A police officer who hit and then pushed Ian Tomlinson during the G20 riots told an inquest today that his training allowed him to use his baton even if the person did not pose a threat.
PC Simon Harwood said that Mr Tomlinson was “almost inviting a physical confrontation” because he was not going to move from a police line “whatever happened”.
Mr Harwood also refused to accept that he had pushed the newspaper seller from behind even though a video of the incident in 2009, shown repeatedly to the court, seemed to prove otherwise.
In fraught exchanges during his third day of giving evidence the Territorial Support Group officer agreed that he hit Mr Tomlinson with his baton despite admitting that he was not a threat to anyone as officers tried to clear a section of the City of London.
Matthew Ryder, QC, for the family, asked him: “Does your training tell you if someone is not a threat to you or any person it is acceptable to baton them? Is that your training?”
Advertisement
Mr Harwood replied: “Yes.”
Asked the question again, he said it depended on the circumstances.
The officer, who could still face criminal proceedings and the sack from disciplinary action, was then warned by the coroner, for the second time in an hour that he did not have to answer questions that could implicate him.
A few minutes earlier parts of a prepared statement the officer had made for independent investigators in July 2009 were read out to the court. He said that Mr Tomlinson’s posture “remained defiant and his hands in his pocket” as officers tried to get him to move on.
In his statement Mr Harwood added: “He just looked as if he was going to stay where he was whatever happened and was almost inviting a physical confrontation in terms of being moved on.”
Advertisement
Mr Harwood also appeared to struggle to justify his use of force under the law, but said that Mr Tomlinson was “constituting a breach of the peace” by “encroaching” on a police line.
Showing him a video of when he “engaged” with Mr Tomlinson, Mr Ryder said that Mr Tomlinson could be seen walking away from the police line although Mr Harwood insisted that from his perception he believed he was walking towards it.
Mr Ryder said: “When was he walking towards the police line? I am suggesting to you it is right there in front of your eyes that what you are saying is not true.”
The officer maintained that “from his angle” it appeared that Mr Tomlinson was not moving away. Mr Ryder responded: “That is rubbish, I suggest to you, PC Harwood - and you know it.”
The inquest, at the International Dispute Resolution Centre in Fleet Street, London, continues.