TOMLINSON II

FIVE weeks ago in this space I wrote about the death of Ian Tomlinson, a City of London newspaper seller, after he had been hit by a police baton and pushed to the ground on April 1 last year. Although a video existed of this rough treatment by a member of the Metropolitan Police the Director of Public Prosecutions had announced that no charge would be made against the policeman concerned since disagreement among doctors on the cause of death meant “there was no prospect of getting a conviction”. Autopsies had been conducted by three doctors; two, acting for Tomlinson's family, agreed that death was from “blunt force trauma and internal bleeding” and one, Dr Freddy Patel, briefed by the police, said it was due to natural causes linked to a coronary artery disease.

Yesterday the General Medical Council ruled that in cases drawn to its attention before the Ian Tomlinson incident, Dr Patel had “acted in a way that amounted to misconduct in post mortem examinations and that his fitness to practice was impaired.” The Council also commented on “deficient performance” in cases in 2002, 2003 and 2005. Now that Dr Patel's competence has been questioned it is surely for a jury, rather than the Director of Public Prosecutions, to decide how Mr Tomlinson died? At the same time the Metropolitan Police should be invited to explain why they referred Mr Tomlinson's death to a doctor about whom doubts already existed.