It’s been taking a long time to wade through all the available material and make some kind of sense of it, so I’m a bit late going through the footage of the dog attack on Cornhill.
This took place around 7:16pm on 1st April, shortly before the deadly assault on Ian Tomlinson, and which involved several of the City of London dog handlers (D3, for example) also present when Ian Tomlinson is put to the ground.
But one thing of note is the apparent presence of ‘A’, the officer who later batons and pushes Ian Tomlinson. See the following pictures from each incident, and make up your own mind whether they are the same officer:
Some basic notes
After the moment captured in the screengrab from the ‘dog attack’ video, officer ‘A’ (if that’s who it is) exchanges looks (and possibly words) with the blue-flashed hi-vis jacket-wearing officers to right of screen (suspected FIT cops), before moving off into the cluster of cops around the corner of Threadneedle Street and Royal Exchange Buildings. Some of those officers head down Royal Exchange Buildings in the direction of Cornhill, before the videographer gets distracted by the big build up of riot police to his/her left, who then charge round the corner into Royal Exchange Avenue.
The general make-up of the group heading down Royal Exchange Building (as opposed to the surge into Royal Exchange Avenue) appears to match up with the beginning of the ‘American tourist’ video – some riot police with helmets and shields, the balaclava’d up shieldless left-handed officer, suspected FIT cops and dog handlers.
If one considers that the ‘dog attack’ incident to the north end of Royal Exchange Buildings and the Tomlinson assault to the south are connected by a number of police personnel and a short period of time (ie that some of those at the ‘dog attack’ then dash down the path to the location where Ian Tomlinson is then assaulted, all in a short space of time), then it would appear that the police officer who actually batons and pushes Mr Tomlinson talks to or takes some form of instruction from one or more police officers in the blue flashed hi-vis jackets before moving off from the ‘dog attack’ incident – as do other officers in the group we see in the assault footage. This might indicate, we may speculate, some level of command or control.
(This is, I note again, only speculation. Perhaps there were a number of left-handed baton-wielding riot cops with no epaulettes, high cut hi-vis jackets, balaclavas, trousers tucked into their boots, Nato helmets and no shields running around the Royal Exchange area of London between 7:16 and 7:20pm on the 1st of April. Hopefully they will all be making formal statements to account for their own actions and to bear witness to what they saw.)
As the evidence is assembled and analysed it may well be possible to piece together not just a chain of events, but the reasoning behind it, right down to who said what to whom at what point.
It will not be enough for one cop to face punishment for his actions, when his actions were but a side-effect of a tactic, a strategy, a doctrine, a policy. Responsibility lies in the fist gripped around a baton, but also in the command centres and briefing rooms.
NB: The times on the pictures above are approximate. The YouTube uploader of the ‘dog attack’ video states that they are unaware of whether the 7:16 timestamp refers to the beginning or end of the film. The moment pictured comes 1′32″ into the video.