Regarding the death of Ian Tomlinson during the G20 protests, reading this:
Nick Hardwick, chairman of the Independent Police Complaints Commission, gives the first interview about the death of Ian Tomlinson to Krishnan Guru-Murthy.
Hardwick said of the assault:
“We don’t have CCTV footage of the incident… there is no CCTV footage, there were no cameras in the location where he was assaulted.”
Speaking to More 4 News, the IPCC confirmed Hardwick’s comment, saying that the CCTV cameras overlooking the incident were not working.
reminds me of how, before the story of the police’s connect to Ian Tomlinson’s death came out, the police were talking about how good their CCTV coverage had been:
Commander Simon O’Brien, of the Met, said small pockets of criminals among the 4,000-strong crowd were to blame for the trouble yesterday…
“There were small groups charging forwards and backwards into police lines. It did seem to us, from CCTV and police on the scene, that they tried to find a way to ramp up the protest and hijack it into violence.”
O’Brien said police had collected footage from helitelly, the force’s nickname for CCTV from powerful helicopter cameras, adding that those identified should expect a “knock on the door”.
Ah well.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Conservatives are embarking on another purge
Why don't people use trains more?
Are Plaid Cymru serious about government?
How many councillors has Reform UK lost since the May 2026 elections?
Random thoughts
A few thoughts on Ann Widdecombe
David Evans
Paul Walter
expats
Ruth Bright
Russell
12 Comments
Funny how all the CCTV footage ofen seems to go missing when the police are/might be at fault isn’t it? 🙁
Redlands LibDems has an interesting piece offering a local perspective on the conflict between CCTV and the Police.
http://www.redlandslibdems.org.uk/2009/04/more-police-not-cctv-the-way-to-cut-crime.html
Excellent round-up, thank you.
Oh I see Mark, so you’re happy to discuss THIS aspect of the G20 protest evidence but you mysteriously ignore other evidence that doesn’t suit your agenda.
“there were no cameras in the location where he was assaulted” – has Hardwick visited the site or is he just meekly accepting what the Police have told him?
LFAT – well, you would say that, wouldn’t you?
Even if he did stand around drunk in front of a police van (and his family have admitted that he had alcohol problems) he does appear to have moved or been moved so that the van could proceed – and I don’t think anyone would argue particularly strongly about the police doing that, provided the force used was reasonable.
What wasn’t acceptable was the apparent shove in the back when he was moving away from the police, nor was the alleged beating he received subsequently. That did not appear to be reasonable force.
No mystery: how quickly or not he got out of the way of a police van previously doesn’t seem to me to excuse the direct physical action a policeman subsequently took against him. Moreover, the very fact that those policeman moved him out of the way without him ending up on the ground rather shows up their colleague’s subsequent behaviour as being unnecessary doesn’t it? And I notice you’re still plugging away quoting yourself as saying Ian Tomlinson was in “plain clothes” as if that someone helps explain away him being hit and pushed to the ground.
Given the police warnings about potential disorder during the protests did they not undertake a review of all the CCTV systems to ensure they were all working in advance?
LFaT,
what next? will you be telling Ian Tomlinson’s family that they should be glad to be rid of him? his death was his own fault? if he lived a healthier lifestyle etc etc?
The man is dead and it was completely avoidable for goodness sake.
That he wasn’t wearing a zegna suit, that he may have been drunk, that he was a millwall fan, that he may have been acting provocatively etc is all completely and absolutely irrelevant.
Nothing is more valuable than life itself. Every life is sacrosanct.
The direct cause of Ian Tomlinson’s death is utterly clear and anyone who even attempts to justify it should be ashamed of themselves.
How the officer in question is dealt with will be a testimony of this government’s attitude towards justice.
More than 100 officers were monitoring, over 3,000 CCTV cameras, in an area that was known weeks in advance so they had plenty of time to ensure the system was working.
Nick Hardwick, chairman of the Independent Police Complaints Commission, says “We don’t have CCTV footage of the incident… there is no CCTV footage, there were no cameras in the location where he was assaulted.”
This has now been amended to ‘the CCTV cameras weren’t working’.
De Menezes II.
The goon who killed Ian Tomlinson should be convicted of manslaughter and sat on a slop bucket.
What will actually happen is as follows:-
(1) His idenity will be protected.
(2) He will not be prosecuted.
(3) He will get promotion.
(4) He will be given a brand new apron and trowel.
Police mismanagement caused the incident
Police not prepared to admit they were at fault
Access to the scene restricted because of the police claim there was “fighting”
CCTV footage unavailable
Black propaganda unit engaged in supporting a cover up
All that happened 20 years ago