Six degrees – Our Future on a Hotter Planet, is the title of Mark Lynas’s 2007 book (this review is from the updated 2008 version) which seeks to give a broad overview of what mainstream scientific opinion (ie those which have appeared in reputable peer reviewed journals) suggests the world might look like over the next century with variable amounts of warming from pre0industrial temperatures. As title of the book suggests, Lynas looks as what is likely to happen with 1 degree of warming, 2 degrees and so on.

Overall, the book is well researched and written, condensing a vast amount of scientific literature into 275 pages with clear references to the original material Lynas has cited. The prose is generally very straightforward, and consequently this is a book which anyone can pick up and read, which I’m sure was Lynas’s intention: seeking to present a simple but generally accurate picture of what science says a warming world will probably be like, and some of the reasons why this is likely to be enormously detrimental to most forms of human and non-human life on Earth.

While Lynas does mention the potential positives of a mildly warming world such as increased growing seasons and crop production in Russia, the Ukraine and Canada, these are heavily outweighed by rising probabilities of drought, water shortages (largely from glaciers melting away), floods, mass crop failures, loss of biodiversity and potential social and ecological collapses. Lynas does a good job in this respect of respecting regional differences, but connecting these regions into a broader global picture.

Particularly frightening are the predicted prospects of a world more than two degrees warmer than the pre-industrial global mean, as not only are the effects of such climactic change going to be more severe, but there exists a reasonable chance that once warming reaches this oft-discussed tipping point that natural positive feedback loops kick in which alter the global climate so as to reach the kind of steady-state seen in other global extinction events, a six degree rise in temperature. Lynas does a very good job in explicating how some of these effects may arise, and in spelling out the kind of drastic changes they would entail for the planet’s climate.

While generally I think the book has been well though out and written, there were a few bits of linguistic sloppiness which frustrated me. Describing a world which is six degrees warmer than 150 years ago as ‘the ultimate apocalypse’ merely gives ammunition to those who seek to decry Lynas as a false prophet of global doom. If the apocalypse is the end of the world what exactly the ultimate apocalypse? The sun going supernova? The Galaxy collapsing into a black hole? No… a similar amount of warming to other mass extinction events such as the Permian. Six degrees of warming may well see the extinction of the human species (as Lynas states) but this is very different from it being the ultimate apocalypse, and this kind of exaggerated statement is the only thing that really stops me from saying that this is a book that everyone should read. Which is a shame, because most of it isn’t alarmist nonsense, but a very clear and well written summary of the scientific evidence surrounding our probable future climate.

So it seems that after a flurry of activity for the climate swoop last week where climate activists met at six strategic locations before converging on Blackheath to set up this year’s Climate Camp the mainstream media have largely lost interest in events.

On the Guardian website today we have bibi van der Zee claiming that ‘Five days in and the campers admit things are a little boring – there are no more toilets to put up and the police have vanished. But a plan for direct action should put the zip back into things’

If you took reports like that seriously you would believe that essentially nothing has been going on at camp since the set up on Wedsnesday and Thursday last week. In fact the site has been awash with activity as the camp has hosted roughly 30-35 workshops a day in addition to the daily neighbourhood meetings.

These workshops have covered everything from creating bicycle powered sound systems to the science of climate change and the current state of geoengineering, from creating your own media to understanding the subtleties of carbon trading schemes, from communicating climate science to lay audiences to building your own wind turbines, from direct action and legal observer training to understanding the links between the arms trade and climate change, from consensus based decision making and direct democracy to creating biochar as a green energy source.

In fact there have been so many disparate workshops, seminars and debates that it would be impossible to to attend more than a fraction of them. Meanwhile, the small amount of mainstream media coverage still focusing on the camp (largely in the Guardian) sees the likes of Van der Zee moaning that the camp has come boring because there aren’t campers being beaten up by the police like at the G20. It truly indicates the sad state of corporate media when even the allegedly left wing papers are interested in issues only so long as they are presented with dramatic images of police attacking protesters.

