Finally a Bit of Truth from the G20 Protests

Initial Story

First Part

Initial reports from the demos were that a middle-aged man had died.  “Aha!” I thought.  “Heart attack”.  Just like the Great North Run.

Second Part

Then it turned out that he’d been hit by a bottle and died as police medics were protecting him from the crowd.

Third Part

Later news says that he’s died from a heart attack.  I thought that was it.  I also thought, see posts here and here, that decent photographic documentation of the G20 protest was seriously lacking…

Crucial Evidence

Now some photographic evidence (as a video, no less) has appeared which show a middle aged newsagent walking home round the edge of the crowds.  (“he shouldn’t be there”, I hear the Daily Mailers crying).     So?  He’s still got his job and he’s still got to go home.  That’s his route, apparently.

@ amazonTomlinson, with his hands in his pockets, is then attacked from behind with a 2 foot baton by an armoured and riot-helmeted policeman who seems totally out of control given the lack of riot.  The policeman then wallops Tomlinson in the small of the back, who then falls forward.

Tomlinson manages to get his hands out of his pockets but even so, his face hits the ground.

Difference in Reporting between Guardian and BBC

The Guardian has the video, which is here:

G20 police assault revealed in video

Footage shows Ian Tomlinson, the man who died during G20 protests in London, being attacked from behind

A BBC report is here, using the same Guardian video:

Footage shows G20 death man push

However, the BBC’s verbal overlay is extremely defensive of the police and their actions.  Not so The Guardian.  The Guardian is quite open and factual.

The video is lacking in that there are many cuts (probably because it’s intermittent filming – but I’m guessing), that omit some extra corroborative information from a pair of law students who witnessed everything.  This is the YouTube clip below.  In it, they say that First Aid for Tomlinson was delivered by protesters until they were pushed away by police.  This isn’t shown in the video.  They describe the way that people were barged & pushed “as is their way” – as they describe it, by the police.  This is clear from this video and others.


  • This is the very same police who can have you arrested for 42 days without having to inform anyone you know.
  • These are the same police who shot an innocent man on a tube train at point blank range with seven dum dum bullets.
  • These police are employed by us to protect us and uphold the law.
  • Most laws are made in parliament.
  • We can vote out parliamentary people we don’t like.
  • In “the old days” there were also riots and protests.  Some protests were to get the vote for women.  They were treated horribly by the police, much like many people were the other day.  They were treated as pariahs of society, much like the popular press described the protesters.
  • In “the old days” protesters had a protest to try and make change in society by adequately making the lawmakers understand that something was wrong.
  • Spartan Shield
    Spartan Shield

    Now, protesters are herded and penned into a “demonstration area”, well out of sight of anyone of influence.  They are looked on as “oddities” and beaten just because of that.

  • Rats when cornered will fight.  It’s the fear reflex that we all have.  That’s why cornered people very rarely are peaceful, especially when antagonised by hooded and armed men in black.
  • In “the old days”, police just used their normal uniforms.  Protesters wore normal clothes.
  • At the G20 protest, police wore armoured clothing and were armed to the teeth, protected with Spartan shields.  Protesters wore normal cloths.

By Strangely

Founding member of the band Crawling Chaos from the North-East of England


  1. The high court has today ruled that kettling and the use of "Spartan" type riot shields was wrong! See:

    London G20 demo: Met Police 'kettling' not justified

    Not only that, despite this and the total loss in public confidence and being censured (twice) by parliamentary investigations, the police are again using taxpayer money to appeal against this verdict.

    Talk about crooked, money-grabbing egotistical power mongers!

  2. “This is the very same police who can have you arrested for 42 days without having to inform anyone you know.” HUH I think you mean 48 hours under very specific conditions
    “These are the same police who shot an innocent man on a tube train at point blank range with seven dum dum bullets. ” look ar the video I think they are COLP not MET, just a guess.
    “Now, protesters are herded and penned into a “demonstration area”, well out of sight of anyone of influence. They are looked on as “oddities” and beaten just because of that. ” within recent memory protestors have damaged property in London, there can be no good reason for damaging other property.

