite being arranged in advance with the met and remaining peaceful to the end, the climate camp got baton charged by police anyway. they just waited till after midnight to do it, to avoid the bulk of mainstream media scrutiny.
Yup, nothing like having your picture taken as you lob that chair through the window of RBS to "intimidate". Didn't realise El Reg's editorial leanings had shifted to Spartist...
That comment was ridiculous from the start - I can't believe there is a single square inch of the Square Mile that isn't covered by at least 2 cameras!
people have so little faith in "the system".
Could it be because the current "system" appears to be rotten to the core.
Had it been a copper that had been beaten and died the "protesters" would have been banged up days ago... now the first cover up didnt work, they need to seize the tapes and destroy them to make their story hang together...
Look out for job adverts calling for extensive experience of Photoshop...
Mines the one with the built in balaclava and id numbers removed.....
Can they not just Fast-Forward to the time of the assault?
Paris' assault beings at 2:34.
So, you have a police force that was widely criticised for its tactics during the event, including unprovoked attacks that led to the death of an innocent member of the public ... and the IPCC is allowing them to go around London collecting private CCTV tapes that may be relevant to an investigation of the tactics used ??
Im sure its OK, they wont lose any tapes. No gaps .. and if they find any potentially damaging evidence, i have every confidence they will pass it over promptly and bring it to the attention of the IPCC.
I really do feel so much safer these days with the wonderful way our security services are run, and I for one welcome our new Taser-equipped overlords.
Yeah - & Jean Charles de Menezes was wearing a puffer jacket, running & jumped the barrier...
Best guess here is that they hope the tapes have been erased already...
er.. actually if I'm not mistaken that was all covered by the news camera's, not the police ones. The police used the news camera captures to work out whodunnit.... In fact if you look there's about 2-3 protesters surrounded by camera's, seems the media were more interested in something like that happening then helping stop it....
not that the media would ever do that obviously...
He made a ridiculous claim that no body had verified and yet was easily verifiable. That claim may display bias if not indicate an initial, perhaps ongoing, coverup. That is certainly indicated by his initial choice to subcontract the investigation to the City of London police, despite their officers being involved.
We need an independent public inquiry into police culpability in the death of Mr Tomlinson and a second such inquiry into police tactics at protests.
...they need to make sure it gets published to t'internet before the IPCC or plod get their sweaty little hands on it.
Anyone who knows anyone who might be considering handing over a relevant tape should make sure there are at least two copies before handing one to the police. The copies may not need to be evidence-quality certified copies, they just need to be good enough to worry Plod that they may be looking at a harder time than they had expected.
Thanking you in advance for your co operation,
Ministry of Truth.
Is this how evidence is gathered now - SEIZURE?
What the heck is going on with things that they have gotten to this point?
And there's absolutely NO CHANCE that the chair-wielding culprit was a plant, is there. Christ, you Brits are thick.
"Im sure its OK, they wont lose any tapes. No gaps .. and if they find any potentially damaging evidence, i have every confidence they will pass it over promptly and bring it to the attention of the IPCC."
Agreed. Just like the tapes of Leppings Lane at Hillsborough 20 years. Or did they disappear from a locked room, I forget which.
I've seen this sort of thing before and the video footage that was released and running on the mainstream media a lot, only seems to actually cover the event from when the man was pushed over. I want to see the footage before hand to make sure he wasn't actually causing the police any hassle.
This reminds me of a picture of the poll tax riots one of my lecturers showed us to point out the power of a picture (edited or otherwise). First off it looks like a crusty protestor is hanging onto a street railing whilst being pulled away by police, a woman is on the other side of the railing and looks like she is shouting at the protester, she's well dressed and looks a notch above middle class. When the full picture was actually reveiled she was shouting at the police to leave the fellow protestor alone as she thought the police we're being heavy handed.
We seemed to have breed a society that's quick too make a judgement on an image/video, yet by todays standards of technology they are the easiest to edit for a purpose, yet we still judge.
OK, so lets start with this one (it is the camera pointing in the direction of where he was turned away by the police as he first tried to get home)
Is that blurred thing on the street light a CCTV? That would point at the street where he got the first clubbing:
This one may have some extra info:
As may this one:
Plus of course, ever single video recorded by NETCU should be seized.
City of London Police are investigating this themselves?
Oh that'll be completely transparent and impartial then won't it?
No wonder nobody has any respect for the police nowadays :-(
wow that word pisses me off and i'm not even one of the poeople sitting on this tape.
surely a *request* would turn up related material? the only time i think "seizure" would a real option is if the tapes were somewhere a bit dodgy like met headquarters or the ipcc.
"please make contact immediately in order that your seizure can be prioritised."
Bit of a Freudian slip, methinks. Surely "securing" the evidence would be more appropriate. Unless the intention is actually to make sure that the police are the only ones who are allowed to have the video tape/disk/file?
I sincerely hope that anyone in possession of CCTV footage make sure they make their own copy before providing a copy to the police. As many people have pointed out here before, the police don't have a very good track record when it comes to such footage.
I too was pissed off by the use of the word "seizure". Funny what the perception of absolute power does! I wonder what would happen if one of the data controllers of the relevant CCTV systems refuses to hand over the relevant footage.
BTW - most modern CCTV systems are disk based, so hopefully those having their CCTV systems 'seized' can provide a DVD of the relevant footage (and keep a spare or two) without the whole thing being grabbed and destroyed!
I actually think the head of the ipcc did quite a good interview. He was open and actually answered the questions put to him by the channel 4 reporter. He obviously believed at the time that there were no cctv, perhaps he meant non state run cctv.
If the public and media keep reacting like this evreytime someone is wrong in all good faith then is it any wonder politicians never answer any questions and there are jobs in "media training" that is basically teaching how to lie.
Also to the point about him apearing drunk perhaps in the early stages of a heart attack and his brain was lacking proper blood flow he may appear agressive & confused.
The police have been forced to apologise for preventing press photographers covering a police charge against demonstrators.
(note also the bit at the end about allegations police used the Terrorism Act to force photographers to delete images of officers)
Oh, and the NUJ have recorded at least six instances of beatings and unlawful detention against journalists and photographers.
Still, as far as the IPCC's concerned there's absolutely no problem in letting the same force whose officers tried to prevent the press gathering evidence of abuse, gathering evidence of abuse from CCTV footage.......
....they will be able to dish up some highly dubious incredibly low res poorly fabricated footage of Ian Tomlinson `shouting abuse at officers` or `causing trouble` - just as we `saw` `three` terrorists walking into the underground on 7/7, no doubt.
He said they scoured the area for evidence.
Later in the interview he tries to maake out that he has watched the CCTV evidence. The interviewer gets him to clarify that they only have the amature video, which is entirely a different thing.
OK, so he is yet another incompetant person in an important position.
More like he is pretty competant but he is up against some pretty competant opposition. We now have google street view and it's easy enough to walk down there yourself and scoure the area for CCTV cameras.
By the way, the Police Officer reminded me of Peter Pan, being that it's like a woman playing the role of a man.