On the other hand, when we’re assigning blame – and Charlotte, you’re surely right to stress the ambiguity of the video – isn’t it worth giving a bit of thought to the troublemakers who have spent weeks contextualising the G20 protests as a locus for violent confrontation, who provoked multiple confrontations with police at the protests, and who did so much to create the conditions in which one confused, possibly mentally disturbed long-time alcoholic ended up behaving in a way that may have appeared pointedly obstructive, rather than just a bit sad and silly?

This isn’t, to repeat, about letting the police off the hook. Assault is assault, and we rightly expect those who enforce the law to behave with more patience, forebearance and self-restraint than the rest of the general public.

Personally, I didn’t go anywhere near the G20 protests, because it seemed clear that they would be violent. (Obviously there were some peaceful protesters there, too, but it doesn’t take many violent thugs to make a nice decent protest go very badly wrong.) The police, responding to the tone of the troublemakers’ organisational efforts, came prepared for violence. And indeed, the protests WERE violent – there was plenty of television footage showing rioters armed with scaffolding poles, hammers and so forth, taking swings at the police line, as well as that odd business about protesters carrying police uniforms – obviously ready to generate bit of ‘police brutality’ themselves.

The police, as usually happens, were trying to do their job – protecting life and property – although it seems possible, in the Tomlinson case, that a few of them failed to uphold the standards we expect of them. What were the more violent ‘protesters’ trying to do, though? Nothing positive, that’s for sure. Actually, I am pretty sure that the worst of them would have been absolutely delighted that Tomlinson died, because it gave them another rhetorical means by which to pursue their ‘anarchist’ goals, such as these are. (The fact that most of them wouldn’t last ten minutes in conditions of real anarchy is neither here nor there.)

Ultimately, then, if Ian Tomlinson’s death was anyone’s fault – rather than just the tragic conclusion of a life curtailed by addiction, homelessness and mental illness – we should perhaps remember why there were 5,000 police drafted into London in the first place, at enormous expense and considerable inconvenience, expected to deal not only with counter-terrorism, protection of visiting dignitaries and the usual police workload, but also this wholly unnecessary, wholly pointless troublemaking from some of the most useless, morally vacant people out there. Please, let’s not play these morons’ game by launching into the ‘police brutality’ refrain too soon, as the useful idiots at the Guardian & Co were so quick to do – for all their various and several faults, the police simply were not the worst enemies of life and liberty out on the streets that day.

It appears unnecessary. If it were a yob doing this I would want to see Manslaughter charges. Technically Mr Tomlinson was the one being obstructed, AFAICT.

Thank you.