 |
| Ian Tomlinson tries to find a way past police at the G20 protests shortly before his death in April 2009. Photograph: City of London Coroner's Court/PA |
A senior Metropolitan police officer was "reckless" in his conduct by misleading two pathologists over the possible cause of Ian Tomlinson's death, the police watchdog has ruled.
Detective Inspector Eddie Hall, the most senior Met officer involved in the Tomlinson inquiry, was investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission after it emerged he told two forensic experts Tomlinson had fallen to the ground in front of a police van before the newspaper seller came into contact with PC Simon Harwood.
In his defence, Hall said an IPCC investigator had told him Tomlinson had fallen in front of a van. The IPCC investigator, Chris Mahaffey, denied this.
Hall's claim was formally relayed to two pathologists charged with finding a cause of 47-year-old Tomlinson's death at the G20 protests in London.
Video footage showed Tomlinson being struck with a baton and violently pushed from behind on 1 April 2009 on Royal Exchange Buildings.
An inquest jury found last week that Tomlinson was "unlawfully killed" by the police officer, and died from internal bleeding as a result of injuries sustained by the push.
Jurors heard evidence from four pathologists, including Dr Ken Shorrock, one of the pathologists formally instructed by Hall on behalf of the Met at St Pancras mortuary on 22 April 2009.
The police officer told Shorrock that Tomlinson had been seen to fall to the ground on Lombard Street, minutes before the newspaper seller came across Harwood. The same information was supplied to Dr Ben Swift, the pathologist instructed by Harwood, who was also present during the examination.
Tomlinson did walk on to Lombard Street as he tried to find a route home through the G20 protests and was forcefully escorted out of the road by police officers. But there was no evidence that even suggested he fell to the ground.
Releasing the findings of its inquiry, the IPCC confirmed that "misinformation was supplied by the police to the pathologists". It said there was never any evidence to suggest Tomlinson fell to the ground in front of a van on Lombard Street.
Investigators found that while Hall did not "intentionally mislead" the pathologist, his erroneous briefing jeopardised the investigation, inquest and possible prosecution. "He did so based on what he believed to be the case at the time but he should have ensured he relayed factual information rather than his interpretation of the facts," the report said.
The inquest jury was told to ignore part of Shorrock's report in which he said he could not rule out that the fall in Lombard Street had resulted in the fatal internal bleeding.
The Met said in a statement: "The report concerning information supplied to the pathologists by an MPS [Metropolitan police service] officer found that although incorrect information was given, this was an honestly held belief and there was no evidence of intent to mislead and no lasting damage to the investigation."
Tomlinson's family responded by the report by releasing extracts from a letter the IPCC sent to a top-ranking Met officer in March this year. In the letter, the IPCC said there was a "total lack of evidence" for the fall reported by Hall.
"There is no evidence of any kind to suggest that Ian Tomlinson fell in front of a van," the letter said. "No media footage portrays a fall; it was not said in any Gold Group [a forum designed to 'add value to the response to an internal or external critical incident'] meeting; no investigator workbook documents that there was a fall, there is no email traffic revealing such a view and there is no witness evidence that he fell in front of a van."
In a separate development, the Guardian revealed on Monday that senior police were told within 48 hours of Tomlinson's death that police witnesses had seen him being pushed to the ground by Harwood.
The three constables who witnessed the assault did not recognise Harwood, but the significance of their information was instantly realised and passed on to City of London police investigators.
The IPCC is now investigating why City of London failed to pass the information on to its own officials, the coroner, the pathologist, the family or the media.
9 May 2011
Detective Inspector Eddie Hall, the most senior Met officer involved in the Tomlinson inquiry, was investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission after it emerged he told two forensic experts Tomlinson had fallen to the ground in front of a police van before the newspaper seller came into contact with PC Simon Harwood.
In his defence, Hall said an IPCC investigator had told him Tomlinson had fallen in front of a van. The IPCC investigator, Chris Mahaffey, denied this.
Hall's claim was formally relayed to two pathologists charged with finding a cause of 47-year-old Tomlinson's death at the G20 protests in London.
Video footage showed Tomlinson being struck with a baton and violently pushed from behind on 1 April 2009 on Royal Exchange Buildings.
An inquest jury found last week that Tomlinson was "unlawfully killed" by the police officer, and died from internal bleeding as a result of injuries sustained by the push.
Jurors heard evidence from four pathologists, including Dr Ken Shorrock, one of the pathologists formally instructed by Hall on behalf of the Met at St Pancras mortuary on 22 April 2009.
The police officer told Shorrock that Tomlinson had been seen to fall to the ground on Lombard Street, minutes before the newspaper seller came across Harwood. The same information was supplied to Dr Ben Swift, the pathologist instructed by Harwood, who was also present during the examination.
Tomlinson did walk on to Lombard Street as he tried to find a route home through the G20 protests and was forcefully escorted out of the road by police officers. But there was no evidence that even suggested he fell to the ground.
Releasing the findings of its inquiry, the IPCC confirmed that "misinformation was supplied by the police to the pathologists". It said there was never any evidence to suggest Tomlinson fell to the ground in front of a van on Lombard Street.
Investigators found that while Hall did not "intentionally mislead" the pathologist, his erroneous briefing jeopardised the investigation, inquest and possible prosecution. "He did so based on what he believed to be the case at the time but he should have ensured he relayed factual information rather than his interpretation of the facts," the report said.
The inquest jury was told to ignore part of Shorrock's report in which he said he could not rule out that the fall in Lombard Street had resulted in the fatal internal bleeding.
The Met said in a statement: "The report concerning information supplied to the pathologists by an MPS [Metropolitan police service] officer found that although incorrect information was given, this was an honestly held belief and there was no evidence of intent to mislead and no lasting damage to the investigation."
Tomlinson's family responded by the report by releasing extracts from a letter the IPCC sent to a top-ranking Met officer in March this year. In the letter, the IPCC said there was a "total lack of evidence" for the fall reported by Hall.
"There is no evidence of any kind to suggest that Ian Tomlinson fell in front of a van," the letter said. "No media footage portrays a fall; it was not said in any Gold Group [a forum designed to 'add value to the response to an internal or external critical incident'] meeting; no investigator workbook documents that there was a fall, there is no email traffic revealing such a view and there is no witness evidence that he fell in front of a van."
In a separate development, the Guardian revealed on Monday that senior police were told within 48 hours of Tomlinson's death that police witnesses had seen him being pushed to the ground by Harwood.
The three constables who witnessed the assault did not recognise Harwood, but the significance of their information was instantly realised and passed on to City of London police investigators.
The IPCC is now investigating why City of London failed to pass the information on to its own officials, the coroner, the pathologist, the family or the media.
9 May 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment