The person circled is the officer alleged to have pushed Ian Tomlinson. Looking at the whole photo various questions need to be asked;
- several officers are wearing balaclavas, why? It wasn't cold on the day and they are already wearing full riot gear helmets so why the need for the balaclavas? If protesters wear them - or masks or hoodies - they are asked why - the same applies to the police,
- the officer circled doesn't seem to be wearing his identification number on his shoulders, why? Without these how do we even know he a police officer?
- the various incidents took place outside the Bank of England and Royal Exchange. This is in the heart of the City of London where there are numerous CCTV cameras - both public and private. Either the CCTV cameras will easily and quickly establish the chain of events, or this will prove that the headlong rush in to CCTV cameras is a waste of money and false investment as they will either be looking in the wrong direction, been deleted, or not be of sufficient quality,
- since February is has been an offence to film or photograph a police officer in a manner that might be of use in terrorism. Thankfully public order law was used re these demonstrations but given the wide use of terrorism law - most notoriously used to seize the money in Icelandic banks and when I last looked Iceland wasn't a hot bed of terrorism - will such filming be allowed in the future? Without an American trader happening to film this incident we may never have known about it.
We are repeatedly told when new laws are introduced that "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." This also applies to police - more so as in the UK there is the tradition of policing with the consent of the people.
Overall, something smells fishy - and in the words of Blackadder "I'm not just talking about the contents of Baldrick's apple crumble."
This story "has legs" - watch this space - more is going to come out...
No comments:
Post a Comment