'There is nothing we can say to reverse the situation,' Met police watchdog tells relatives

• Paul Lewis
• guardian.co.uk, Thursday 5 November 2009 17.17 GMT
• Article history

Ian Tomlinson's widow Julia and his son Paul. Photograph: David Mansell/Guardian

The family of Ian Tomlinson, the man who died at the G20 protest after being attacked by the police, has been told it would be "inappropriate" for an official watchdog to consider whether officers were involved in a cover-up.

Five members of Tomlinson's family, including his wife, Julia, attended a public meeting at London's City Hall today to complain that events surrounding his death were being ignored by officials.

They told the civil liberties panel of the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), which is conducting an inquiry into the protests, that police tried to "cover up" police involvement in his death, an aspect of the controversy which they feel has been ignored.

Tomlinson, 47, collapsed and died near the Bank of England on 1 April, minutes after a member of the Met's territorial support group struck him with a baton and pushed him to the ground. The newspaper vendor, who was walking home from work when he was attacked from behind, also received suspected dog bites to his legs.

"We hope your report will look into whether police tried to cover up our father's death," Tomlinson's son, Richard King, told the panel. "We feel we were led down the garden path. We do feel it was a cover-up from the beginning. He [was struck] in front of 18 officers. Not one of the officers came forward to say they witnessed what happened. Not one of the officers went to give him first aid. Not one of the officers went to help him off the floor."

His brother, Paul King, added: "There have been four inquiries into the demonstrations and the policing of G20 and we want to know why the dog that bit Ian, the baton strike and the push to the floor have not been mentioned. He was an innocent man on his way home. We have lost our dad."

However, Victoria Borwick, the Conservative chair of the panel, told the family that she believed it would be "inappropriate" for the MPA – the body responsible for holding the force to account – to take up their concerns. "There is nothing any of us can say to reverse the situation of what happened last April," she added. "We are extremely sorry."

After the meeting, Borwick said she meant to say her committee would take legal advice on whether it could investigate the alleged cover-up.

Within 24 hours of Tomlinson's death, police became aware that their officers may have been involved in a physical altercation with him. However, in public, police refused to confirm there had been contact and resisted calls for an independent investigation until five days later, when the Guardian revealed video footage of the incident.

The officer who struck Tomlinson was suspended from duty on full pay. The Crown Prosecution Service has indicated it will decide whether to charge him with Tomlinson's manslaughter in the next two months. An inquiry by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) into complaints the Met and City of London deliberately misled the public about Tomlinson's death has yet to conclude.

Among several reports into the policing of the G20 demonstrations has been a report from the Met, two parliamentary inquiries and an official review by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary, the national watchdog. All have made just glancing references to Tomlinson's death, claiming they cannot prejudice the investigation into his death.

However Tomlinson's family point out that concerns which are separate from the criminal investigation into what caused his death – such as their belief they were "deliberately misled" by police – have not been addressed.

When an initial postmortem found Tomlinson died of a heart attack, the family were not told that the pathologist also found large amounts of blood in his stomach, bruising on his body and bites on his leg. Instead, they were told by police at an early stage that witnesses had seen him "run out of batteries". A second postmortem found he died of internal bleeding.

Police in riot gear use their batons against demonstrators as they clash near the Bank of England in the City of London during the G20 protests. Photograph: Andrew Winning/Reuters

Police officers' notebooks lodged at the high court tell how they punched people in the face and beat others with riot shields during the G20 demonstrations in April.

The notebooks, which have been lodged as evidence in an action brought by three protesters, also disclose how Metropolitan police were given no restrictions on the use of force when they were ordered to move protesters attending the Climate Change camp in the City of London on 1 April. The accounts were written up the day after the demonstrations.

In one notebook, a police constable recounts how when he saw a protester pushing against officers' shields: "I punched him in the jaw and he moved backwards."

Another officer describes how he hit people with "shield strikes both flat and angled. I also delivered open palm strikes to a number of individuals and fist strikes as well."