Somewhat bizarrely in yesterday’s Observer Peter Beaumont claimed that ‘the protesters should spend more time convincing others that their actions are sound,’ it’s hard to understand what he believes the workshops on the science of climate change and the careful efforts of campers to provide factually accurate workshops which clearly delineate why they are involved in protesting around these issues, but somewhat unsurprisingly he fails to mention that any workshops are taking place, instead focusing on what he claims are Climate Camp’s ‘often hazy messages and complex inner negotiations.’ Quite how specifically targetting institutions such as the European Climate Exchange, Barclays Bank and Shell, while holding discussions and workshops which communicate precisely why these targets have been chosen can be understood as ‘hazy’ is somewhat beyond me. In fairness it merely appears to be another case of a lazy journalist writing poorly researched rubbish having been disappointed at the lack of sensationalist images of police fighting with protesters.

Recently George Monbiot has been in the blogosphere for his exchange with Iam Plimer in which he joined the bastion of scientists, bloggers and journalists condemning Plimer’s recent book. Personally I found his debate with Paul Kingsnorth far more interesting,

Kingsnorth criticises Monbiot for seeking to create ‘Liberal Democracy 2.0′ arguing that

‘What we face is what John Michael Greer, in his book of the same name, calls a ‘long descent’ – a series of ongoing crises brought about by the factors I talked of in my first letter, which will bring an end to the all-consuming culture we have imposed upon the Earth. I’m sure ’some good will come’ from this, for that culture is a weapon of planetary mass destruction.’

Monbiot’s retort is that a series of crises would mean billions deaths and an immense amount of suffering, and that this scenario would likely see

‘instead of gathering as free collectives of happy householders, the survivors of this collapse will be subject to the will of people seeking to monopolise remaining resources. Thiswill is likely to be imposed through violence. Political accountability will be a distant memory. The chances of conserving any resource in these circumstances are approximately zero.’

Consequently Monbiot argues that

‘Strange as it seems, a de-fanged, steady-state version of the current settlement might offer the best prospect humankind has ever had of avoiding collapse. For the first time in our history we are well-informed about the extent and causes of our ecological crises, know what should be done to avert them and have the global means – if only the political will were present – of preventing them.’

Of the two perspectives pertaining to the probable and possible outcomes for humanity in the medium term future I would say that I more closely associate with Monbiot’s position of remaining hopefull despite mounting evidence that climate change will create massive detrimental impacts to civilisation as we know it.

Similarly I consur with Monbiot that the likely consequences of inaction are widening global inequalities, which under the current geopolitical climate of nationalism and antagonism fuelled by a neo-liberal drive for competition and self-interest will likely translate into war between nation states for resources, the collapse of social welfare where it does currently exist and a vast amount of suffering for billions. I also agree that this kind of scenario would not represent a positive development.

Where I feel that I differ from both authors however is in the framing of the debate itself. Civilisations are not static objects which can be saved (preserved intact) or destroyed (completely) as some kind of binary pair, they evolve as dynamic processes dependent on a multitude of factors. This means that the actions we take now are relevant as these actions will have an effect on which of the many potential futures we realise. The more sustainable technologies are developed and implemented, the more ghg emissions are cut, the more social solidarity and a sense of community, both locally and globally are constructed in the here and now, the better the prospects for the future will be. The difference may only be a small one, but that will largely depend on how many people decide to actively engage with the problem – larger actions now mean better conditions for the future.

Even if the future looks decidely gloomy, and both Monbiot and Kingsnorth argue that they are, the actions of people today still has some agency (not the myth of unilateral control Kingsnorth critiques, but an active factor in a dynamic causal network) in deciding what the future will be like. While individually our actions are only minutely consequential, collectively they can be massive. That is why I believe in building networks of change from the grassroots up.

The synthesis report from this year’s Copenhagen conference on climate change gives dire warning of the consequences of inaction about global warming. The report contains the most comprehensive update to climate science since the IPCC AR4 report. The report emphasizes six key messages, each of which is given its own chapter. Find the pdf of the report here

KEY MESSAGE 1: CLIMATIC TRENDS
Recent observations show that greenhouse gas emissions and many aspects of the climate are changing near the upper boundary of the IPCC range of projections. Many key climate indicators are already moving beyond the patterns of natural variability within which contemporary society and economy have developed and thrived. These indicators include global mean surface temperature, sea level rise, global ocean temperature, Arctic sea ice extent, ocean acidification, and extreme climatic events. With unabated emissions, many trends in climate will likely accelerate, leading to an increasing risk of abrupt or irreversible climatic shifts.