    “At the G20 protest, police wore armoured clothing and were armed to the teeth, protected with Spartan shields. Protesters wore normal cloths. ” those bent upon violence often wear masks and sometimes padding, not normal at all. The clothing worn by police was bought in beacuse without those clothes injuted police would sue the bejesus out of teh service.

    1. Hi Buster.
      There’s a bit of chicken and egg going on here. As you point out, the 42 days thing isn’t law yet, but HM Gov still intends to bring it in. Not that that matters – during the 80s miner’s strike, many miners were arrested and imprisoned for up to 18 months without charge. Obviously, these must have been key figures in someone’s mind. In the end, none were ever convicted and many won damages for wrongful imprisonment.

      Pedantically, you’ve helpfully pointed out the different shades of law enforcement agencies involved in the Menendez shooting. On TV and in court, they were all referred to as ‘police officers’, like the guy that whacked Tomlinson is also a ‘police officer’.

      The good reason to damage property is that the property was raised and financed by corrupt businesses who are now thoroughly discredited in the eyes of almost every thinking person. To damage the property is to ensure that those in authority are fully aware of the disgust felt by many across the country. The damage is minor compared to the whole ongoing cost of the companies’ and employees of the same, dodgy dealings. Furthermore, the whole cost of the security operation was put at £7m. Obama’s flight and entourage alone probably bettered that. These are the costs that a democratic state must endure – so please, read Jill’s post here for a balanced view of our democracy.

      People who disguise their faces in a situation like this, do it for two reasons; either because they are real criminals or because they have a real thorough mistrust of the state and it’s apparatus of power. Even now, the completely shrouded police officer who whacked Tomlinson is still unidentified – and that’s after being videoed! This shows that camouflage is effective on both ‘sides’ of this demonstration.

      And that, like the chicken and the egg, is the root of the problem. Angst begats angst. Making ‘sides’ when their isn’t even a conflict is the cause of this. For weeks, trouble has been stoked up by the media, politicians and the like. Their very language has sought to inflame rather than meld. Most protesters were completely visible, hemmed in and sat on the ground in their little ‘demonstration area’! Most police were ‘up for it’, as the phrase goes, and fully armed and protected that ensured their own personal aura of strength.

      But this wasn’t the Battle of Thermopylae. It was a simple demonstration by various causes about the appalling state in which our country has been run by kleptomaniac vested interests. Your point that detention over 48hrs is only under special conditions omits the fact that the Home Secretary, wacky back Jacqui Smith, is one of the names presiding over the ‘special conditions’. And yet she herself has a very poor grasp of honour and decent behaviour but a very strong grasp on the public purse for her own ends.

      In that light, I’m with the people who mistrust the state. The reason is simple. The state is run by people and people are fallible. If we don’t assert our right to speak out and protest, then we are nothing more than slaves.

  3. The Met’s chief, Sir Paul Stephenson has said he ‘has concerns‘ about the death of Tomlinson, here.

    Well that’s one way of putting it!

    The Home Secretary has said there’s going to be an enquiry ASAP. Perhaps the enquiry should also ask why Tomlinson’s body was whisked away and a cause of death announced as a heart attack before any news came out?

    It’s said that “heart attack” isn’t a very good prognosis for a cause of death and more work should have been done. A heart attack is usually a result of some other factor. After all, everyone’s death is by their heart stopping and brain function ceasing!!! The cause of death is the thing that brings these about.

    I smell a cover up by the people on the spot who knew that something really, really bad had just happened and they hoped they’d get away with it.

    Fortunately, an interested New York financier happened to have his video camera switched on….

    I hope that Tomlinson’s body stays in the freezer and doesn’t get cremated before any ‘enquiry’ happens. Otherwise, the truth will quite literally go up in smoke – and there are a lot of people who’d like that.

Comments are closed.