Sutton RSS Feed


Carshalton G20 copper to face disciplinary proceedings over Ian Tomlinson incident


The police officer at the centre of the Ian Tomlinson G20 controversy will face disciplinary proceedings for alleged gross misconduct.

Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson announced to the Home Office Committee this week that PC Simon Harwood, from Carshalton, will face an internal investigation.

Pc Simon Harwood, a member of Scotland Yard's territorial support group, was filmed hitting the newspaper seller with his baton and pushing him to the ground during the protest on April 1.

The news comes after it was announced by Keir Starmer, director of public prosecutions at the CPS, that there would be no criminal proceedings over the 47-year-old’s death - a decision labelled as "outrageous" by Mr Tomlinson's stepson Paul King.

As Mr Tomlinson was walking home past the protests, through the City of London, PC Harwood police officers struck him on the thigh with a baton and pushed him hard in the back.

The push caused the newspaper seller to fall heavily to the floor and, because he had his hands in his pockets, he was unable to break his fall.

Although Mr Tomlinson was able to get back to his feet he then collapsed to the floor and died after unsuccessful attempts to resuscitate him.

Sir Paul told a meeting of the Commons Home Affairs Committee he was "disturbed" by the amateur video footage showing the incident.

He said: "It is right we move swiftly and it is also right that there is full public disclosure at the inquest."

The Met commissioner said it would be "entirely inappropriate" to comment on the decision by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) last Thursday not to prosecute.

He said the incident had "cast a shadow" on the professionalism of the overwhelming number of staff and officers involved in policing G20 event.

Mr Starmer said there was no realistic prospect of a conviction following a 15-month inquiry, because of irreconcilable differences between medical experts.

Len Jackson, of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), said: “We are pleased the Metropolitan Police has responded quickly to the file of evidence we provided them with on Friday. We welcome their proposal and await receipt of a formal letter from the MPS which will set out the full detail.

“We will examine the proposed course of action before agreeing how this should proceed and respond as swiftly as possible.”

Do you think the CPS were right not to prosecute PC Harwood? Let us know using the form below...

Comments(4)

Michael Pantlin says...
2:09pm Wed 28 Jul 10

Although greater charges could not be brought because of a conflict of medical evidence the assault recorded on the video must be addressed as now planned and thanks to the cameraman, media and public pressure for seeing it was not allowed to be ignored. That could have been me or you in the wrong place at the wrong time.

AlKnowsBest says...
5:54pm Wed 28 Jul 10

It is a real shame that the medical evidence was contradicted on this occassion as the case should have gone the full course and hopefully sent that clearly guilty policeman down for manslaughter. Now I suspect that the police officer in question would get a mere slap on the wrist or extended paid leave - Its one rule for us and a different one for the Police.

GR-London says...
12:02am Fri 30 Jul 10

Putting aside the associated loss of life, which is a tragedy, there is absolutely no way that it is acceptable behaviour to knock someone to the ground when they are walking away with their back to you and their hands in their pockets.

It seems to me that an unprovoked assault has taken place and if the authorities want the public to have any faith or trust in the police they need to deal with this accordingly.

mikehendry says...
3:25pm Thu 12 Aug 10

It is disgraceful that this local thug in police uniform, Simon Harwood, will (literally) get away with murder.

The decision not to prosecute Harwood is also disgraceful. He should have been charged with assault on the day the video was viewed. And certainly well before the expiry of the arbitrary six month deadline. The charge could always have been reduced or dropped later if further evidence came to light.

That this was not done is evidence of a deliberate attempt by the authorities to protect a murderous policeman. Why?

The conflicting pathology reports is also no grounds for avoiding a trial. Let the jury decide which pathologist is more credible.

This is a very black day for Surrey - a murderer walks free among us in Carshalton.


Picture: The Guardian Picture: The Guardian

Picture: The Guardian

Picture: The Guardian



Most popular


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses