# Naomi of Brixton, RIP



## nick h. (Apr 22, 2008)

Some of you may know Naomi, the cheerful young woman wearing a Marlboro jacket who is (or was) one of Brixton's more colourful characters. She was also known as Gully. She was run over by a prison van at the Acre Lane/Coldharbour Lane crossroads this afternoon. She had a lovely smile and was always friendly to me whether she was drunk or sober. She had quite a severe drink problem but she was very sweet natured. We often chatted in Windrush Square and I'm going to miss her. My deepest sympathies to her family and friends, and to anyone who witnessed her death.


----------



## Propaganda (Apr 22, 2008)

Oh man, I didn't realise it was Naomi.  Sad whoever it was, but Naomi was special 'round here.  No matter what she was doing or what she was on she always looked fantastic.  Definitely one of the most creatively dressed and interesting personalities in this neighborhood..  

Condolences to all the people who were close to her.

R.I.P.


----------



## lynne8 (Apr 22, 2008)

I didn't know her, but this is very sad.  R.I.P Naomi of Brixton, and to those of you who knew her, I am very sorry for your loss.


----------



## Citizen66 (Apr 22, 2008)

Marlboro jacket did you say? sad to lose a fellow style icon. RIP


----------



## rollinder (Apr 22, 2008)

didn't know her or anything but it's sad that there's one less interesting person in the world


----------



## gabi (Apr 22, 2008)

A fine lady. Bonkers. A conversation could drift in any unexpected direction and if it is true that some screw drove over her on purpose then there will be hell to pay. CUNTS. Theres shitloads of CCTV there so we'll see. I bet the guy gets off though due to his 'precious cargo'.


----------



## Augie March (Apr 22, 2008)

gabi said:


> A fine lady. Bonkers. A conversation could drift in any unexpected direction and if it is true that some screw drove over her on purpose then there will be hell to pay. CUNTS. Theres shitloads of CCTV there so we'll see. I bet the guy gets off though due to his 'precious cargo'.



Where does it say that someone run her over on purpose?


----------



## gabi (Apr 22, 2008)

On the brix chitter chatter thread. Will find out more tomorrow i guess.


----------



## agricola (Apr 22, 2008)

Augie March said:


> Where does it say that someone run her over on purpose?



That certainly was the implication of the News at Ten report that was just on, though how much that is worth given that they also - despite comments from Brixtonites about how much the Police liked/knew her - managed to get in comments about fractious community / "the authorities" relations.

There is a bit more info here.


----------



## Urbanblues (Apr 22, 2008)

Go with the ghosts girl. RIP


----------



## jcsd (Apr 22, 2008)

Very sad. I was almsot run over today, by some cunt who wasn't looking at the road and even when he did see me didn't bother to slow down or brake.

Prison van drivers are under pressure because their companies have contractual obligations to get prisoners to court by a ceratin time. If not theyir company gets a fine.. I've had a prison van go through a red light at a pedestarian crossing just as I was about to cross the road. Ironic as I was on my way to Court at the time.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 22, 2008)

jcsd said:


> Very sad. I was almsot run over today, by some cunt who wasn't looking at the road and even when he did see me didn't bother to slow down or brake.
> 
> Prison van drivers are under pressure because their companies have contractual obligations to get prisoners to court by a ceratin time. If not theyir company gets a fine.. I've had a prison van go through a red light at a pedestarian crossing just as I was about to cross the road. Ironic as I was on my way to Court at the time.



It happened in the evening so I don't think pressure to get to court was the issue TBF. 

Whatever it was RIP.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 23, 2008)

Naomi deliberately blocked the van when it was stopped at the lights. It was a game she liked to play. (She was nearly always drunk.) The van inched forward and she banged on the front. Then it accelerated and she was crushed. Perhaps the driver thought she had moved or fallen to the side? It's hard to believe he ran her over deliberately. If he drives up Brixton Hill often I'm sure he would have recognised her. There are so many CCTV cameras there I expect we will get a definitive answer in due course. 

Her body was removed at about 8.15. The street has just been washed. There's nothing left of her except an IV drip in the gutter.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Apr 23, 2008)

nick h. said:


> Her body was removed at about 8.15. The street has just been washed. There's nothing left of her except an IV drip in the gutter.



Oh what a bleak image.  Good luck to those who knew her, I hope you can do something for her memory.  I am not local to that area and I didn't know her obviously but I can guess how some of you will feel.  Life and death, so sudden, so brutal.


----------



## suburbia (Apr 23, 2008)

Hocus Eye. said:


> I am not local to that area and I didn't know her obviously



Ditto, but RIP


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Apr 23, 2008)

Wow, never heard of her but RIP.


----------



## gabi (Apr 23, 2008)

She was cantankerous, but the best souls are. Gully.... x


----------



## butterfly child (Apr 23, 2008)

Rutita1 said:


> It happened in the evening so I don't think pressure to get to court was the issue TBF.
> 
> Whatever it was RIP.



There are also pressures to get people to prisons, as the prisons can't shut down for the evening until everyone is settled in.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 23, 2008)

I didn't know her, but RIP.  Sad.


----------



## Kanda (Apr 23, 2008)

Very sad, but what's the difference between this and some Hacket shirt wearing pisshead Claphamite doing the same??


----------



## baldrick (Apr 23, 2008)

Kanda said:


> Very sad, but what's the difference between this and some Hacket shirt wearing pisshead Claphamite doing the same??


er, people on this board knew her?  i don't think this is the place for this conversation, either.

RIP Naomi.  I didn't know her, but it's sad to hear.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 23, 2008)

Rutita1 said:


> It happened in the evening so I don't think pressure to get to court was the issue TBF.
> 
> Whatever it was RIP.