KEY MESSAGE 2: SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DISRUPTION
The research community provides much information to support discussions on “dangerous climate change”. Recent observations show that societies and ecosystems are highly vulnerable to even modest levels of climate change, with poor nations and communities, ecosystem services and biodiversity particularly at risk. Temperature rises above 2C will be difficult for contemporary societies to cope with, and are likely to cause major societal and environmental disruptions through the rest of the century and beyond.

KEY MESSAGE 3: LONG-TERM STRATEGY: GLOBAL TARGETS AND TIMETABLES
Rapid, sustained, and effective mitigation based on coordinated global and regional action is required to avoid “dangerous climate change” regardless of how it is defined. Weaker targets for 2020 increase the risk of serious impacts, including the crossing of tipping points, and make the task of meeting 2050 targets more difficult and costly. Setting a credible long-term price for carbon and the adoption of policies that promote energy efficiency and low-carbon technologies are central to effective mitigation.

KEY MESSAGE 4: EQUITY DIMENSIONS
Climate change is having, and will have, strongly differential effects on people within and between countries and regions, on this generation and future generations, and on human societies and the natural world. An effective, well-funded adaptation safety net is required for those people least capable of coping with climate change impacts, and equitable mitigation strategies are needed to protect the poor and most vulnerable. Tackling climate change should be seen as integral to the broader goals of enhancing socioeconomic development and equity throughout the world.

KEY MESSAGE 5: INACTION IS INEXCUSABLE
Society already has many tools and approaches – economic, technological, behavioural, and managerial – to deal effectively with the climate change challenge. If these tools are not vigorously and widely implemented, adaptation to the unavoidable climate change and the societal transformation required to decarbonise economies will not be achieved. A wide range of benefits will flow from a concerted effort to achieve effective and rapid adaptation and mitigation. These include job growth in the sustainable energy sector; reductions in the health, social, economic and environmental costs of climate change; and the repair of ecosystems and revitalisation of ecosystem services.

KEY MESSAGE 6: MEETING THE CHALLENGE
If the societal transformation required to meet the climate change challenge is to be achieved, a number of significant constraints must be overcome and critical opportunities seized. These include reducing inertia in social and economic systems; building on a growing public desire for governments to act on climate change; reducing activities that increase greenhouse gas emissions and reduce resilience (e.g., subsidies); and enabling the shifts from ineffective governance and weak institutions to innovative leadership in government, the private sector and civil society. Linking climate change with broader sustainable consumption and production concerns, human rights issues and democratic values is crucial for shifting societies towards more sustainable development pathways.

Breaking News right now on the BBC…

A new post mortem says Ian Tomlinson died from an abdominal haemorrhage not a heart attack after contact with police during the G20 protests.

The statement from the City of London Coroners Court overturns the initial assessment that the newspaper seller died of natural causes.

This stunning news now appears to suggest that Tomlinson was murdrered by police on April 1st. Furthermore, following his murder the police lied to press and public claiming that there was no contact between Tomlinson and the police prior to his death which they initally claimed was from ‘atural causes.

Had a member of the public not filmed the police carrying out a brutal and unprovoked assault on Tomlinson moments before his death the original police story would have been the only one the public ever heard. This makes this a watershed in some ways for the use of citizen journalism to expose police lies and create the necessary public outcry for the matter to be properly investigated, and the results of this investigation now appear to show that virtually every facet of the police’s inital statement was untrue and that they murdered an innocent man on his way home for work.

Breaking news today is that the Pirate Bay, the world’s largest bittorent portal has been found guilty of ‘assisting making available copyrighted content’ after the more serious charge brought against them of ‘assisting copyright infringement’ had been thrown out by the judge on the second day of the trial. While the e International Federation of the Phonographic Industries and the Motion Picture Association of America,had been seeking over 100 million dollars in compensation from TPB, the award was $3.6 million. The PirateBay are set to appeal the verdict, and there is expected to be no disruption to the site, who are advertising a press conference at 1pm Swedish time today.

