Morning:
8°c
We were wrong over CCTV, says police watchdog
Peter Dominiczak, Lucy Proctor and Kiran Randhawa14 Apr 2009
THE police watchdog investigating the attack on Ian Tomlinson minutes before he died at the G20 protests today did a U-turn over claims there were no CCTV cameras where the assault took place.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission has backtracked after first insisting there were no cameras to capture it on film.
After the Standard discovered at least six CCTV cameras in the area, it now says its investigators are looking through footage obtained from several cameras in Threadneedle Street near the corner of Royal Exchange Passage, where the 47-year-old was violently thrown to the ground.
The turnaround comes after the IPCC was accused of trying to sweep away evidence of police brutality with footage revealing Mr Tomlinson was attacked by a Metropolitan Police officer before he had a heart attack.
Critics have also accused the watchdog of being slow to react to claims that the man was attacked by officers, saying it launched a criminal investigation only after being given video evidence taken by a member of the public.
When the footage of Mr Tomlinson's attack was made public on Thursday, Nick Hardwick, chairman of the IPCC, said it took that long to start an investigation because there was no CCTV footage available. He said: "We do not have CCTV footage of the incident. There were no cameras where he was assaulted."
However, at least six CCTV cameras appear to be trained on the corner of Threadneedle Street and Royal Exchange Passage, where Mr Tomlinson came into contact with police. Today, the IPCC released a statement correcting Mr Hardwick's initial comments. A spokeswoman said: "At this point Mr Hardwick believed that he was correct - we now know this may not be accurate. There are cameras in the surrounding area."
Campaigners today criticised the watchdog's handling of the investigation. Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights group Liberty, said: "The clock is ticking for the IPCC. This is a body we want to believe in but they are not proving themselves capable. It appointed the City of London Police to investigate itself and that has been exposed as a shocking mistake.
"The IPCC's first big test was the Jean Charles de Menezes case and it failed that test shockingly. Now they have another chance and they better not fail this time."
Reader views (26)
"The vast majority of officers I'm certain are fine people?"
I am certain you are a prevaricator John Bailey.
Public Serpents populate every borough, you mole.
- Marilyn, Yreka USA, 15/04/2009 05:34
Report abuse
you may criticise anyone who writes up defending the police saying the next tiem they get the wrong perso I hope its someone defending the police here, But give em credit they foiled the 21/7 attacks
- Jack, london england, 15/04/2009 00:15
Report abuse
A friend of our family became a police officer in his early 20's but as he said he had missed the boat. The problem is his ideas of right and wrong were already set but his colleagues all joined when they were very young and were corrupted by the system so when he saw the sort of things they got up to he eventually could stand it no longer and he resigned in his third year, none of his complaints were taken seriously. He is white, male, heterosexual, from the same area as his colleagues, the only difference was his age on entry. The problem the police have, and it is a huge problem, is that soon absolutely nothing they do will be able to be hidden and then "the powers that be" will have to side with the public because if they don't they won't be "the powers that be" for much longer. A good start could be made by having older people join the police force to police the force as well as policing the public and at the same time only accept people into the police force who have had real jobs until they are at least 25. It is either that or disband the whole thing and start again. The UK police pound for pound are the worst value for money in the whole of Europe by a long way according to a recent study.
- John, Stonehaven, UK, 14/04/2009 21:15
Report abuse
Lets just hope that the next time our authorities decide to attack an innocent member of the public, it happens to M Farbiash, Highgate.
Your comments, especially about a so call non-person, sicken me.
- Lb, London, 14/04/2009 16:53
Report abuse
Maybe if it had been a bank-robbery and money were involved,then the Police would suddenly have CCTV footage?How can we trust and believe in them,when for years they (the Police) themselves act above the law and act continuously to protect one another?I look forward to the day of real Police accountability.
- Chris, Budapest,Hungary, 14/04/2009 16:43
Report abuse
No speculation needed. A police officer came up behind a member of the public who was walking in the opposite direction to the officer, shoved him to the ground, and backed away. Simple clear case of assault.
Had the victim been involved in the protest, there might have been some small justification that was not caught on camera. And the initial denial that there was any CCTV footage is also pretty suspect.