Dispersals (shipping freshly convicted prisoners from the nick nearest the court they appeared at to wherever they're to be warehoused, and remand prisoners to the nick nearest the court they're scheduled for) take place in the evening. Not as high pressure as getting people to court on time, but still very busy busy busy, especially with the capacity problems most prisons have had for the last 20 years.

Bad cess on any driver unprofessional enough to fuck about with someone's life, though, no excuse.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 23, 2008)

butterfly child said:


> There are also pressures to get people to prisons, as the prisons can't shut down for the evening until everyone is settled in.


Back when I started working for the prisons dept of the Home Office in the late eighties, most nicks shut down by about 8.30PM. By the time I left in the mid nineties it was 11PM, mostly due to space being such a premium that you'd have inmates being shipped across several counties within a region to find them a berth.
Fucking ridiculous, and almost all the responsibility of Michael Howard, who decided that private prisons were a goer, and stopped building new stock, or even replacing old stock.


----------



## Pavlik (Apr 23, 2008)

Didn't know her but I always seem to befriend people like her.
RIP to another wandering soul.


----------



## gabi (Apr 23, 2008)

More info on it here. Apols for the Mail link. Bizarrely they seem to have put the most effort into covering this.

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages...ews.html?in_article_id=561416&in_page_id=1770


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 23, 2008)

ViolentPanda said:


> Dispersals (shipping freshly convicted prisoners from the nick nearest the court they appeared at to wherever they're to be warehoused, and remand prisoners to the nick nearest the court they're scheduled for) take place in the evening. Not as high pressure as getting people to court on time, but still very busy busy busy, especially with the capacity problems most prisons have had for the last 20 years.
> 
> Bad cess on any driver unprofessional enough to fuck about with someone's life, though, no excuse.




1. That point has been made already thanks.
2. No - one is making excuses. 
3. From what's been reported on this thread it doesn't seem like a case of speeding driver.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Apr 23, 2008)

Poor woman, I hope it was over very quickly and she didn't suffer for too long.
Isn't that part of Brixton covered by lots of CCTV?


----------



## baldrick (Apr 23, 2008)

Rutita1 said:


> 1. That point has been made already thanks.
> 2. No - one is making excuses.
> 3. From what's been reported on this thread it doesn't seem like a case of speeding driver.


  looked to me like VP was trying to be helpful, no need to take it so personally.


----------



## gabi (Apr 23, 2008)

Stobart Stopper said:


> Poor woman, I hope it was over very quickly and she didn't suffer for too long.
> Isn't that part of Brixton covered by lots of CCTV?




Unfortunately I dont think it was over quickly at all. First she was dragged 20 metres and then they spent quite some time trying to free her before she passed away.

Yep, lots of CCTV there.


----------



## agricola (Apr 23, 2008)

Stobart Stopper said:


> Poor woman, I hope it was over very quickly and she didn't suffer for too long.
> Isn't that part of Brixton covered by lots of CCTV?



Yes, that bit especially.  Of course, whether it was pointing in the right direction is another question.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 23, 2008)

agricola said:


> Yes, that bit especially. Of course, whether it was pointing in the right direction is another question.


 

Well at least it was daylight though


----------



## CharlieAddict (Apr 23, 2008)

my gosh...i was there at around 6:15pm last night.
and then this morning at 6am, i noticed someone had left some flowers by the grassy bank.

don't think i've seen naomi but at 30 and so young, it's ever so sad. 

RIP


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

mailonsunday link said:
			
		

> "There were about 100 people, all looking under the van and taking photos. They weren't trying to help, just gawping. It was sick.
> 
> "Then it started to turn nasty. They were pointing their camera phones into the driver's face and shouting, 'You're a murderer! You've killed her!'



Don't you just love the great British public and their fucking camera phones ...


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 23, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> Don't you just love the great British public and their fucking camera phones ...


 

I heard about that last night, but I've seen similar situations when there's been crashes up Brixton Hill so it certainly doesn't surprise me.

Sick cunts


----------



## Structaural (Apr 23, 2008)

Poor woman. RIP


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

Reality check:  Don't be surprised if this incident does not result in the driver being convicted (or even charged) with any offence (or, at least, with any significant offence).

Especially bearing in mind the blind spots which large vehicles have, this:



> Witnesses told how the woman "danced" in the road and stopped the vehicle at 5.45pm yesterday, shouting at the driver and slapping at the bonnet.



if true, is quite likely to present a very large evidential hurdle for the prosecution in proving any gross negligence, recklessness or even carelessness.  It _may_ be possible, but it will not be easy.


----------



## Structaural (Apr 23, 2008)

Sounds like he ran her over on purpose, if he'd stopped the van already.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 23, 2008)

Rutita1 said:


> 3. From what's been reported on this thread it doesn't seem like a case of speeding driver.


I know, my point was/is that many of those drivers are so busy rushing around that they're not paying the sort of attention they should to their driving.


----------



## john x (Apr 23, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> if true, is quite likely to present a very large evidential hurdle for the prosecution in proving any gross negligence, recklessness or even carelessness.  It _may_ be possible, but it will not be easy.



I can't see how! If the vehicle had indeed stopped (for whatever reason) the driver then has to explain to a court why he drove off with someone right in front of his vehicle knowing that death or serious injury would result. The fact that he was late is not a lawful reason to deliberately run someone over.

If someone was pointing a shotgun at his head, fair enough but this woman by all accounts, posed no threat to him, his vehicle or his passengers!

john x


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 23, 2008)

baldrick said:


> looked to me like VP was trying to be helpful, no need to take it so personally.



