Guardian : The doctors in the Ian Tomlinson case: a tale of two pathologists

The doctors in the Ian Tomlinson case: a tale of two pathologists

Audrey Gillan | April 18, 2009

Dr Nathaniel Cary

Cary, who performed the second postmortem and concluded that Ian Tomlinson died of abdominal haemorrhage, is one of the country's top pathologists. He has garnered fame for conducting follow-up autopsies that show inadequacies in tests originally carried out by others in his profession.

He questioned the findings that the Pakistan cricket coach Bob Woolmer had been murdered in his hotel room in Jamaica, concluding this was wrong. After carrying out a second autopsy he ruled that Woolmer had died of heart failure.

Cary was also employed to investigate the death of Pakistan prime minister Benazir Bhutto in a bomb attack in Rawalpindi after it was claimed she had been killed by a bullet wound. Cary wrote that the rapidly fatal head injury was sustained because of the bomb blast. And he was employed by the family of Harold Shipman to carry out his own inquiry into the death of the former GP turned serial killer who was found hanged in his cell. Cary said Shipman's death "could have been murder".

Dr Freddy Patel

Patel, who conducted the first postmortem and concluded that Ian Tomlinson had died of a heart attack, was once reprimanded about his professional conduct by the General Medical Council after he released medical details about Roger Sylvester, a 30-year-old black man who died in police custody.

He told reporters: "I am aware from the medical records ... that Mr Sylvester was a user of crack cocaine." Sylvester's family were devastated by the suggestion and contested that he been a user.

In a second case, which raised questions about Dr Patel's findings, police dropped a criminal investigation after the pathologist gave it as his opinion that the victim, Sally White, had died of natural causes. Anthony Hardy, a psychiatrically-disturbed alcoholic, who lived in the flat where the body was found, went on to murder two other women and mutilate their bodies.

Guardian : Ian Tomlinson's death at G20: how events have unfolded

Ian Tomlinson's death at G20: how events have unfolded

Duncan Campbell | April 18, 2009

In the 10 days since the Guardian revealed footage of Ian Tomlinson being attacked from behind by a police officer during the G20 demonstration, there have been a number of significant developments:

• The Independent Police Complaints Commission decided to take over the inquiry into the death, after initially accepting that Tomlinson had died of a heart attack unconnected with events at the protest.

• The Metropolitan police has invited Denis O'Connor, her majesty's chief inspector of constabulary, to conduct an inquiry into the tactics used on the demonstration and in general. O'Connor is one of the most experienced officers in Britain, having been a chief constable of Surrey and assistant commissioner

• The Liberal Democrats have called for a full inquiry into all the events on the day and specifically those surrounding Tomlinson's death.

• The Metropolitan Police Authority is to hold a private meeting next Thursday at which senior officers are to be questioned about the policing of the protest and police tactics at demonstrations in general.

• A second post-mortem examination, held at the request of the Tomlinson family, concluded Tomlinson died of an abdominal haemorrhage. This contradicts the original post-mortem, which suggested he had died of a heart attack.

• The officer suspended in connection with what happened to Tomlinson has been interviewed under caution for the offence of manslaughter.

Dawn : Student arrested in UK seeks consular service

Student arrested in UK seeks consular service

By M. Ziauddin | April 18, 2009

LONDON, April 17: One of the Pakistani students arrested in last week’s anti-terrorism raids, Janas Khan, has sought Pakistan High Commission’s consular service.

Meanwhile, the high commission has also obtained the names of four solicitors who are representing seven of the arrested students who have refused the offer of consular services. The commission is trying to contact the students through their solicitors.

Sources in the high commission said that the remaining two Pakistani students had refused consular services and have also requested authorities not to involve their families in the matter.All 12 persons were arrested on April 8 on suspicion of being involved in hatching plots to stage terrorist acts in the UK.

One, whose identity is yet to be established but believed to be a Bangladeshi, was released on the very second day, and of the remaining 11 still in custody, one is said to be Afghan national.

The UK authorities have so far not shared with Pakistani authorities even preliminary information about the students like their names, home addresses and the names of the institutions where these students were studying and the subjects they were studying; when they arrived in the UK and when do their visas expire.

Ignoring Pakistan’s request to either put those arrested on trial, or to allow them to remain in the country to continue their studies, the UK authorities are said to have decided to let the police continue their investigation.

There has also been talk of deporting some of the arrested students against whom actionable evidence is not likely to be found.

Under the law, police could keep the suspects in custody for 28 days. So, police has 18 days more to marshal the required evidence to charge them.

Sighatullah Kadri, QC, a British lawyer of Pakistani origin, answered in the affirmative when asked if the UK authorities could deport the students even if the charges under which they were arrested were not found valid.

He said perhaps the police had arrested these students only on the basis of taped ‘incriminating’ conversation, but since taped conversation is not admissible in the court of law and also the MI5 itself would not like to use this evidence in the court fearing exposing its methods of investigations, the police is finding itself in a fix. “They do not want to let the suspects go scot-free because of what evidence they have but they cannot also keep them under detention beyond 28 days without coming up with actionable evidence.”