Search This Blog

Saturday, 12 June 2010

Ring leader is not!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jun/11/g20-protester-harvie-brown-cleared

Jury acquits G20 protester accused of being ringleader in clashes

Crown court clears Harvie Brown of violent disorder in case that challenged police version of events

G20 protestor Harvie Brown
Harvie Brown suffered several injuries after police tried to 'kettle' protesters during the G20 demonstrations in London Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian

His bloodied face became the symbol of violent G20 demonstrators seemingly intent on attacking police. But the man whose angry remonstrations with police at the protests in April last year were relayed live on television news, and later emblazoned across newspaper front pages, was not the rioter he was depicted as.

A jury at Isleworth crown court in Middlesex took 30 minutes to clear Harvie Brown, 31, of violent disorder this week, in a case that challenged the police version of events and established that his injuries were probably inflicted by officers.

Brown was among several hundred protesters "kettled" by police near the Bank of England on 1 April last year. Attempts to contain anti-capitalist and green activists inside cordons led to angry confrontations and clashes.

Brown was caught between lines of baton-wielding police attempting to push the crowd back. Many at the front, including Brown, from Glasgow, were unable to obey the police orders as the agitated crowd behind them tried to surge forward. Many were struck with batons.

The court heard Brown's injuries – two head wounds and a broken tooth – could have been inflicted by police.

In court, Brown was accused of being the ringleader of an aggressive group of rioters, encouraging the crowd to attack police officers – a charge he denied. He faced three years in jail if found guilty.

Initial press reports suggested Brown was goading officers into a confrontation.

"I was shocked when I was released from the police station in the early hours of 2 April to see that I was plastered all over the newspapers and described as a violent agitator at the G20 protests," Brown said tonight.

"I was distressed that I was made out to be the aggressor. I was also very upset that the emphasis of the reporting, which I felt should have been on the demonstration against the causes of the financial crisis, had turned into a focus on what was described as anti-police behaviour."

Witnesses told the court that Brown spent much of the protest distressed and in tears, upset at police treatment.

Rhona Friedman, defending, said: "This was a prosecution that should never have been brought. Footage and photographs show that Mr Brown was repeatedly struck by police officers without resorting to violent retaliation. "Members of the jury were seen to flinch at footage of police officers deploying baton strikes against people in the crowd. When asked to decide who was guilty of unlawful violence and who was not, the jury could not have more clearly decided in Mr Brown's favour."

Despite initial claims by police about violence caused by protesters G20, there have been relatively few convictions for a demonstration of its size.

Seven people have so far been convicted of violent conduct, criminal damage and public order offences at or during the demonstration, including a handful who were identified as having taken part in the ransacking of a branch of the Royal Bank of Scotland. A further five prosecutions are pending, while five have resulted in acquittals.

Prosecutors dropped charges in their largest case, which involved 11 members of the Space Hijackers, an anarchist group whose members arrived at G20 protests in a tank, dressed in police-style helmets and boiler suits. The activists, some wearing red stockings, were arrested and charged with impersonating police officers. They are suing the Met for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment.

Friday, 28 May 2010

Danny Major - The police turn on themselves.


The case of Danny Major has been brought to the attention of WNOW.

-------------


We are Major family,Danny Major was a police officer who was set up by other police officers for an assault one of them commited.Dannys dad also a police officer was given cctv footage that proves Danny is innocent,and the curupt officers lied in court and in their statments.The police are furios with us for getting this cctv footage.We have had our eyes truly opened and are shocked that the police would sacrifice an innocent officer rather than do the right thing and send the guilty ones to prison.They are more interested in saving the reputation of West Yorkshire police than the truth.Anyone reading this can GOOLGE Danny Major and see a small amount of what they have done to this man and his family.WE WILL NEVER EVER EVER EVER give up untill the Major name is cleared.


--------------


I am so sorry to hear of your situation.

However, I utterly admire any who would stand against the wall of silence that too often occurs if misconduct takes place.

I have witnessed shocking behaviour from individual officers but for me the hardest thing to bear was the amount of officers that stood back and allowed it to happen and then by their inaction allow the misconduct to be justified.