It is important to remeber among the media coverage of the trial which has rarely portrayed TPB in anything but a grossly negative light, that firstly the Pirate Bay does not host any copyrighted material whatsoever. It merely provides search results and links to material hosted by various users. Google of course does exactly the same thing. However it’s hard to see the IFPI and MPAA trying to sue Google for doing the same thing.

Furthermore while the MPAA and IFPI may wish that torrents as a technology were made illegal it has to be remembered that they provide a vast number of legitimate uses, as torrents decentralised system of sharing files meaning that LInux distributions, independent films (systems such as the Catbot project do this) and other large files which are free to download can be shared by a large community without the problem of bottlenecking downloads at a centralised server. Indeed the  more popular a torrent the faster it can be shared by the community, making it a tremendously useful technology for creating a readily available creative commons.

The BBC’s rather poor coverage of the trial concluded today with a story and blog comment in which Darren Waters claims

The professional creative industries know too well that file-sharing copyright files without permission is not something they will ever completely eradicate.

Instead, they want to drive it to the margins of society – and to do that they have to educate the file-sharers and attempt to eradicate the abuse of file-sharing technologies.

However what exactly they seek to educate people about is totally unexplained. Perhaps they seek to educate file sharers as to how little money the poor record and film companies are making and how they are collectively on the verge of bankruptcy… Perhaps they seek to educate people that the cost of creating a digital copy of a dvd or cd is just a few pence, but will retail for somewhere between 15 and  20 pounds… Perhaps they seek to educate people that the notion that should be able to sample a product to see if they like it before making a purchase is enitrely unreasonable and that one must part with thir money to discover that a cd is rubbish.

Most people I know download music and films. If they like them they will often buy the album, go to see the band live, or go to watch the film in the cinema as it will be better quality and on a larger screen. However asking people to part with money without any knowledge of the product as happened in the old days is no longer a viable option, and no amount of ‘education’ from enormous corporations with multi-billion dollar annual turnovers will convince people otherwise.

The BBC finish their coverage of the trial with the statement that

The creative industries want ISPs to become the guardian of those gateways and take more responsibility over the way their customers use the internet.

Which essentially says that having failed in their attempts to ‘educate’ consumers that the outdated models which the MPAA and IFPI climg to are the best way to preserve corporate profits… i mean help struggling artists… They are now trying to get internet service providers to spy on their users and give these enormous corporations the details of any individual who shares stuff. So it turns out that they are fairly wise to the fact that education is not a viable option for them after all, but that trying going after individuals and trying to scare people into doing what they want is a better long term strategy to help the massively rich to stay massively rich.

This story was found on BBC Devon and came to my attention via the Bristle blog

All five members of a group arrested in connection with an alleged terror plot have been released without charge.

Police say the final member of the five, a 25-year-old man, was freed on Tuesday night.

The man was arrested in Plymouth on 27 March, along with two 20-year-old women, a 19-year-old man and a 16-year-old boy after police found explosives.

Police said investigations were continuing, but those freed were no danger to the public.

‘Firework-like devices’

A search of a Plymouth flat after the arrest of the eldest man led to police finding “political literature”.

After the flat was searched, a number of “firework-like devices” were made safe by Royal Navy bomb disposal experts.

Literature found in the flat was described by officers as political but “not extremist”.

The last activists to be released without charge were freed from police custody on the 9th of April having been arrested under the Terrorism act between the 27th and 29th of March according to the Devon and Cornwall Constbualry. So that means that activists were held for up to up to weeks without charge under terrorism laws before being released on the basis that they had not done anything unlawful.

As ever the BBC seeks to defend the police’s actions, describing fireworks as ‘explosives.’ I hate to think what they would make of my house, where my fire performing housemates have what would undoubtedly be described as ‘a large volume of highly flammable liquids’ alongside my collection of ‘political literature.’ Its quite frightening to think that this combination could land someone in prison, held without charges for two weeks.

The BBC article concludes that ‘Detectives were investigating the possibility they were planning to mount protests in London against last week’s G20 summit of world leaders.’ It appears then that detaining people without charge for two weeks because they have ‘political literature’ and intend to attend protests is now seen as legitimate police tactics in the face of the grave terrorist threat posed by the eclectic mass of dancers, musicians and street performers seen at climate camp last week.