We are living in a country where a police officer can arrest someone because they feel like it, don't have to provide any real grounds for arrest, and don't get penalised for wrongful arrest. This can be anything from "I'm having a bad day, so I think I'll ruin yours too" to wearing a lout shirt in a built up area.
The vast majority of officers I'm certain are fine people. But just a few gits can cause a lot of problems for everybody. The job of the police force is to maintain law and order, not to make it up as they go along.
- John Bailey, London England, 14/04/2009 16:40
Report abuse
Of course the police were lying about the cameras.
The cameras are everywhere.
Oh, and the crime rate is... up?
- Trunk, US, 14/04/2009 16:01
Report abuse
In reply to H. Morgan; So you think that the violent shove and baton across the knees is in proportion to your perceived belligerence? The Police Officer hit him, pushed him violently to the ground and removed himself to at least 15 yards away before Mr. Tomlinson could see who was responsible- it looks from the footage like this officer did not have identity numbers on his shoulers. The other police officers should hang their heads in shame. They did nothing to help Mr. Tomlinson and did not reprimand or report their colleague. I have always said that the police will always look after each other better than they will ever look after us, the public they are supposed to protect.
- Bill S, Grays, Essex, 14/04/2009 15:36
Report abuse
We've just had years of boring bleating about that non-person Jean-Charles Mawotsit in Stockwell tube station. I suppose now we'll have years of pointless speculation about what really happened to this non-person. Enough already!
- M Farbiash, Highgate, 14/04/2009 15:36
Report abuse
Remember at Stockwell Station we were told there was no footage regarding Jean Charles de Menezes and that he jumped the barrier wearing a padded jacket and later the footage turned up showing he picked up a Metro went through the barrier and was wearing a jean jacket. cameras.
- Georgina, London, 14/04/2009 15:35
Report abuse
How can we be so naive about CCTV surveillance? Ian Tomlinson's death will be another run of the mill “death by misadventure” verdict. Is it worthwhile pursuing the matter at all? Remember Blair Peach's death on 23 April 1979? Just wait when the "Authorities" shut all of us up when "data mining" gets going and "kettling" becomes the order of the day. A fatal shove on the street will feel like a gentle pat on the back. Blair Peach wasn't a one-off. Tomlinson is now an unstoppable revival. St George's Day, 30 thirty years on, is still, despite the new technology, plus ça change plus c'est la même chose. Let's launch into mere hand-wringing empty rhetoric as usual and start a catalogue of the Peaches, de Menezes, Tomlinsons. The Tony Blair political heritage has made our street protests impotent gestures and our "liberty" defenders have grown old and toothless. The Police will keep our streets open only to consumers not citizens with chutzpatic GBrownesque bullying fundamentalist ferocity and self-righteous blessings. Ian Tomlinson was a citizen. Have we already lost our streets, then?
- Alastair Enwright-Singh, Golders Green, London., 14/04/2009 15:19
Report abuse
Innocent Man, Wrongful Death, Police Brutality, Coverup... My heart goes out the the family members & friends of Mr. Tomlinson. Because the "Crime" was commmitted by indiduals who are in fact supposed to "protect" individuals like Mr. Tomlinson, this makes the crime all the worse. Yes, it was a "difficult situation" and the police were under much "stress" however, don't they get training for situations such as this? This incident needs to be put under the MAGNIFYING GLASS and handled in a way that will allow the family & friends feel as though they haven't been totally disrespected & slapped in the face.
- Connie, atl, ga, 14/04/2009 15:17
Report abuse
The IPCC "independent"? Of what?
In all of my dealings with the IPCC they are more interested in covering the Police's tracks, than they are of conducting an "independent" enquiry.
- Reuben Camara, Morecambe UK, 14/04/2009 15:07
Report abuse
I'm sure that if Mr Tomlinson was pushed onto a double yellow line there would have been plenty of cctv footage,
- Mr S.Port, London, 14/04/2009 14:13
Report abuse
This smells very bad. CCTV footage must exist and it must include many police misdeeds on that day.
