Editor-at-Large: Tomlinson was no saint, but he deserved better
The circumstances surrounding the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests on 1 April are only gradually becoming clearer. What has emerged, however, is that Mr Tomlinson was a troubled man with quite a few problems. I am not trying to diminish his death, and the sad loss felt by his family and friends, but before we put the police in the dock, it might be worth considering what Mr Tomlinson was doing that night, and what state of mind he might have been in.
At first, the police put out a statement which subsequently turned out to be misleading. It said that officers sent two medics to help a man who had stopped breathing, and on arrival at hospital he was pronounced dead. We now know, as more people come forward with pictures of that evening, that events were a great deal more complicated, and that Mr Tomlinson had been involved with the police on several occasions before he collapsed.
Mr Tomlinson was an alcoholic who lived in a bail hostel around the corner from me in the City of London. He'd tried and failed to stay away from booze, but I make no judgement about that. How many of us are just an inch from going down that path, where alcohol takes over your life to the point where your family don't want you around? It's all too common. There are dozens of people like Ian Tomlinson in the City every day, hanging around in churchyards, sitting on park benches, selling The Big Issue. They turn up at the AA meetings held in the City every night of the week, where rich and poor talk freely about their struggle to stay sober. By the way, there are plenty of salaried alcoholics holding down good jobs in the City, disguising their addiction.
Mr Tomlinson did not have that opportunity, having started out as a scaffolder and shifting from job to job, to the point where he ended up in a hostel for the homeless in Smithfield. Mr Tomlinson probably sold me a newspaper when he had a pitch outside Blackfriars station for a while and I worked in Fleet Street.
One columnist has said that the "steady drip" of information about his background is designed to denigrate an ordinary man. I disagree. Knowing that he was an alcoholic is critical to understanding his sense of disorientation and his attitude towards the police, which might on first viewing of the video footage, seem a bit stroppy.
Mr Tomlinson was wearing a Millwall shirt, smoking a cigarette, and he'd had a few drinks. He didn't look anything like the people the police had corralled into a confined space around the Bank of England that night. They were mostly younger, middle class, and worlds apart from a working-class bloke whose face seemed older than his years after a life on the street. One perfunctory glance ought to have shown officers that he was completely harmless. Witnesses say Mr Tomlinson appeared to be drunk, he wasn't coherent and couldn't move very well. Over an hour later, footage shows a police officer wearing a balaclava aiming at his legs with a baton, and he falls to the ground.
It had been a long and trying day for the police. Mr Tomlinson wound them up when he didn't get out of the way. But he wasn't a 20-something anarchist with a placard. The fact he didn't swiftly jump to attention when ordered to do so should have been just a mild irritant, not something requiring physical manhandling. The police have been trained to deal with drunks, just as they are trained to deal with demonstrators. This man was not a threat to public order. His life story demonstrates that the only person he ever harmed was himself. I can understand how annoying he might have been, but I can't understand why anyone would want to hit him, especially not an officer who is paid to protect ordinary citizens.
Ian Tomlinson deserved some respect and understanding, and he clearly didn't get any that night.
Golden oldie: Only Caine could make a must-see movie out of dementia
Look out for Michael Caine's next film Is Anybody There?, opening in a couple of weeks' time – he gives a remarkable performance as a retired magician who arrives at a care home and gradually succumbs to dementia. Sounds depressing, but Caine is on top form, supported by excellent performances from fellow veterans Sylvia Syms, Elizabeth Spriggs and Leslie Phillips playing the other residents.
Care homes rarely receive good press, and generally only make news when there's been a death or a fire. To make them the subject for a feature film was a bold choice for writer Peter Harness and director John Crowley. Michael Caine's character befriends Edward, the 10-year-old son of the owners, who is thoroughly fed up at having his home taken over by the deranged and incontinent.
It could be mawkish, but isn't, and Caine's portrayal of a difficult old man is thoroughly unsentimental.
I first met Michael with the tailor Doug Hayward in the 1970s, and at 76, he's still on top form. He always makes me laugh, and certainly doesn't suffer fools.
Have a cabbage. It's five quid
The Home Secretary was embarrassed by revelations that her husband watched adult movies while she toiled in London, but can I suggest something less controversial to help him through those lonely nights? Middle-class households don't bother with X–rated channels, they thumb through the Lakeland catalogue, spending hours drooling over pages of gadgets you never knew you needed, from egg-poaching pouches to deep root trainers for runner beans.
This weekend Lakeland will be packed with shoppers – growing your own fruit and veg has become the fashionable way to pretend to friends you are being sensible in the recession, but guaranteed success requires tools, composts, cloches and gadgets. The notion that this constitutes thrifty living is misplaced. The cost of producing your own beans and potatoes renders them as expensive as those £195 baskets of cherries which Harrods are flogging. My spring cabbages attract every slug in the neighbourhood, and I've already spent £4 on slug pellets. Lakeland offer something called a Plant Guard Electric Slug Fence, a snip at just £29.94, so each cabbage will have cost me approximately £5 before it's even got six leaves. Truly, the caviar of brassicas.