This just adds to the growing list of abuses of power perpetrated by police forces using Terrorism act legislation. At the protests in London police were using Terrorism act laws to force protesters to delete digital photographs and video footage. Given that this kind of citizen journalism has played a major part in highlighting the police’s role in the events surrounding Ian Tomlinson’s death alongside graphic illustrations of riot police callously attacking peaceful protesters with their hands raised chanting peace not riot at climate camp, I’m left wondering how much longer these ridiculous laws can be defended for when they are being used to so clearly to breach innocent people’s rights.

The guardian now has a fairly substantial list of eyewitness reports surrounding the Police attacking Ian Tomlinson shortly before his death on April 1st

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/08/g20-ian-tomlinson-death-witnesses

The main protests of the day had ebbed away but hundreds of people were still penned inside a police cordon near the Bank of England around 7pm last Wednesday when newspaper seller Ian Tomlinson started on his journey home through the City. He never made it. What happened in Tomlinson’s final half hour before he collapsed and died of a heart attack is now the subject of an inquiry on behalf of the Independent Police Complaints Commission. The Guardian has gathered statements from 15 witnesses who saw Tomlinson to piece together a forensic reconstruction his movements. This directly contradicts the official version of events put out by police in the aftermath of Tomlinson’s death. The witnesses accuse police of lashing at protesters and bystanders alike, attacking them with batons, shields and dogs. Officers are alleged to have attacked Tomlinson twice; both times from behind and as he was walking away. Eight witnesses produced photographic evidence, time- and date-stamped, that corroborates their version of events. Three said they saw Tomlinson being assaulted by riot police. Here are their accounts.

A: Marcus Bensasson, 30, photographer, south London

I was taking pictures of police charging protesters and using their batons. It was violent. One charge took people by surprise. They thought they were at a safe distance and then suddenly police – riot police – were charging at them. My photographs show police attacking protesters with batons. One image shows a bystander being shoved in the back with a shield at the very spot Ian Tomlinson collapsed.

B: Dr Justin Meggitt, 40, senior lecturer in religious studies, Cambridge University

I was with the crowd at Cornhill. But when police started coming up I went down the pedestrianised zone, Royal Exchange Buildings, on the Threadneedle Street end.

I saw a couple of occasions when police with batons hit individuals. It wasn’t a big row of officers. They seemed to be spread out. There were dogs along the street.

I was pretty disturbed. I didn’t expect that kind of violence. So at the time I took pictures and on at least one occasion I went up to the policeman to complain that he appeared to have hit someone, right in front of me, for no apparent reason.

The dog attacks occurred at about 7.10pm, when a police dog, as far as I could see, bit the handler and then bit a man. The man who was bitten was showing people his injuries. I have a photograph. They were very deep gashes in the top of his arm.

Then, as the crowd surged out of Cornhill at around 7.12pm and some people ran down Royal Exchange Buildings, I saw a policeman clubbing somebody. This was a young man – I saw him throw a plastic bottle. The policeman ran at him and clubbed him. He did fall over and then ran away. Then there was another dog attack at 7.16pm. The person was a tall, younger man and the policeman set the dog on him.

And then, soon after that, about 10 seconds afterwards, something happened in front of me where someone was clubbed again. That person was on the ground and they were being hit, at least once. They were on the floor and hit. That struck me as another unprovoked assault. I was really shocked. I know it’s difficult policing these things. But these incidents took me by real surprise. It seemed as though individual police officers were taking it out on bystanders for no reason. They seemed extremely pumped up. After that I thought it was unwise to stay in that area because it was extremely violent.

C: Anna Branthwaite, 36, freelance photographer, south London

There had been a situation where a small number of police officers had become outnumbered by protesters in Cornhill, and had retreated into the pedestrian street, Royal Exchange Buildings. It was like, anything could happen right now. Riot officers began to arrive and within minutes the police had regained control around the Threadneedle Street end where I went to stand.

At this point there were probably about 20 officers – some dog handlers, some riot officers. And members of the public – city workers, people watching – were being stopped around the traffic lights although some were being allowed to walk through the pedestrian street that was now relatively clear, with a few protesters still standing around but certainly not a crowd.