- Dave, London, 14/04/2009 13:31
Report abuse
In reply to the post from H Morgan - what ever happened before the incident, it was clear from the footage, that Mr Tomplison was asaulted, while walking away from the police cordon. It is extremely likely that this caused his death. There were a dozen of police officers watching and they did nothing. The police and the IPCC then tried to cover it and they are still trying to cover it. This is a big big story. I just do not understand why people are not talking about it.
- Kior Hassan, UK, 14/04/2009 13:31
Report abuse
The Metropolitan Police owed £75 for over 2 years to one of my client's for providing CCTV footage at Berkeley Square. I doubt they asking businesses to provide CCTV footage and agree to pay for it.
However, it leaves me baffled to learn that NO CCTV cameras were available to record any footage. Are we talking of some suburban derelect area or the street where Bank Of England stands?
- Londoner In Surprise, London, UK, 14/04/2009 13:03
Report abuse
The actions of the officer involved may have been justified - did anyone see the events a few minutes BEFORE the camera started rolling? There are a number of stories circulating about that, which may justify what happened next. Even without this, the camera is only half the story - why was he walking so slowly after being told to move? Was this perceived as being deliberately belligerent? How many times was he warned to move before he was pushed? There are many questions and the camera answers very few of them. Maybe people should wait until the facts are clear before damning the officer involved - even if it turns out to be an assault, to claim this caused a death is a gigantic leap.
- H Morgan, London, 14/04/2009 12:50
Report abuse
" This is a body we want to believe in but they are not proving themselves capable."
Quite right, the public actually want to believe in the police themselves but are mature enough to accept that mistakes can be made and so see the role of the IPCC as a check and balance.
The ethos of 'policing by consent' still prevails and is widely accepted, partly because an organisation like the IPCC exists to investigate the police, in this way they complement rather than confront the police. This is similar to the way an auditor can give a clean bill of health to a company after an audit.
The IPCC is too important to be allowed to fail, as stated, having failed Jean de Menezes, they cannot fail Ian Tomlinson, the public need to know that they ar not a threat from the very police the want to protect them.
- Manny Goldstein, London, UK, 14/04/2009 11:53
Report abuse
Nnick Hardwick was in bed with the Home Office when he was at the Refugee Council but people gave him the benefit of the doubt. Now he's proving a dud at the IPCC. Time he 'moved on', as his political masters are so fond of saying.
- Jf, London, 14/04/2009 11:31
Report abuse
No doubt the CCTV footage has already been recovered and” accidently lost”. Assuming any new footage comes to light I have every confidence it too will be accidently lost. Why is it the only thing the bunch of unformed thugs who masquerade as a police force in this country seem to be efficient at is covering up their own crimes?
- John, London, 14/04/2009 11:27
Report abuse
I would suggest that Mr. Hrdwick reflect long and hard on his early comment that there where no CCTV images available; especially in consideration of how his comments serves to cast even more doubt on the reputation of the IPCC as being both rigourous and independent.
Further, it is clear that the many businesses in the area must have security footage of their own that will need to be gathered and assessed. I do hope that the Standard is able to use its influence to ensure this is accomplished.
- Rob, London, 14/04/2009 11:17
Report abuse
I find it hard to belive that not one cctv camera picked up this incident,The City of London square mile has cameras on every street,they have their own police force,and apart from their own cameras every bank or office in that area is covered by cctv.It does seem odd that this footage is not available,if the crime had been commited by a person without uniform i am sure there would have plenty of footage,but this looks like someone is hiding something they dont want the general public to see.
- Jim Ex Pat, London N.1, thailand, 14/04/2009 11:16
Report abuse
This is nothing new for people who have dealings with the police.
They love their precious cameras (as they clueless without them) yet if those same cameras show them acting in a criminal way, suddenly there are none in the area and the ones that are there do not work.
- Lb, London, 14/04/2009 11:12
Report abuse
Who believes the IPCC anyway?
Only the Police trust them.
- Mickyinlondon, london, 14/04/2009 10:59
Report abuse
The people who control CCTV always switch the things off when there's half a chance of their getting caught doing something they shouldn't. How many times have the security services or the police committed some egregious crime only to tell us "sadly, the cameras weren't working that day." I'm thinking of 7/7, the murder of Diana, various central London riots etc. The cameras never work in our favour - they only work against us.
- Neil M., london uk,, 14/04/2009 10:33
Report abuse