Hey, no skin off my nose.


----------



## girasol (Apr 23, 2008)

ViolentPanda said:


> I know, my point was/is that many of those drivers are so busy rushing around that they're not paying the sort of attention they should to their driving.



I don't care how rushed someone may be though, not seeing someone dancing right in front of your van really is going to be impossible to justify/explain...  This is terrible


----------



## wurlycurly (Apr 23, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> Reality check:  Don't be surprised if this incident does not result in the driver being convicted (or even charged) with any offence (or, at least, with any significant offence).
> 
> Especially bearing in mind the blind spots which large vehicles have, this:
> 
> ...



Do you never, ever take a five-minute break from Ex-Copper Mode?? Get over it for Christ's sake


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

Structaural said:


> Sounds like ...


.... lots of things possibly (depending on your chosen viewpoint / prejudices).


----------



## editor (Apr 23, 2008)

wurlycurly said:


> Do you never, ever take a five-minute break from Ex-Copper Mode?? Get over it for Christ's sake


Sorry, but DB's post  just looked like a pertinent and useful insight in to the legal process to me.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 23, 2008)

baldrick said:


> looked to me like VP was trying to be helpful, no need to take it so personally.



I know, I was just making sure that I was not being misunderstood.


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

john x said:


> I can't see how! If the vehicle had indeed stopped (for whatever reason) the driver then has to explain to a court why he drove off with someone *right in front* of his vehicle *knowing* that death or serious injury would result. *The fact that he was late * is not a lawful reason to deliberately run someone over.


You see those bits I've bolded ... those are assumptions, those are ...


----------



## Dan U (Apr 23, 2008)

john x said:


> I can't see how! If the vehicle had indeed stopped (for whatever reason) the driver then has to explain to a court why he drove off with someone right in front of his vehicle knowing that death or serious injury would result. The fact that he was late is not a lawful reason to deliberately run someone over.
> 
> If someone was pointing a shotgun at his head, fair enough but this woman by all accounts, posed no threat to him, his vehicle or his passengers!
> 
> john x



he might say he thought she was a distraction while people round the back 'blew the doors off'

it's what i would say, in his shoes.


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

wurlycurly said:


> Do you never, ever take a five-minute break from Ex-Copper Mode?? Get over it for Christ's sake


The main reason I come here at all is to try and add to the (usually dire) level of knowledge people have of police procedure, investigation, prosecution and the necessary evidence for a conviction.  In my experience many of the concerns people have over policing (and I suspect many other things) are based on a lack of reliable information.

If you already know everything there is to know on the subjects and don't want to read what I post, you don't have to.  You know what you can do.


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

Dan U said:


> he might say he thought she was a distraction while people round the back 'blew the doors off'


I'd be very surprised if his explanation for what happened is anything like so dramatic ... though it is possible!


----------



## Dan U (Apr 23, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> I'd be very surprised if his explanation for what happened is anything like so dramatic ... though it is possible!



i have an over active imagination!


----------



## john x (Apr 23, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> You see those bits I've bolded ... those are assumptions, those are ...



Of course they are, although I am *assuming* more will be known about what actually happened if it ever goes to court.

The point I was making was that if the driver had indeed come to a stop (which seems to be what most people are saying) what you said about her dancing in the road and pulling on the windows do not relieve the driver from his lawful duty of care before pulling off. If he claims that 'she was jumping about all over the place, pulling the wipers. One minute I saw her, the next she seemed to have gone', he still has to make a case for it to be safe to have started the vehicle moving again to avoid the accustion of being reckless as to whether she was injured or not.

This whole case will rely on credible witness/CCTv evidence as to what physically happened in those few moments.

john x


----------



## likesfish (Apr 23, 2008)

though being drunk and playing silly buggers with a lorry fairly stupid way to go


----------



## agricola (Apr 23, 2008)

john x said:


> I can't see how! If the vehicle had indeed stopped (for whatever reason) the driver then has to explain to a court why he drove off with someone right in front of his vehicle knowing that death or serious injury would result. The fact that he was late is not a lawful reason to deliberately run someone over.
> 
> If someone was pointing a shotgun at his head, fair enough but this woman by all accounts, posed no threat to him, his vehicle or his passengers!
> 
> john x



I must say I agree with this.  Yes, if he had been moving and she ran out in front of him then I could see a difficulty, but as (if the reports are to be believed) the van was stopped when she was banging on his windows and standing in front then one imagines it would be less difficult for a prosecution to suggest the driver knew she was there.


----------



## mrsfran (Apr 23, 2008)

We don't yet know the facts. Can people not wait a few days until the situation becomes clear before you start picking sides/using this to further your political agenda/blaming people? Or is your need to argue and score points more important than establishing facts around someone's death?

Oh wait. This is Urban. Of course it is.


----------



## TopCat (Apr 23, 2008)

missfran said:


> We don't yet know the facts. Can people not wait a few days until the situation becomes clear before you start picking sides/using this to further your political agenda/blaming people? Or is your need to argue and score points more important than establishing facts around someone's death?
> 
> Oh wait. This is Urban. Of course it is.



Speculation, debate and arguing is what this place is about.


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 23, 2008)

hegley said:
			
		

> never seems particularly appropriate to me tbh.



Indeed. Totally unhelpful in any circumstances for the emergency services.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 23, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> The main reason I come here at all is to try and add to the (usually dire) level of knowledge people have of police procedure, investigation, prosecution and the necessary evidence for a conviction.  In my experience many of the concerns people have over policing (and I suspect many other things) are based on a lack of reliable information.
> 
> If you already know everything there is to know on the subjects and don't want to read what I post, you don't have to.  You know what you can do.



standard double speak from a former coper and i now know why i dislike them so much, doing what i do ie take photographs of an incident here in Sheffield, and i live on one of the roads closed to cars not people, this twat tells me i can not go there as i had a camera? so we talk he was insistent till i proved i lived where i said i did ie open the f-ing front door. the police are full of shit back to post..