The dog handlers began to sweep through the pedestrian street to start forming a police line. A dog barked and I saw one protester was on the floor who managed to get up. That’s what drew my attention to that spot. It was then that I noticed Ian Tomlinson, who was walking from Threadneadle Street direction, walking towards Cornhill Street. A riot police officer had already grabbed him and was pushing him.

It wasn’t just pushing him – he’d rushed him. He went to the floor and he did actually roll. That was quite noticeable. It was the force of the impact. He bounced on the floor. It was a very forceful knocking-down from behind. The officer hit him twice with a baton when he was lying on the floor.

So it wasn’t just that the officer had pushed him – it became an assault. And then the officer picked him up from the back, continued to walk or charge with him, and threw him. He was running and stumbling. He didn’t turn and confront the officer or anything like that.

Tomlinson was not confronting a police cordon. He was not in a crowd of protesters being corralled by police. He was walking on the street away from the police with barely anyone around him when he was attacked from behind.

I think the officers were so fired up, it had been very intimidating for them to be outnumbered. When they came back I think this one officer just rushed in and lashed out. And it happened to be Mr Tomlinson. The next time I saw Ian Tomlinson was when he had collapsed about 50 yards down around the corner and surrounded by a group of police officers.

D: Kezia Rolfe, 27, NGO researcher, east London

I saw a man approaching the police line from my right. He was quite tall with a beer belly and short hair. I later recognised him from a picture. He was on his own. He walked up to the police across the Royal Exchange Building, towards the centre left of their line.

He did not appear drunk – he was walking normally. I saw him suddenly fall back as though flung down with force. It was as though he had been spun. He fell and hit the top of his head hard. I was shocked. He lay on the ground for around 30 seconds without moving before a protester helped him up. The police did not help him at all.

E: Amiri Howe, 24, actor/musician, west London

We stood on a ledge near Cornhill. Before he got hit, at the beginning of the whole thing – we were watching the protesters at the Bank of England. Police got into a couple of scuffles with people. They were pushing the line forward, pushing the line forward.

We saw a couple of scuffles happening. Our friends were inside trying to get out – no water, no food, we wanted to get them out. Police started coming forward. Missiles started to be thrown. They came in with their batons, stamping.

The guy [Tomlinson] was stood there. He got hit near the head with a baton. It was like a pencil, he just fell to the floor and hit his head again when he hit the floor. When he got hit, police were coming forwards. I saw him fall so I moved back. But I saw him on the floor and someone picking him up – that’s when I took the picture.

If there was CCTV then they will see exactly what happened – which is exactly what I said happened. You see in that corner where the dogs came up, it was proper chaos. After that, I was taking pictures of police and the dog line, and a girl came and said, ‘this guy needs help’. He was further back down the road. It was the same guy that got hit. He was wearing the exact same stuff.

F: Investment fund manager, 38, from New York who filmed the attack

The primary reason for me coming forward is that it was clear the family weren’t getting any answers. I saw him wandering around [before he was attacked]. He was just taking a look. He just got too close to the police line. [When he was attacked] it was absolutely horrible. I didn’t put two and two together. Then I looked at the footage again and thought ‘my God, it’s the man they pushed to the ground’. It must be him it was minutes later who collapsed.

G: Jasper Jackson, 23, journalist, Paddington

There was an altercation with a protester who had been doing graffiti. He was dragged by police and smashed his head against the door. After a bit of scuffling they withdrew down a side street. The police then brought in a set of dogs and blocked Royal Exchange Buildings. The picture I have of him is of him stumbling in front of the protesters and in front of the police dogs. He looked dazed, a glazed look on his face.

Later, someone shouted to the police with a loudhailer: there’s a casualty down – can we get a medic? The police took this seriously. Out of an alley came medics and policemen in riot gear.

There were a couple of people throwing bottles in the direction. A bottle smashed near a Starbucks. Protesters told them to stop it. In fact, threatening to kill other protesters if they did anything to disrupt the treatment.

H: Press photographer 1, anonymous

There were two sets of police and a sort of standoff. Those police started moving forward to try and push the protesters back. If you see the pictures you can see exactly what they were doing. The batons were up, they were moving forward, they were using their shields.

