"Turning to the medical evidence, the coroner said the jury would have to decide exactly how Tomlinson died.
"[He] was more vulnerable than a normal person as a result of a number of factors" they include his diseased liver, his alcoholism, his input of alcohol that day and the condition of his left shoulder," Thornton said.
"But at the same time, the police officer [had] a duty to [protect] the more vulnerable, and also the mere fact that Mr Tomlinson was vulnerable cannot excuse the police officer from an unlawful act."
He reminded the jurors that they had heard two very different explanations of Tomlinson's death. Dr Freddy Patel, the Home Office pathologist who initially examined Tomlinson's body, had concluded he died as a result of a spontaneous heart attack, but other medical experts had suggested the cause had been internal bleeding. Patel had later made a number of important changes to his evidence.
"Is there a good reason for these changes which justifies and supports his original cause of death, or is his credibility as an expert witness no longer intact?" asked the coroner."
REPORTERS SAM JONES AND HAROON SIDDIQUE; THE GUARDIAN;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A thorough account of "The death of Ian Tomlinson" can be found on Wikipedia at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: If Dr. Freddy Patel had the last word, a 47-year-old newspaper vendor named Ian Tomlinson's death after he collapsed on the pavement on the fringes of protests at the G20 on April 1, 2009 would have been written off as "natural causes." However amateur video footage emerged showing him being pushed to the ground by a police officer who faces misconduct proceedings after an inquest beginning in March 2011 is completed. As noted on Wikipedia: "Ian Tomlinson (7 February 1962 – 1 April 2009) was an English newspaper vendor who collapsed and died in the City of London on his way home from work during the 2009 G-20 summit protests. A first postmortem examination indicated that he had suffered a heart attack brought on by coronary artery disease, and had died of natural causes. His death became controversial a week later when The Guardian obtained footage of his last moments, filmed by an American investment fund manager who was visiting London. The video showed Tomlinson being struck on the leg from behind by a police officer wielding an extendable baton, then pushed to the ground by the same officer. It appeared to show no provocation on Tomlinson's part—he was not a protester, and at the time he was struck, the footage showed him walking along with his hands in his pockets. He walked away after the incident, but collapsed and died moments later. After The Guardian published the video, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) began a criminal inquiry. A second postmortem indicated that Tomlinson had died from internal bleeding caused by a blunt force trauma to the abdomen, in association with cirrhosis of the liver. A third postmortem was arranged by the defence team of the accused officer, PC Simon Harwood; the third pathologist agreed that the cause of death was internal bleeding. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced in July 2010 that no charges would be brought, because medical disagreement about the cause of the death meant prosecutors could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there was a causal link between the death and the alleged assault. The first pathologist, Dr Freddy Patel, was suspended for three months in August 2010 for "deficient professional performance" in several unrelated cases." As the Guardian reported on March 19, 2011, Patel, who had been previously suspended for incompetence in a series of high profile autopsies, was found guilty of professional misconduct after failing to spot that a murder victim had been suffocated. He now faces being struck off the medical register. A disciplinary panel of the General Medical Council ruled that his "fitness to practise was impaired" because of his reluctance to consider asphyxiation in the murder case, the falsification of his professional CV, and his failure to redress previous professional shortcomings. The UK Press Association says that the inquest, "is likely to examine the actions of police, the pathologist, the coroner and independent investigators in the aftermath of Mr Tomlinson's death." The Goudge Inquiry into many of former Dr. Charles Smith's cases also examined relationships between pathologists and police - particularly a case in which Smith agreed to interview a woman, suspected of murdering her baby, at her home while fully aware that the home had been secretly bugged by the authorities. The inquest is expected to last six weeks. This Blog will follow it closely.
HAROLD LEVY; PUBLISHER; THE CHARLES SMITH BLOG;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The jury at the inquest into the death of Ian Tomlinson has been told it can return a verdict of unlawful killing, but only if it is satisfied the police officer who beat him with a baton and shoved him to the ground acted deliberately and illegally," the Guardian story by reporters Sam Jones and HaroonSiddique published earlier today begins, under the heading, "Ian Tomlinson inquest: Jury can return unlawful killing verdictCoroner says jury would have to be sure police officer's actions had been intentional and dangerous during G20 protests."
"Judge Peter Thornton QC, sitting as assistant deputy coroner, said the jury of six men and five women would have to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that PC Simon Harwood's actions had been intentional and dangerous during the G20 protests in central London two years ago," the story continues.
"Thornton said the jury could also consider verdicts of misadventure, death from natural causes and an open verdict. He said they would have to decide whether the 47-year-old newspaper vendor died from internal bleeding or a heart attack.
Although Harwood – a member of the Metropolitan police's territorial support group – initially claimed he had hit and shoved Tomlinson because he was "being defiant" and "encroaching" on a police line. But he conceded this was not the case when confronted with footage of the encounter.
"PC Harwood said that [Tomlinson] was not a threat to him or any other officer," said the coroner in his summing-up. "In evidence PC Harwood said his perception at the time was significantly different to what the CCTV camera footage shows …
"s his perception, as he puts it, an honest mistaken perception of events, or is it an untruthful account of events put forward as a deliberate lie to try to excuse his actions? You will have to decide."
Thornton asked the jury to consider whether the force used in either the baton strike or the subsequent push was reasonable or excessive and illegal.
"If you are sure that either a heart attack caused by stress from the baton strike and/or the fall or [an] injury from the push or fall causing internal bleeding were proved, you would find [one of the requirements for unlawful killing] proved," he said.
Turning to the medical evidence, the coroner said the jury would have to decide exactly how Tomlinson died.
"[He] was more vulnerable than a normal person as a result of a number of factors" they include his diseased liver, his alcoholism, his input of alcohol that day and the condition of his left shoulder," Thornton said.
"But at the same time, the police officer [had] a duty to [protect] the more vulnerable, and also the mere fact that Mr Tomlinson was vulnerable cannot excuse the police officer from an unlawful act."
He reminded the jurors that they had heard two very different explanations of Tomlinson's death. Dr Freddy Patel, the Home Office pathologist who initially examined Tomlinson's body, had concluded he died as a result of a spontaneous heart attack, but other medical experts had suggested the cause had been internal bleeding. Patel had later made a number of important changes to his evidence.
"Is there a good reason for these changes which justifies and supports his original cause of death, or is his credibility as an expert witness no longer intact?" asked the coroner.
Although the jury had been told that Patel had been removed from the Home Office register of experts and is suspended for failings in cases unrelated to Tomlinson's death, Thornton urged them to "not put this aspect of the case out of all proportion".
He reminded the jury that no one was on trial. "There is no indictment, no criminal charge – it is simply a way of establishing facts," he said.
"Come to your decision coolly and calmly and on the evidence. Your duty is to find the facts and conclude from the evidence, and from nothing else."
The inquest is expected to retire next Tuesday to consider its verdict."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The story can be found at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/28/ian-tomlinson-inquest-jury-verdict?INTCMP=SRCH
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
For a breakdown of some of the cases, issues and controversies this Blog is currently following, please turn to:
http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=120008354894645705&postID=8369513443994476774
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;