----------



## TopCat (Apr 23, 2008)

Teaboy said:


> Indeed. Totally unhelpful in any circumstances for the emergency services.



The emergancy undertaker was hindered eh?


----------



## twistedAM (Apr 23, 2008)

missfran said:


> We don't yet know the facts. Can people not wait a few days until the situation becomes clear before you start picking sides/using this to further your political agenda/blaming people? Or is your need to argue and score points more important than establishing facts around someone's death?
> 
> Oh wait. This is Urban. Of course it is.



...where the first post on the incident said it was a 13 year old girl.
A tragic event and I'm with missfran on this one.


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 23, 2008)

TopCat said:


> The emergancy undertaker was hindered eh?



Urm,  did it not say earlier on the thread that they spent some trying to free her from underneath the van?  I'm guessing that wasent the general public.  Also there was something about an IV thingy in the gutter, which would indicate an ambulance crew trying to save a life.  Though of course I am speculating about speculation.


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 23, 2008)

gabi said:
			
		

> The fact that he was stopped at the lights then proceeded to drive straight over the woman from a standstill and drag her 20metres removes any sympathy I might have felt for the driver. He can't possibly claim it was in any way accidental. Allegedly of course.



I don't think you can claim any of this as *fact*.  What you have is reports and speculation and until we know a few more 'facts' deciding that it couldn't have been accidental is a bit beyond your remit. 

Fact is we don't know how events unfolded from the driver's point of view.


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 23, 2008)

I'd be very surprised if the police closed rank on this one.  This was a employee of a private company (I believe) involved in an accident seemingly witnessed by many.  I suspect the police will not have any qualms about charging the driver if he has done anything wrong.


----------



## TopCat (Apr 23, 2008)

Teaboy said:


> I'd be very surprised if the police closed rank on this one.  This was a employee of a private company (I believe) involved in an accident seemingly witnessed by many.  I suspect the police will not have any qualms about charging the driver if he has done anything wrong.



They _will_ close ranks. Accusations of brutal assualt against private prison transfer staff don't go too far...


----------



## cesare (Apr 23, 2008)

That poor woman, RIP Naomi/Gully

Also her friends and neighbours that witnessed her death, huge shock to them and the community 



---------------

Once the initial shock and emotion has receded a bit, I hope the eye witnesses individually write down a very detailed account of what they actually saw and heard, in the most neutral and objective (therefore credible) way possible. It's cathartic to get it all out, and it's 'bearing witness' and - AND - it might be very important. 

I'd best bugger off cos I'm not from Brixton and I didn't know Gully, just a two pennorth


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Apr 23, 2008)

twisted said:


> ...where the first post on the incident said it was a 13 year old girl.
> A tragic event and I'm with missfran on this one.


That's was me, saying what they had reported on London Tonight yesterday, when the story broke.


----------



## smokedout (Apr 23, 2008)

i chatted to her a few times when i lived in brixton and she was at reclaim the food the other week

seemed to spend much of her life winding up the old bill in a fairly inoffensive and quite funny way

top bird


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 23, 2008)

gabi said:


> More info on it here. Apols for the Mail link. Bizarrely they seem to have put the most effort into covering this.
> 
> http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages...ews.html?in_article_id=561416&in_page_id=1770



I see the daily mail readers are taking a somewhat different view.


----------



## john x (Apr 23, 2008)

Err... where has the rest of this thread gone? 

john x


----------



## Crispy (Apr 23, 2008)

There was a massive argument ruining it, which is now in the bin. Poster are free to pay respects/remember the dead here.


----------



## shygirl (Apr 23, 2008)

Crispy pulled it, took a while tho'.  Over-use of 'cunt', personal abuse, etc.  Must have taken most offence at my post asking sal who the fuck she thinks she is


----------



## Crispy (Apr 23, 2008)

shygirl said:


> Crispy pulled it, took a while tho'.  Over-use of 'cunt', personal abuse, etc.  Must have taken most offence at my post asking sal who the fuck she thinks she is


Take it elsewhere.


----------



## shygirl (Apr 23, 2008)

I agree with the binning, cos it was all too nasty given the circumstances, including my own post.  I just get incensed when people go on like people are less than human if they have an addiction.  

Sorry.


----------



## shygirl (Apr 23, 2008)

One memory I have of Naomi is when we were at the reclaim the food stall on 9 March.  Rosie et al had made a pie with a vagina moulded out of pastry on top.  When a copper asked her what she was eating, she shouted out, 'fanny pie'!  

On the few occasions I spoke to her, she was warm and friendly.   I really feel for her partner, who had only left her to go somewhereher minutes before she died.  He's distraught, but getting a lot of support from friends.


----------



## BrixiSteve (Apr 23, 2008)

wurlycurly said:


> Do you never, ever take a five-minute break from Ex-Copper Mode?? Get over it for Christ's sake


 

What's your problem?  It's great to get his perspective on it.  What would be the point of him commenting on something like this, with his knowledge as an ex-cop, if he's not going to share it....?


----------



## TopCat (Apr 23, 2008)

Quite a few people demonstrating about this in brixton right now. Lots of flowers tied to a tree and angry faces abound.


