This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jul/03/simon-harwood-wrong-ian-tomlinson

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Simon Harwood: 'I was wrong to hit and push Ian Tomlinson' Simon Harwood: 'I was wrong to hit and push Ian Tomlinson'
(about 1 hour later)
A police officer accused of killing a man during the G20 protests in London would "not have gone anywhere near him" had he known the man was an infirm alcoholic making his way home, rather than a potentially violent protester, a court has heard. A policeman accused of killing a man during the G20 protests in London told a court he was "sorry I got it wrong" in deciding to strike the man with a baton before pushing him over.
"Now I know all that I know ... and how poorly he was, I am sorry I got it wrong. I should not have hit him with a baton," PC Simon Harwood said of his strike and push against Ian Tomlinson on the evening of 1 April 2009. Asked what he would have done if he had known Ian Tomlinson was an infirm long-term alcoholic trying to get home rather than a potentially violent protester, PC Simon Harwood replied: "I would not have gone anywhere near him."
Asked by Mark Dennis QC, prosecuting, what he would have done had he known Tomlinson's intentions and health at the time, Harwood replied: "I would not have gone anywhere near him." During a full day of sometimes emotional testimony, which saw Tomlinson's family walk out of the public gallery for a period and Harwood's wife, Helen, break into sobs several times, the policeman said he regretted his actions on the evening of 1 April 2009.
Continuing his evidence at Southwark crown court, Harwood – a member of the Metropolitan police's elite Territorial Support Group (TSG) public order unit – insisted repeatedly that he made the best decision he could at the time, in the context of a day of disturbances connected to the meeting of G20 leaders in London. He told Southwark crown court: "Now I know all that I know now, and how poorly he was, I am sorry I got it wrong. I should not have hit him with a baton and pushed him."
At one point during a morning of sometimes heated questioning at Southwark crown court, some of Tomlinson's children gasped and walked out from the public gallery after Harwood described a firearm as one possible tactical option he could have used in a hypothetical public order situation. The 45-year-old, from Carshalton, Surrey, denies manslaughter.
Asked by Dennis to list the potential methods open to a TSG officer to move someone on, Harwood listed first a baton strike to the arm or leg, then a push, kicks or punches, CS spray, handcuffs, or a voice command. Asked by Mark Dennis QC, prosecuting, whether he accepted he had gone "over the top" having seen footage of Tomlinson walking away from a line of police trying to clear a pedestrian passageway in London's City district, Harwood agreed. He said: "Watching the video, yes, I probably have."
Questioning the order in which the officer named the options, Dennis said: "You have gone straight to violence, force." Harwood responded: "No, I have gone for reasonable force." However, Harwood, a member of the Metropolitan police's elite Territorial Support Group public order unit, said repeatedly that he made the best decision he could at the time in the context of a day of disturbances connected to the meeting of G20 leaders in London.
Asked to cite more options, he named the use of a firearm – at which point some of Tomlinson's family left the court – then use of a shield, or "life-threatening strikes". Harwood also rejected Dennis's suggestions that his failure to mention the incident with Tomlinson in notes written later that evening suggested he wanted to cover up what he had done. "No, not at all," he said.
Harwood is accused of the manslaughter of 47-year-old Tomlinson, who was attempting to find a way through police lines to the hostel where he lived when he collapsed in the street, dying shortly afterwards. Tomlinson, 47, died soon after collapsing while trying to find a way through police lines to the east London hostel where he lived. Video footage published by the Guardian several days later showed a riot officer, later identified as Harwood, strike Tomlinson on the back of the legs before shoving him hard to the ground several minutes before he collapsed.
Several days later video footage ran on the Guardian's website, taken by a US man in London on business. It showed a riot officer, later identified as Harwood, strike Tomlinson on the back of the legs before shoving him hard to the ground. Tomlinson was walking away from the advancing line of police at the time. The prosecution alleges that the fall caused internal bleeding associated with Tomlinson's liver, which killed him. The effects were exacerbated by Tomlinson's long-standing alcoholism, the court has heard.
The prosecution alleges that the fall caused internal bleeding associated with Tomlinson's liver, which killed him. At one point several of Tomlinson's children gasped and walked out after Harwood listed a gun among the methods police could use during a hypothetical public order situation to move people like Tomlinson.
The effects were exacerbated by Tomlinson's long-standing alcoholism, the court has heard. Tomlinson had been drinking heavily on the day and appeared unresponsive to earlier commands, other witnesses said. Asked what tactics he could use, Harwood listed first a baton strike, then a push, kicks or punches, CS spray, handcuffs, or a voice command. Dennis said: "You have gone straight to violence, force." Harwood said: "No, I have gone for reasonable force."
Harwood, 45, from Carshalton in Surrey, denies manslaughter on the grounds that he used reasonable force. Asked to cite more options, he named the use of a firearm – at which Tomlinson's relatives left – then use of a shield, or "life-threatening strikes".
Under persistent questioning from Dennis, which at one point saw Harwood's wife, Helen, weep in the public gallery, the policeman repeatedly insisted that given the short space of time and situation he had made the correct decision on how to move Tomlinson, who he had decided was obstructing police efforts to clear a pedestrian passageway by the Royal Exchange in the City. Under persistent questioning from Dennis the policeman repeatedly insisted that given the short space of time and situation he had made the right decision on how to move Tomlinson, who he believed was blocking police efforts to clear the passageway.
He could not have guessed Tomlinson's infirmity, Harwood said, saying he would rank him visually at eight on a one-to-ten scale of apparent physical vitality.
Asked why he did not consider, for example, moving Tomlinson away more gently, Harwood said: "I did not have time to consider that option."Asked why he did not consider, for example, moving Tomlinson away more gently, Harwood said: "I did not have time to consider that option."
Asked why he opted for a baton strike followed very quickly by a push, he said: "Because that is the course of action I decided to take." Questioned as to why he pushed Tomlinson before giving him a chance to react to the baton, Harwood said: "Because that is the course of action I decided to take." Other officers had already ordered Tomlinson to move and he had not, Harwood added.
Other officers had already ordered Tomlinson to move and he had not, Harwood added. Dennis repeatedly challenged Harwood's assertion that he believed at the time he was in a riot, showing videos of the passageway containing relatively few people.
Dennis repeatedly challenged Harwood's assertion that he believed at the time he was in a "riot", showing videos of the passageway, containing few people. Dennis said: ""I suggest you are not telling the truth at all. This is your last line of defence, having been caught out, on video, acting improperly." Harwood rejected this.
Dennis said: "I suggest you are not telling the truth at all. This is your last line of defence, having been caught out, on video, acting improperly."
Dennis asked whether Harwood's tactic was to "strike first and ask questions afterwards". This was unfair, the officer replied.
The trial continues.The trial continues.