The boat that rocked my career
Perfect bank holiday fare, The Boat That Rocked, Richard Curtis's affectionate portrayal of the golden era of pirate radio has received mixed reviews from critics, but the public likes it. The music is great, and there's a splendid cast, but is it accurate? In 1978, I presented a telly series for young people and we made a documentary about illegal radio stations. Radio Caroline had been closed down once, but was broadcasting from outside British waters in the North Sea. We chartered a trawler out of Ramsgate and set off to find Caroline at 4am in relatively calm seas. The skipper cooked us a massive Full English, but when the weather broke, everyone was sick. All my pieces to camera about the allocation of European broadcasting wavelengths were written on a roll of paper that flew away. I puked over the side, but it blew back, and I had to be hosed down. When I arrived at the pirate boat, British security services hovered overhead in a helicopter and told us we would be breaking the law if I went aboard.
I interviewed a couple of unshaven DJs through a loud hailer, as both boats rose and fell about 20 feet. Not the highlight of my telly career, but I can still recite the terms of the 1948 Strasbourg Agreement, so unnerving was the whole experience. It's all on YouTube.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited





Comments
The officer was not only masked but was wearing no number and after delivering a baton blow, pushed Mr Tomlinson with both hands, then ran off. He did not try to effect an arrest, it was just an assault. There was no evidence that Mr Tomlinson had "wound up" this officer, who did not recall assaulting him until he saw it on TV, according to Met sources. The police statement also claimed the "medics" were pelted with missiles, when in fact the police present pushed away a medical student attending the scene and refused to speak to the ambulance dispatcher called by a protester.
Why have you wilfully misrepresented this? It's a farrago of lies.
And still little from the media about the atrocious lies and spin, yet again by the Met. The police within hours of yet another death have been caught LYING through their teeth in what can be only seen as the beginnings of an operation to cover up which says to me the police knew far more than they are admitting.
And please someone tell me what this is about his shirt that seems to strike a chord with some journo's, heck I wear a Millwall shirt, my 13 year old daughter wears a Millwall shirt, bloody Danny Baker wears a Millwall shirt, "Handy Andy" wears a Millwall shirt, even the casino builder in Las Vegas wears a bloody Millwall shirt so quit the inferences to the shirt please and trying to hint that he is some football hooliganesque character, perhaps if he had been wearing a Man Utd shirt or another teams he might have gotten a better reception in the media.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic
The actions of the victim are only relevant in that those seen by the perpetrator may affect the perpetrator's state of mind.
Police were horribly tardy in arresting and questioning the perpetrator, a masked armed policeman who should, in my opinion, have been stopped and either arrested or formally cautioned immediately.
Police were negligent in allowing officers to confer and discuss their witness accounts, in violation of the general rules of interrogation of suspects, but which do follow the shameful standard international practices when police are caught on video tape committing serious crime.
Whether a person is a criminal depends solely on their decision to commit a crime. (Convictions in court merely add the adjective "convicted".)
IF this police officer committed a crime, IF his friends and co-workers are shielding him from prosecution by obstructing justice, filing false police reports, or perjuring themselves, they are criminals regardless of whether they are charged and convicted.
I suggest that in no other country would an armed police officer show such restraint.
This incident is not considered worthy of a mention in the online edition of the Indie, doubtless because it would not sit comfortably with the Indie's current overblown reaction to the Tomlinson affair.
And then we need to consider the orders and briefing given to officers on these occassions; were they hyped up by their commanders? Were they told to go in "a bit heavy"? Etc. And are the tactics used in such situations provocative? Do they exacerbate problems and incite violence? These are bigger questions than what happened with one man at one demonstration. But we must recognise that what happened appears to be an assault by a police officer followed by an institutional attempt to suppress the truth.
I think there needs to be a wide ranging investigation into the tactics used by the police, and the briefings given to officers on occassions such as G20. I believe that the police need to learn from their mistakes. And I certainly believe that every police officer, in no uncertain terms, must have it spelled out to them that they are not above the law. Lastly, I believe that the "canteen culture" in the police needs to be tackled - the code of silence that belongs on the playground.
In response to the incident with the armed officer being injured that you mention. I am not in possession of the details, but apparantly you are. Why not write to the Editor, giving details? Your letter may be published thus publicising the bravery of this officer more widely.
When the IPCC conduct their investigation they should certainly establish whether the police officer involved, now identified because he came forward, wore a balaclava with intent to conceal his face and prevent identification but also whether he removed the ID numbers from his uniform that he should have had on display to allow identification.
Ever since the police force was introduced into the United Kingdom, each police officer was allocated a 'warrant card' which allowed them to make an arrest without a 'warrant'. The unique number has always been used as the basis of uniquely identifying each police officer, as should ALWAYS be displayed, usually on the collar of shoulder, to allow the public to know who they are dealing with.