----------



## trashpony (Apr 23, 2008)

She danced in front of cars stopped at the lights quite a lot. That was what she did. Poor woman, what a horrible way to die 

It's vile that people were standing around taking photos but I am quite pleased that they were angry with the driver for killing a woman with mental health issues. People like Naomi are too often ignored


----------



## TopCat (Apr 23, 2008)

People taking photo's is a good thing. A record of evidence that may prove useful later in ensuring justice is done and seen to be done.


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2008)

trashpony said:


> She danced in front of cars stopped at the lights quite a lot. That was what she did. Poor woman, what a horrible way to die
> 
> It's vile that people were standing around taking photos but I am quite pleased that they were angry with the driver for killing a woman with mental health issues. People like Naomi are too often ignored


It's entirely possible that people were taking photos and/or filming because they knew it might be important evidence. It's clear that a number of people did think he deliberately drove into her, whether it's true or not. I don't think it's any more appropriate to condemn those people without knowing what the situation was than it is to condemn the driver before more is known.



> Samuel Joseph, a 30-year-old media worker from Clapham, added: "There were about 100 people, all looking under the van and taking photos. They weren't trying to help, just gawping. It was sick. Then it started to turn nasty.
> 
> "They were pointing their camera phones into the driver's face and shouting, 'You're a murderer! You've killed her!' They were chanting 'murderer' and gesturing at him.
> 
> "He was just sat there with his head in his hands and looked in an absolute state. He wouldn't get out of the van and I don't blame him in that situation, with that hostile reaction."




E2A: Sorry - missed TC's post.


----------



## agricola (Apr 23, 2008)

TopCat said:


> People taking photo's is a good thing. A record of evidence that may prove useful later in ensuring justice is done and seen to be done.



If thats why they were taking pictures, then yes.  Sadly however I would harbour a guess that many of them were just trying to either hawk them to the press, or show them to their mates.


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2008)

agricola said:


> If thats why they were taking pictures, then yes.  Sadly however I would harbour a guess that many of them were just trying to either hawk them to the press, or show them to their mates.


Do rubber-neckers usually turn on the driver like that then? I wouldn't have thought they cared ...


----------



## innit (Apr 23, 2008)

ymu said:


> Do rubber-neckers usually turn on the driver like that then? I wouldn't have thought they cared ...



seems to happen in central Brixton - I think there were posts recently about members of the public harassing / heckling emergency services on Coldharbour Lane.


----------



## agricola (Apr 23, 2008)

ymu said:


> Do rubber-neckers usually turn on the driver like that then? I wouldn't have thought they cared ...



I did say "many of them" not "all", and yes, people can rubberneck and try and get / shout at the driver in the same incident.


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2008)

agricola said:


> I did say "many of them" not "all", and yes, people can rubberneck and try and get / shout at the driver in the same incident.


Accepted. There were ~100 people there, all with different perspectives on the incident and different motivations for doing what they did. I just think it's weird to condemn a crowd of 100 individuals on the basis of what some of them were doing at different points in time.

I hope that some of the cameras, CCTV or otherwise, were pointing in the right direction before they managed to get the van to stop. Twenty metres, if correct, is quite a long way to get from a standing start in a busy urban environment with crowds of people screaming in horror at some incident which appears to have happened near you.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Apr 23, 2008)

gabi said:


> More info on it here. Apols for the Mail link. Bizarrely they seem to have put the most effort into covering this.
> 
> http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages...ews.html?in_article_id=561416&in_page_id=1770



Jeez, some of the comments on that article.  I know it's the daily hate, but still.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 23, 2008)

Is there any point in having a seperate RIP thread if it's just going to fill up with speculation about the incident as opposed to respects/rememberance of the dead? There's a perfectly good thread in Brixton forum for talking about the event.


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

john x said:


> If he claims that 'she was jumping about all over the place, pulling the wipers. One minute I saw her, the next she seemed to have gone', he still has to make a case for it to be safe to have started the vehicle moving again to avoid the accustion of being reckless as to whether she was injured or not.


Indeed ... but that brings me back to the point I was making - it will not be quite so simple as you imply to prove that - if, for instance, would be pretty reasonable to conclude that she had realised the lights had changed and had gone on to the pavement, that he checked all around he could see and then, not seeing her, moved off ... which would be where the blind spots bit would come in.  The described "lurch" or "jump" forward may also indicate it was not a deliberate move off.


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Is there any point in having a seperate RIP thread if it's just going to fill up with speculation about the incident as opposed to respects/rememberance of the dead? There's a perfectly good thread in Brixton forum for talking about the event.


Apologies. I wasn't aware of the other thread.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 23, 2008)

that's ok. I think I'll move this one to Brixton forum, to give them equal weighting


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

TopCat said:


> People taking photo's is a good thing. A record of evidence that may prove useful later in ensuring justice is done and seen to be done.


Disingenuous apologia.  This was 99.999% ghoulishness and you damn well know it.

* Doesn't hold breath waiting for a queue to form to hand them over to the investigation *


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

innit said:


> seems to happen in central Brixton...


Certainly did when I was there.  People jump to conclusions (I think some may post here ... ) and, in my own personal experience, have attempted to free two armed robbers, a rapist and a murderer as well as _dozens_ of Class A dealers ...


----------



## smokedout (Apr 23, 2008)

> Originally Posted by TopCat
> People taking photo's is a good thing. A record of evidence that may prove useful later in ensuring justice is done and seen to be done.



you can understand why the old bill dont like them


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

smokedout said:


> you can understand why the old bill dont like them


I loved them ... but rarely got them even when I specifically appealed for them ...


----------



## whitedove (Apr 23, 2008)

Teaboy said:


> I see the daily mail readers are taking a somewhat different view.




yes I was disgusted with what is being written in there...


