SIGN UP

'A Tawdry Lust For Fame' By Ian Tomlinson's Family?

Avatar Image
Kerosene | 17:00 Thu 20th Sep 2012 | News
86 Answers
http://www.dailymail....awdry-lust-fame-.html

I was roundly condemned by certain posters following my recent thread where I queried whether that his family's grief was genuine - or merely an attempt to garner public support in a quest for monetary compensation?

The above article suggests that it could possibly be the latter?
1: Mr Tomlinson had not shared a home with his 'caring family' for 13 years.
2: His 'grieving widow', Julia, had a total of 9 children, only 4 of whom were Mr Tomlinson's.
3: Mr Tomlinson, a chronic alcoholic, had been living for many years in hostels - NOT with any of his now 'caring & grieving' family with whom he apparently had lost touch.

So, is the columnist correct in labelling them and their public outpourings as a 'tawdry lust for fame'? I know what I think!

Answers

1 to 20 of 86rss feed

1 2 3 4 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Kerosene. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It's reassuring that a poor, disadvantaged, family can still look to the courts for justice.
A great pity that they didn't get it.
Always nice to see a topical post on here. Well, I suppose it was topical on April 11th 2009.
Well who else should be fighting for a fair hearing kero?

Regardless of their relationship over the years.

What would be a better headline?

'Dysfunctional alcoholic saddo dies after being assaulted by Police Officer - who cares? says estranged family'

I'm sure that would have been The Met's preferred outcome
The officer was sacked, but only after a long process. Whether his family were estranged from him or not, it's good to see that justice of a sort has finally been served.
Somewhere in the background there will be a lawyer saying 'do this, do that, say this, say that' - money, money, money - no win no fee.
Well spotted rojash

an article written before we heard about PC Harwood's history of thuggish assaults, before he stood trial for manslaughter and before he was fired for Gross Misconduct'

How much of that would have seen the light of day without the family's efforts - regardless of their motivations
Question Author
sandy,

"justice" What's your definition of it?

rojash,

"..I suppose it was topical on April 11th 2009" No, far more recently than that.

Zeuhl,

You do the Met a great disservice with your contrived sarcasm.
"No, far more recently than that. "
I suggest that you follow your own link and check the date of the article.
Question Author
Zeuhl,

"How much of that would have seen the light of day without the family's efforts -"

It wasn't "the family's efforts" which brought Harwood's disciplinary record to light. This is automatic when any Officer is subject of such a hearing by his Force.

Just thought I'd clarify your...erm...'misunderstanding' ?
There comes a point with chronic alcoholics/drug addicts that you can no longer help them. Sometimes, for your own sanity and the benefit of your children, you have to walk away. Does that mean you no longer love them?
@rojash

another typically sneering reply from you, seeing the header why did you bother reading and then reply to it then ?

so we dont all make the same mistake please give us your window of topicality for future subjects to post on
Question Author
rojash,

This case has been in the public eye for three and a half years. Why do you think it's still being discussed today? Because it's still 'topical', plus the contents of the article. Why shouldn't they be in light of the family's ongoing campaign for....'justice. ?
<It wasn't "the family's efforts" which brought Harwood's disciplinary record to light. This is automatic when any Officer is subject of such a hearing by his Force.>

Yes kero

and would there have been a hearing if the family had 'rolled over' and kept quiet?

You don't deny this has been a massive embarassment for The Met (again)

And I don't think dragging up articles from 3 years ago really adds much bearing in mind all that has now been revealed.
Question Author
ummmm,

I wouldn't know, as your post suggests, if Mr Tomlinson still loved his family? But he's deceased, and it is they - none of whom could apparently give their alcoholic husband/father a home - who are now campaigning relentlessly for 'justice'.

I've never been estranged from any of my family and I'd like to think that they could come to terms were I to have died in similar circumstances - virtually impossible though it seems - without a concerted public campaign costing the public purse many millions of pounds in the process? And, no, I'm obviously not a homeless alcoholic - far from it.
Why did the article feel the need to point out that his wife had 9 children and that "only 4 of whom were Mr Tomlinson's"?
<<without a concerted public campaign costing the public purse many millions of pounds in the process?>>

kero

the reponsibilty for the expenditure lies with the officer who committed 'gross misconduct' and has come damn close to being convicted of manslaughter

don't try and shift the blame onto the victims ...

the Police havealready been justly condemned for that sort of disgusting behaviour this past week - that's enough surely?
Kerosene - wow it doesn't take you long to flare up and consume everyone who answers you. Calm down, you might get some constructive answers which make good debates. Then, with your current attitude to other users, you may in the future get no responses at all.

And you were justifiably roundly condemned for your recent thread. Too many of your comments are caustic or inflammatory - not surprising though, eh Kerosene?
@Kerpsene.

I really don't get you at all. You continually attempt to defend this base speculation of yours that the Tomlinsons are only persuing this for the money or the publicity.It still seems to me like a desperate attempt to defend the police from any hint of wrongdoing.

You dig up an old report from Amanda Platell, that beacon of compassion, and present it as "evidence" that, since Tomlinson himself was an alcoholic estranged from his family, there was no love, no family bonds between family members - oh, and the thowaway line that he was the natural father of "only" 4 of the children - as if that diminishes the emotions of them or the stepkids.

Harwood was a thug who exercised his inclinations at the G20 demo. He dishonoured and brought into disrepute the Met by his actions. Despite an initial finding of unlawful killing, He was later found not guilty of manslaughter, and finally dismissed for gross misconduct. At the manslaughter trial, it was highlighted that the reason he was found not guilty was in large part due the confusing post-mortem reports - confusion caused by the first pathologist, now struck off, who committed 68 faults and errors in the process and threw out 3L of abdominal fluid in the process.

So, the family are left with the knowledge that their family member was unlawfully killed, the culprit escaping any jail time and keeping his pension to boot, and no admission of liability from anyone. If they wish to take a civil action, that is entirely their right.

What, exactly, are you trying to defend?
Are you trying to save the State money, as, because Tomlinson was an alcoholic estranged from his family they don't deserve financial compensation?
Your right to impugn the family and attribute the basest of motivations to their actions?
The Met for re-hiring a thug?
PC Harwood?

I don't think the columnist right at all, and yes, we certainly know what you think....

Here is another article about Ian Tomlinson and the family dynamic, from The Telegraph, which offers a different perspective to Platell....

http://www.telegraph....d-family-bridges.html
Kerosene - Do you've never lived or tried to support someone chronic addictions?

Like I said...there will come a day when you have to walk away. You don't know what Mr Tomlinson was like under the influence. Drug addicts and alcoholics are not nice people when they need their fix.
Question Author
Zeuhl,

The Met has approximately 30,000 Officers, they're always looking for recruits to maintain that number, as I can well remember from personal experience when I was invited to join them but preferred a Force closer to home.

It's hardly surprising that there are some rotten apples in that massive pool of employees, is it?

"..all that has now been revealed" ? Like what?

We've had no fewer than three post mortems, a comprehensive investigation conducted by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, a Crown Court trial, and a Met Police disciplinary hearing.

What more can be done? We happen to live in a country where the judicial system is there to serve everyone, for better or worse. But unless we allow it to function without prejudice we will have anarchy, regardless of what we make of individual cases.

It's called living in a democracy - lynch mobs and vigilantes do not believe in it.

1 to 20 of 86rss feed

1 2 3 4 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

'A Tawdry Lust For Fame' By Ian Tomlinson's Family?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.