"Evil is done by good men who do nothing."

It seems that Danny Major is a victim of this.

The WNOW campaign supports good officers by protecting them from spurious accusations. It seems that it is needed for such claims from within as well as without.

I will do some googling but if there is a way that I can support you, please let me know.

My thoughts are with you.

Zoe Mercer

------------------------------

More information can be found here.

http://www.freegordon.com/yhai//dannymajor.html

This case has made me realise that although many of the cases that the injustices that I have encountered must be hard to bear, it must be even more bleak if you are an officer yourself bearing the brunt of it.

The officers that criminalised me did not do so out of any personal reasons, they were merely protecting their own. (Although I understand this, it is not a condonable action still.)

The decision to sacrifice one officer over another is so much more calculated. There have to be personal reasons surely?

It is my impression that it is an extraordinary event no matter the severity of misconduct if an officer remonstrates in any way about the conduct of a colleague, let alone makes formal complaint.

The lack of such, should raise alarm bells, well it does in my mind at least.

In separate news, apparently it is an acceptable professional police standard for the police to put a man with mental health problems in a cell for 8 hours and then threaten to prosecute for several months only to drop the case due to no evidence.

All for giving them the finger with no witnesses.

The complaint result was utterly what I have come to expect. Inference of guilt without fair trial and cherry picking of facts in order to justify inappropriate use of powers. Absolutely no attempt to see the situation from the complainants point of view.

We will appeal.

Judicial Review Hearing


An hour has been allocated to hear the arguments for and against Judicial review with regard to the DVLA decision to revoke my husbands licence on the 14th of June.

We're not done yet :)

Wednesday, 26 May 2010

DVLA administer the punishment the Police could not.

Congratulations to the DVLA for revoking my husbands licence on medical grounds which are no way associated with, but 'discovered' after in depth perusal of his medical as a result of the Polices false allegation of Diabetes and Epilepsy.

It took a year and a single test that was not fit for the purpose.

Be warned, if you have ever told your doctor you are depressed, ever had a suicide attempt, used to have a drug problem no matter how long you have been in remission, have hayfever and take anti histamines in the summer or a plethora of other conditions, this could happen to you.

That is particularly scary when you consider that the DVLA have informed me that anyone can make an allegation, make up a condition based only on fiction, and that may trigger the Drivers medical unit into action. There are no consequences for doing so.

I won't go into detail about the how's and why's of the DMG's rational for the revocation, but we are not simply going to take the unfair decision.

Thanks to Scroobius Pip for his lyrics in the song, 'Get Better.'

'The system may fail you but don't fail yourself!'

So, we applied for a urgent consideration judicial review yesterday and the High Court in London.

Boy, that is not a process for the faint hearted!

I would really like to be a fly on the wall in that office when the paperwork drops on their desks :)

Thursday, 1 April 2010

Ian Tomlinson Memorial

Despite the increase in anxiety following the Smellie result, I attended the Tomlinson memorial in London this morning.

The tone was generally sombre and I am glad to say sensitively policed.

I'm glad I went in the end.

On a side note, I signed the letter enclosed in this link on behalf of WNOW.

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/apr/01/delroy-smellie-g20-assault

The video was is eventful and I noticed that the press were interested in the more vocal among the group. Apologies for the camera work. I was a bit rubbish in that department.



Friday, 26 March 2010

What planet is he on?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/mar/25/g20-smellie-fisher-assault-trial

The guy seems to be expecting credit for only using the back of his hand instead of his elbow. It doesn't even enter into his head using a non physical method of dealing with Ms Fisher.

"Asked about his suspension from duty last April, Smellie said he could not understand why he was not allowed to continue working. "It has been explained to me in a number of different ways but I still do not understand the reason for my suspension."

The man whinges on about being scared, to me he sounds paranoid and that frankly makes him dangerous in his line of work.

Lets not forget to point out that members of the group Smellie belongs to is voluntary. They choose to be there and perform those duties.

Am I missing some non disclosed danger here? Either from the little lady or those assembled to remember Ian Tomlinson, killed by the police the day before.