----------



## smokedout (Apr 23, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> Don't you just love the great British public and their fucking camera phones ...



yeah you love em when it suits you


----------



## whitedove (Apr 23, 2008)

No doubt it will be plastered all over youtube by now

its sickening


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Is there any point in having a seperate RIP thread if it's just going to fill up with speculation about the incident as opposed to respects/rememberance of the dead? There's a perfectly good thread in Brixton forum for talking about the event.


The other thread is here.


----------



## smokedout (Apr 23, 2008)

whitedove said:


> No doubt it will be plastered all over youtube by now
> 
> its sickening



i doubt it

but it does mean that should the cctv go mysteriously missing or the cameras turn out to have been 'turned off' then at least there may be independant footage of what actually happened


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 23, 2008)

smokedout said:


> but it does mean that should the cctv go mysteriously missing or the cameras turn out to have been 'turned off' then at least there may be independant footage of what actually happened


Yeah right.  Footage of the lady bleeding together underneath the lorry is going to be _really_ useful ...


----------



## smokedout (Apr 23, 2008)

more useful than the thousands of pics of me (and my kid) the met have taken over the years


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2008)

In case you missed it ... Crispy has asked three or four times now



ymu;7407928][QUOTE=Crispy said:


> Is there any point in having a seperate RIP thread if it's just going to fill up with speculation about the incident as opposed to respects/rememberance of the dead? There's a perfectly good thread in Brixton forum for talking about the event.



The other thread is here.[/QUOTE]


----------



## lighterthief (Apr 23, 2008)

trashpony said:


> I am quite pleased that they were angry with the driver for killing a woman with mental health issues.


Why?  Do you think it was deliberate?


----------



## smokedout (Apr 23, 2008)

i barely knew her other than the odd chat months apart

but if id been killed by a prison van for dancing in front of it id hope that every fucking thread on the net would be filled with righteous anger at the authorities that maintained the system that led to my death

am i the only one here who thinks that dancing in the road in front of prison vans is  as fuck


----------



## STFC (Apr 24, 2008)

I hope so.

I'm sure it would be a source of great comfort to the deceased's family and friends, though, if they only knew that the way she died was " as fuck".

Idiot.


----------



## trashpony (Apr 24, 2008)

lighterthief said:


> Why?  Do you think it was deliberate?



No, not at all. Just that 





> People like Naomi are too often ignored


 which was the bit of my post you chose to overlook


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Apr 24, 2008)

lighterthief said:


> Why?  Do you think it was deliberate?



There is a middle ground you know - you can be responsible through negligent or dangerous driving without having deliberately run somenoe over.


----------



## smokedout (Apr 24, 2008)

STFC said:


> I hope so.
> 
> I'm sure it would be a source of great comfort to the deceased's family and friends, though, if they only knew that the way she died was " as fuck".
> 
> Idiot.



she didnt die because she danced in front of a prison van

she died because some cunt ran her over


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 24, 2008)

smokedout said:


> she didnt die because she danced in front of a prison van
> 
> she died because *someone* ran her over



Erm..... she died because of both of those reasons actually.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 24, 2008)

I hope the woman's friends/family aren't reading this rather ugly thread but if they are, my sympathies to them.

I think I recall seeing Naomi around; I'm sure I would recognise her if I saw a photo.

RIP.


----------



## lighterthief (Apr 24, 2008)

.


----------



## trashpony (Apr 24, 2008)

.


----------



## ymu (Apr 24, 2008)

.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 24, 2008)

.


----------



## ymu (Apr 24, 2008)

#85, 96 and 100 Minnie.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 24, 2008)

Iemanja said:


> I don't care how rushed someone may be though, not seeing someone dancing right in front of your van really is going to be impossible to justify/explain...  This is terrible



I totally agree. The point I'm making is that the system (i.e. prisoner movements and the prison estate in general) is so fucked that it almost makes stuff like this more likely to occur.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 24, 2008)

TopCat said:


> They _will_ close ranks. Accusations of brutal assualt against private prison transfer staff don't go too far...



About as far as complaints against prison officers (private or otherwise) go, i.e. as short a distance as is manageable.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 24, 2008)

...



ymu said:


> In case you missed it ... Crispy has asked three or four times now





Crispy said:


> Is there any point in having a seperate RIP thread if it's just going to fill up with speculation about the incident as opposed to respects/rememberance of the dead? There's a perfectly good thread in Brixton forum for talking about the event.





ymu said:


> The other thread is here.


----------



## Ms T (Apr 24, 2008)

Her distinctive Marlborough jacket is tied to the tree outside the Ritzy, along with lots of bunches of flowers.  Very sad.  RIP Naomi.


----------



## Jim Williams (Apr 24, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> .



Makes no sense to me either.


----------



## via-strass (Apr 25, 2008)

There is also a very nice photo of her pinned to the tree, in case anyone isn't sure if they recognise her.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 25, 2008)

Picture of her in SLP 

http://www.southlondon-today.co.uk/tn/News.cfm?id=6096


Seems she has a daughter


----------



## Structaural (Apr 25, 2008)




----------



## ymu (Apr 25, 2008)

Thanks Minnie. Stunning image.







RIP Naomi.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 25, 2008)

That's a really good photo, nice one SLP


----------



## *Miss Daisy* (Apr 25, 2008)

ymu said:


> Thanks Minnie. Stunning image.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 Sweet Dreams Naomi x rip


----------



## Principle (Apr 28, 2008)

She was a lovely women! When i first used to hang around Brixton she helped me out in a pretty bad situation!!

R.I.P Gully!!!