A third constable logged: "To get the protesters who would not move, I needed to hit the flat part of my shield to get them to move back. I also used open-handed palm strikes. Once the protesters were moved back to the required distance, we remained in a closed cordon until relieved."

During the demonstration a newspaper vendor, Ian Tomlinson, died after a confrontation with police.

The logbook revelations are included in court documents lodged in a legal challenge by solicitors Bindmans against the Met brought on behalf of three Climate Camp protesters, criticising the use of "kettling", the controversial police tactic of forcibly containing a potentially disruptive crowd, as "unlawful" and unjustified.

Other Scotland Yard documents include the logbook of the officer in charge of policing the Climate Camp. It reveals that the decision to "kettle" was taken just moments after Chief Superintendent Michael Johnson, the "Bronze" commander responsible for the day's tactical decisions, was informed there was a "party atmosphere" among the crowd.

The police logs state that, at 6.12pm, Bronze command received information, possibly from an undercover informant in the Climate Camp, that there was a "party atmosphere. No issues."

Five minutes later – at 6.17pm – the log suggests that a decision to "kettle" was taken, with actual containment commencing at 7.07pm.

Moments before the kettle was brought into operation – at 7.04pm – lines of police officers begin advancing into Bishopsgate, where the Climate Camp was sited, and shields were used to push back protesters. The police log, however, does not comment on the levels of force that were to be used by officers to force back the demonstrators.

An account in a police constable's notebook states: "We were directed to push back the Climate Change protesters approximately 20-30 metres beyond two alleyways … I used my round shield to push back the crowd, which was 15 people deep."

Frances Wright, a member of the Climate Camp's legal team, said: "Having read all the documents that the police have disclosed so far, I still don't know who ordered force to be used at 7pm or why it was needed.

"The violence that Ian Tomlinson experienced was not an isolated example and the result of a few bad apples, as the police would like us to believe. An attitudinal change is needed."

Christopher Abbot, 30, from Reading, who described how his girlfriend was injured after being dragged by officers outside the police cordon during the Climate Camp and then shoved back into the crowd, is one of the complainants.

Despite his girlfriend "requiring urgent medication", it is claimed that officers refused to let her leave to receive treatment. It was not until after 11.15pm that she was allowed to leave the cordon, by which time she had "collapsed".

The disclosure of such sensitive material comes as Climate Camp organisers are set to unveil a new protest site at an undisclosed location in London this week.

In an attempt to counter unease over heavy-handed policing, Assistant Commissioner Chris Allison will unveil a new "softly, softly" strategy on Thursday for dealing with public protests following widespread criticism in the wake of the G20 protests.

A report by the police inspectorate recently condemned Scotland Yard's operation during the G20 rally as "inadequate" and belonging to a "different era".

Earlier this month, the Independent Police Complaints Commission criticised officers for pushing a 23-year-old woman with riot shields. She was already bleeding heavily and may have suffered a miscarriage as a result. The woman was also detained in the Climate Camp "kettle" and prevented from receiving medical attention for up to five hours.

John Halford, a human rights specialist at Bindmans, said it was telling that none of the constables' logbooks mentioned any early release arrangements for protesters who were ill or injured.

The other two claimants are Hannah McClure, 21, who claims that riot officers pushed her with shields, and Joshua Moos, 21, who says he was hit by police despite holding his hands behind his back to demonstrate that he was a peaceful protester.

Halford said: "Most chilling of all is the absence of a single recorded instruction to those officers about when they could use force and what would be reasonable, given this was a peaceful demonstration.

"In the absence of such instructions, many officers apparently behaved as if they had been unleashed on a rioting mob. If they were instructed to use violence in the way they did, that was unlawful. But the failure to prevent this from happening was an equally serious dereliction of their senior officers' duties."

A Met spokesman said: "Every officer is accountable under law and fully aware of the scrutiny that his action can be held open to. The decision to use force is made by the individual police officer, and he must account for that."

He added that the use of "kettling" was a "recognised tactic in public order policing".