Oh and the pedant in me wonders why he is allowed to give a c/o address to the court. Can anyone do that?

Anyway, how this pans out will be interesting either way.

Thursday, 25 March 2010

Remembering Ian



What follows is an email that I received from the Ian Tomlinson Family Campaign. I have signed and intend to attend the memorial on the 1st.



Dear Friend,

We are writing to ask for your support. Ian Tomlinson died following an assault by police at the G20 protests on April 1st 2009. A year later his family are still awaiting a response from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) as to whether anyone will be charged for the assault and death of Ian Tomlinson.

The Ian Tomlinson Family Campaign has drafted a letter to the Director of Public Prosecutions [head of the Crown Prosecution Service] to express concerns about their delay in reaching a decision. We are asking individuals and organisations to show their support by signing this.

It would be greatly appreciated if you could read the letter (which is both attached and also pasted below this email) and let us know if you would be willing to add your signature to it by replying to iantomlinsonfamilycampaign@googlemail.com

Please indicate if you are signing on behalf of an organisation or in a personal capacity and reply as soon as possible, no later than 5pm on Tuesday the 30th of March. The letter will delivered to the CPS on the 1st of April and circulated to the media.

Additionally we would like to invite you to join the Tomlinson family in remembering Ian on the anniversary of his death on Thursday 1st April 2010,11.00am (assemble 10.45 am), Cornhill by Threadneedle Street, London, EC3V. The family will be holding a minute's silence, saying a few words and laying flowers at the spot where Ian died.

If you would like to discuss any aspect of this email please do not hesitate to contact me.

Thank you

Estelle du Boulay [Newham Monitoring Project - 0208 470 8333]

on behalf of The Ian Tomlinson Family Campaign

www.iantomlinsonfamilycampaign.org.uk


------
LETTER FROM IAN TOMLINSON FAMILY CAMPAIGN

1st April 2010

To the Director of Public Prosecutions,

It has now been one year since the tragic death of Ian Tomlinson during the G20 protests in the City of London on 1st April 2009.

Whilst we appreciate a fair and thorough investigation takes time, Ian’s grieving family has been left in limbo for a year waiting for a full explanation about the circumstances of Ian’s death. There is now very real concern as to whether the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) proposes to charge anyone in respect of the assault and death of Ian Tomlinson.

The CPS has been in possession of the provisional Independent Police Complaints Commission investigation findings since August 2009. We understand that these findings, at least in part will provide the basis for your decision on whether to prosecute anyone for Ian’s death. We also note that you, the Director of Public Prosecutions, went on public record in a Guardian interview on September 21st 2009 to say you hoped the CPS would reach a decision “within a few months”.

Delays in the investigation and charging decisions increase the suffering for families of victims leaving them unable to gain closure and move on with their lives. Families are greatly concerned not to prejudice the process and are therefore effectively silenced from expressing their views publicly about the death of their loved one. They are desperate to ensure any potential future legal proceedings are not undermined nor an excuse found to abandon any cases that might be brought. The Tomlinson family has endured a year of public scrutiny unable to respond to questions about Ian’s death, with little they can do but wait for the outcome of your decision. The delay however is now intolerable.

The policing of the G20 protest caused widespread public concern around use of excessive force by police officers. Proceedings against many protestors arrested on the day, as well as a number of reviews and investigations into the events of the day, have all been concluded. In the case of Ian Tomlinson, there is a heightened need for the statutory investigating body to be seen to be carrying out justice in a robust, transparent and timely manner to address public confidence. One year later the public, like the Tomlinson family, are still left with unanswered questions about how and why Ian died at the G20.

In the absence of any updates from the CPS, we have growing concerns about the investigation into Ian's death. There has been a complete lack of communication and transparency about the delay into concluding the investigation into Ian Tomlinson’s death that calls the CPS' credibility into question.

As we have already set out we do not wish to prejudice any investigation or potential proceedings but believe that either a decision or public explanation is due. We call on the CPS to fulfill its public duty regarding the investigation into the death of Ian Tomlinson and respond to this letter immediately.

Signed