----------



## john x (Apr 29, 2008)

There was a guy kneeling on the pavement praying at the 'memorial tree' the other day. 

john x


----------



## nick h. (Apr 29, 2008)

There will be a meeting to remember Naomi today at 5 pm, one week after her death, in the square next to the spot where she died. The police are concerned that there may be unrest. I've been talking to a lot of the mourners over the last few days and while many are angry that she was "deliberately" run down, others say she brought it on herself and blame her friends for not pulling her out of the road. 

I understand from somebody at Brixton police station that the driver says he couldn't see her.  She was very short, the driver was sitting on the right and she was squashed under the front left wheel, so it does seem plausible that she was not in his line of sight when he drove over her. But why he didn't stop to check whether she was clear of the vehicle before driving off is beyond me. All the witnesses I interviewed (I'm a journalist and a friend of hers) agree that she was banging on the front of the vehicle before he ran her down and that he was rocking on the accelerator and the brake in an attempt to shove her out of the way. He's pretty certain to have recognised her and known her to be a street drinker.  His work would have entailed him driving up and down Brixton Hill the whole time, and he'd probably seen her on many occasions - she was very conspicuous in that jacket of hers. 

So it seems likely that he knew she was out of control. In my opinion he had a duty of care towards her and people are absolutely right to be angry with him for doing nothing to avert a totally avoidable death. 

He was arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving but has not been charged. I hear he's back at work behind the wheel as usual.

According to this info http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=843 the offence he was arrested for seems to me to be the appropriate one and carries a max. sentence of 14 years. But her drinking buddies are convinced he'll get off. If he is charged merely with careless driving he can't be jailed. 

There's a banner at the site of her death reading 'Avenge Naomi - Killed by the System.' The wording was chosen by a local anarchist, not one of Naomi's close friends, and I don't think it reflects any intention on the part of a significant number of people to take action. Nobody's in the mood to do anything silly. 

I haven't seen a Serco van all week, so I suspect they've been rerouted. Just as well. 

Everybody knows that the police are upset by Naomi's death and I think they realise it would be very unfair to direct their anger at officers. I just hope the senior officer doesn't do anything daft, like despatching fleets of armoured vans full of officers in riot gear.


----------



## lighterthief (Apr 29, 2008)

nick h. said:


> I understand... it does seem plausible...He's pretty certain to have recognised her...probably seen her on many occasions...seems likely that he knew...In my opinion...people are absolutely right....totally avoidable death.


Quite a few assumptions there IMO.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 29, 2008)

I've been mulling this over all week and I'll try to justify my assumptions if you like. Which ones concern you?


----------



## slcr (Apr 29, 2008)

The impression I got from a very brief conversation with one of the women at the tree was of a lot of anger, and a general misunderstanding that SERCO and the police aren't the same thing.  Which made me wonder if there will be problems at this service/meeting today.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 29, 2008)

slcr said:


> a general misunderstanding that SERCO and the police aren't the same thing.



Yersss. I've been trying to correct this impression, but it's hard to get the point across when everyone under the tree except me is a bit two and eight.


----------



## lighterthief (Apr 29, 2008)

nick h. said:


> I've been mulling this over all week and I'll try to justify my assumptions if you like. Which ones concern you?


All of them?


----------



## nick h. (Apr 29, 2008)

Ok, pick one or two for starters. I'm knackered and can't be arsed to list them all right now.


----------



## dogmatique (Apr 29, 2008)

> He's pretty certain to have recognised her and known her to be a street drinker.



Absolute rubbish, sorry.



> So it seems likely that he knew she was out of control.



Garbage.

On another note, I don't think I've ever seen police anywhere taking so much effort to collect witness statements than I did tonight.

Obviously in part a public relations excercise, given the planned demonstration, but a visible stop and ask campaign can only help.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 29, 2008)

If you're going to throw words like 'rubbish' and 'garbage' at me when I'm trying to tell you about a story that I've researched in some detail, you can just wait for the trial and the inquest. I'm not going to waste my time pandering to your ignorance.


----------



## dogmatique (Apr 29, 2008)

When you come up with ridiculous statements as the above, you will be greeted with derision, and rightly so.  

Pull your socks up, and stop trading on tragedy for your own ends.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 29, 2008)

Go back and reread the post that says she was a friend of mine, fuckwit. Then apologise.


----------



## smokedout (Apr 29, 2008)

dogmatique said:


> When you come up with ridiculous statements as the above, you will be greeted with derision, and rightly so.
> 
> Pull your socks up, and stop trading on tragedy for your own ends.



do you feel like a prick now

because you sound like one


----------



## dogmatique (Apr 29, 2008)

No chance.  You're making a fool of yourself.  Self appointed "journalist".  You're only doing harm.


----------



## Maggot (Apr 29, 2008)

The police were out in force today.  I just drove through Brixton and they were handing out leaflets apealing for information on the incident to all the motorists, and questioning some too.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 29, 2008)

nick h. said:


> I haven't seen a Serco van all week, so I suspect they've been rerouted. Just as well.



Our bus followed one from Oval down towards Stockwell the other day, we turned left towards Brixton and it went straight on.

Could be relevant, not sure.


----------



## co-op (May 1, 2008)

dogmatique said:


> When you come up with ridiculous statements as the above, you will be greeted with derision, and rightly so.
> 
> Pull your socks up, and stop trading on tragedy for your own ends.



There's no derision from me. I don't know nick h. and I didn't witness this accident, but if this statement is true 

*"All the witnesses I interviewed (I'm a journalist and a friend of hers) agree that she was banging on the front of the vehicle before he ran her down and that he was rocking on the accelerator and the brake in an attempt to shove her out of the way."*

then that's not "trading on tragedy" that's important information. 