Removal of these numbers really will lead to 'secret' police!
I suspect your story is really a PR job on behalf of the police.
The point is, nothing you have said has any relevance in the slightest to what has happened.
As a friend of Bill myself, I have learned that alcoholics come in all shapes and sizes and they say the sofa is the park bench of the middle class alcoholic. Of course, you don't get hassled by the police if you are on your sofa. It is clear, you think that alcoholism is a sign of weakness. You seem to believe alcohol was a contributing factor in the man's death, and that may be the case, but it was a policeman who knocked him to the floor and that is all that matters, period.
"It had been a long and trying day for the police. Mr Tomlinson wound them up when he didn't get out of the way." - please tell me what motivated you to become a journalist, you idiot.
you mention his attitude towards the police - fuck me this is london not Berlin in the 60's, this isw meant to be a free country, remember?
it matters not that he was an alcoholic - the facts are simple he was assaulted walking around where he lived by summer jacked up on the moment copper who felt so brave, and was probably the only person he had seen all day on his own.
Prison is the only place for that prat.
Rather than wanting to put the police in the dock, the public want to know that the police are acting in an appropriate and responsible manner. A vital element is when potential wrongdoing is exposed, that it is thoroughly investigated and, where necessary, appropriate disciplinary action is taken.
Public concern currently involves not only the incidents themselves, but the response by the police authorities and the IPCC. In too many cases, denial and obfuscation have been the immediate response, leading to an atmosphere of mistrust and lack of credibility.
"He was wearing a Millwall shirt", which of course, as we know, is the ultimate crime. In fact, he was asking for it, wasn't he? And then you look at the footage, and frankly, I would know it was a Millwall shirt because you CAN ONLY SEE THE SLEEVES. So the Millwall shirt is irrelevant, why do you mention it?
But my favourite is the headline "Tomlinson was no saint..." So what? Are you, JSP? Is anyone? He could've been bloody Pinochet and in a lawful society he shouldn't be assaulted, by anyone. If he committed a crime, arrest him. But your headline just sows that little bit of doubt, doesn't it? "He wasn't really a good lad, was he? It was inevitable he'd end badly..."; that's what your calculated headline says.
None of this surprises me. JSP used to peddle herself as the voice of "yoof". "Yoof" didn't really buy that. So now JSP peddles herself as the voice of some mythical, uninformed Middle England. And all the time she reveals herself to be just another mediocre hack with a loud voice and b*gger all to actually say...
In contrast I would offer THOUGHT FOR THE DAY
http://recycledbogrollblues.blogspot.co
It is clear to me however that large elements of the police no longer see that their job involves the protection of the innocent or vulnerable citizen. Their primary function is to uphold the requirements of the New Labour State.
1-Ian Tomlinson's background is completely irrelevant
2.What right have you,Janet Street Porter to decide whether Ian Tomlinson was a saint or not?That's up to those who really know him.
3-By writing this article you are playing into the hands of the police by being part of their propoganda machine.
4-Were you their when Ian Tomlinson was attacked b the police?So how do you know whether he was stroppy or not?
Please stick to writing what you know about.An ill-informed piece if there ever was one.
the placard waving anarchistsand and the young middle class protesters that wound up the officers having a long and trying day?
What planet this woman lives in?
I've got news for you: No one is a saint.
He didn't live in a bail hostel. That is a slur on him. But even if he did, and even if he was an alcoholic, he didn't deserve to be savagely attacked by the police. His background has got nothing to do with this. He was just a man trying to get home after his day's work. Pure and simple.
Once again we have the victim on trial instead of his attacker. When I was a child I repeatedly read the Fairy Story of Pinnochio and I always amazed when I got to the part where Pinnochio is sent to jail by the judge for 'allowing' himself to be robbed. In my innocence I couldn't believe that the victim of a crime would be on trial and jailed. Surely it was the person who commited the crime who should be put on trial and if found guilty, punished. But there is so much truth in that Fairy Story. So often when a person is attacked it is their charatcer that is put on trial. And here we have it again with Chris Tomlinson.
To state, Janet, that he didn't deserve to die is stating 'the bleeding obvious'. Did you think that the rest of us hadn't realised that without you help?
I hope you publish an apology for saying he lived in a bail hostel. But I doubt you will.
It's worth pointing out that even the Daily Dacre gets it right occasionally, just as Janet's lack of compassion has got the worst of her on this occasion.
Shame is on you, Janet!
This is a variation of the 'police officers are only human' argument. But it's nonsense. It's only human to be squeamish about blood, but we select surgeons who are not, and then train them not to faint during operations. It's only human to suffer from vertigo, but we select pilots who do not and then train them not to crash planes.
As importantly, we should select police officers who are not psychopathic, and then train them not to act like thugs. As a society, we give the police special powers and privileges, and in return we should hold them to a higher, not lower, standard.
There is never an excuse for unprovoked violence no matter who the perpetrator is. JSP should be ashamed of herself for attempting to mitigate the indefensible.