I saw this guy on the ground. I photographed him. I saw there was something seriously wrong with him when I got the first picture of his face. There was a couple of police around him and the protesters were beginning to throw things. Then the protesters were saying, ’stop, there’s one of ours down there’.

I: Press photographer 2, anonymous

I was at the police line at Cornhill at the Bank of England. We were being pushed back by the police line. The police were coming forward to cajole people. They were using batons. I moved back and as I was moving back towards Bishopsgate I saw this guy on his back being attended to. A missile was thrown in the direction. But I wouldn’t like to say it was intended at police. It sort of landed in the vicinity.

J: Daniel MacPhee, 24, social support worker, Kingston

If the truth be that he died of a heart attack it’s not surprising really because it felt like people were running for their lives. I looked over to my left and there was a man lying in the street. Someone shouted out, ‘he fell down, over there’ – as if to say that he fell down before somehow.

I rang 999. I was on the phone. They said, ‘is he breathing?’ Then they asked me to put him on his back. So with the help of the person I was with, we managed to get him on to his back.

Not long after that a group of four or five riot police came running out from the crowd and surrounded him. The ambulancewoman on the phone said to me, ‘can you pass me to the police?’ I said, ‘I’ve got the ambulance on the phone, do you want to speak to them?’ They just ignored me.

When the police interviewed me, I said that I saw no violence toward this individual, which I didn’t. And afterwards the police said it would take a very brave coroner to proclaim that the cause of death was because he was beaten up, or because of the protests that day. They said it would take a brave coroner to suggest the cause of death was because of any wrongdoing by the police.

Initially I just kind of forgot about it. But it was later on in the day that I thought, why would someone say it would take a brave coroner? If the facts are there.

K: Callum Holden-Cooper, 20, student

He came from the direction of the police and he just collapsed.

He didn’t have any blood on his face. He seemed quite out of it. I saw he was breathing. A guy with a loud hailer called out. Four riot police and two medics came around the guy who collapsed. The police line kept moving. The police kept charging forward. We kept thinking we were going to get killed.

L: Elias Stoakes, 25, student, Mile End

There were two missiles that I remember, thrown from the back. The police claim that protesters impeded them from treating him because of a barrage of missiles was completely untrue. Protesters from the crowd wanted to help him. The crowd were extremely angry at people who had thrown missiles. They were mostly concerned about police charging. Earlier on the same street they hit me with batons over my thigh and calf. They were saying things like, ‘That got you up. Now fuck off’. I still have the bruises. That was because I was stopping to help someone who hurt their head and they came at me. They pressed the pressure point under my ear to make me move.

M: Medical student, anonymous

We were all running – he was running near me. I probably only noticed him just before he fell. Police were chasing us with their batons out.

Then he fell to the floor. A few other people went over to him as well. Then the police charged everyone again. They were all charging towards us. He was lying with his feet toward the police. I stood in the way with my arms out to stop people from running into him. I said: there’s a man down. The people ran around me.

The person on the phone to the ambulance told the police the ambulance service wanted to speak to them. He held the phone out to the police officer. The police officer held the phone and said, ‘no, move along, we’re dealing with this’.

N: Natalie Langford, 21, student from London

We had been by the police line shouting ‘let them out’ because of the people stuck inside. It was peaceful at first. The police were saying: move back, move back, and surging forward.

Some students were sitting down on the floor – I was as well. They came in using batons against us. Police came in and began hitting people with batons. My friend got hit quite badly. It was a minute after that we saw him [Ian Tomlinson] stumbling about. He just seemed really disorientated and stumbling. Then he collapsed.

O: Peter Apps, 20, law student, east London

He was outside a shop. I think it was a glass-fronted shop. When I first saw him he was stumbling along the pavement on the left-hand side of the road. He was disorientated and stumbling and collided with the wall that was jutting out of a shop, and then fell over. Someone had called an ambulance. When protesters were giving him first aid, I looked up and I saw a lot of protesters running toward me and the police charging toward them with their batons out.

Meanwhile there is a protest planned for this Saturday 11th April with a march from Bethnal Green Police Station to the bank of England, where flowers will be laid at the spot where Tomlinson died.

http://london.indymedia.org.uk/events/1079