If you know facts about this killing, share them; if you don't, why are you being so arsey?


----------



## dogmatique (May 1, 2008)

.


----------



## co-op (May 1, 2008)

dogmatique said:


> Because a tragic event, being so contentious in this instance especially needs decent and level headed consideration.
> 
> Assumption and conjecture dressed up as "journalism" in this case have been extremely inflamatory, ilconsidered and unhelpful.
> 
> I'm "arsey" because Nick h thinks that this particular thread is an acceptable place to vent his specific and largely unfounded theories as to the events of Naomi's death..



I don't see anything "extremely inflammatory, ill considered and unhelpful" about - eg - this;

*I've been talking to a lot of the mourners over the last few days and while many are angry that she was "deliberately" run down, others say she brought it on herself and blame her friends for not pulling her out of the road. 

I understand from somebody at Brixton police station that the driver says he couldn't see her. She was very short, the driver was sitting on the right and she was squashed under the front left wheel, so it does seem plausible that she was not in his line of sight when he drove over her. But why he didn't stop to check whether she was clear of the vehicle before driving off is beyond me. *

He also passed on the news about the vigil/memorial at 5 o'clock.




dogmatique said:


> I think it's distastful to do this as there are other places that could be used.
> 
> I also think that these comments, including my own should be removed from this thread as it detracts from it's reason.



How she died is as important in this case as that she died, it's going to be talked about, and imo it's important that it is. It would be very easy for the police to shrug and say she was *only* an alky or whatever.


----------



## dogmatique (May 1, 2008)

Previous comment removed.  I don't want to create a row.


----------



## teuchter (May 1, 2008)

As has been pointed out numerous times, there is another thread for discussing the issues around this:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=247946


----------



## lumpenprinzess (May 7, 2008)

Apologies for not putting this in the other thread, but it stops at April 24, and it didn't look like anyone would ever read something added to it now.  The 'incident' was discussed at the Lambeth Police Consultation Group meeting this evening, although not until after Naomi's friends and supporters had been made to sit through a Powerpoint presentation AND a DVD about new police 'business areas' etc (maybe diversifying into COMMITTING crime -- cutting out the middleman so to speak -- this year?).  Anyway the moment the chair saw fit to raise the matter that everyone except 'community safety' professionals and self-appointed 'spokespeople' had come to talk about just happened to coincide with the ejection of Naomi's loudest supporter/mourner.  When she returned some time later the chair snapped, "I thought I told security not to let her back in".  Fortunately though, the unwelcome member of the community had prepared a written list of questions, which were read out by someone from Lambeth Unison (although not without an ambivalent comment linking the killing to a lack of "adult services" for "people like Naomi", as if the answer was better medication to keep "people like this" out of the way of prison vans on their important mission.)  The questions were the obvious ones that people have been asking: why did the driver accelerate in the first place, and why didn't he stop after he could see what was happening?  And is the council willing to allow some kind of permanent memorial where Naomi died?  Then other people asked: why is her death already labelled a 'tragic accident' when it hasn't been fully investigated and a lot of people still think it was deliberate?  What's going on with CCTV: some of the cameras in the area are believed not to work; which ones do work, and is the 'incident' recorded on any of them?  Is the van driver back at work, as has been reported?  Why was the driver given bail, given the seriousness of the potential charge?  The friend of Naomi (and 'incident' witness) who asked the question put this in context by mentioning the petty drug-related charges on which so many other people spend months rotting on remand, in many cases delivered to HMP Brixton courtesy of Serco.  Finally someone else asked why not a single Lambeth council member had bothered to show up to discuss all this.  The questions were responded to ('answered' would be too strong a word) by a high-ranking Brixton police bureaucrat.  (Sorry I can't remember the name, they all look the same to me.)  He wanted to deal with the points in sequence, he said (as opposed to all once, speaking in tongues?), in order to give a "flavour" of the police position.  But the expelled speaker's questions, delivered by her Unison proxy, somehow disappeared from the sequence, and the officer moved straight on to the matter of "tragic accident".  It's not true, he claimed, that the death has been called accidental: the witness appeal boards say "collision".  Well maybe some of them do, but the ones I've seen say "incident", and there's an important difference.  "Incident" is the term introduced by (Department for Transport? Home Office?) decree in the last couple of years to REPLACE 'accident', which was seen as letting drivers off too lightly by suggesting that crashes might be nobody's fault.  In other words 'incident' is a euphemism for 'accident': in the absence of an officially allowed alternative IT MEANS THE SAME THING.  Next: yes the driver has been bailed (no answer as to why, or why others are not), and is back at work.  But that's ok because of the "robust" etc etc police investigation, on the basis of which the Crown Prosecution Service will decide whether or not to press charges.  The disingenuousness of this argument (which was stretched over several minutes and formed the bulk of the cop's speech) is really breathtaking.  Certainly Brixton police are making a point of being seen to investigate the 'incident' and the 'death by dangerous driving' charge, and for all anyone knows they may really be taking it seriously.  But who does a senior policeman think he's kidding by trying to REASSURE bereaved friends of someone killed by the Criminal Justice[sic] system on the grounds that it's all in the hands of the CPS?!!  The same agency that has declined to prosecute in every single case of death in police custody in the last 10+(++?) years, even when then Coroner's verdict is 'unlawful killing'?!  The silver-tongued copper may have thought he could get around this problem by emphasising that Serco is a private contractor and the driver its employee alone.  Some people posting on this list also seem to see it this way.  But if anything the PFI aspect makes it WORSE: how is it supposed to absolve the policing and criminal justice system of responsibility for its agents' actions if the agents doing dirty work like trucking remand prisoners through a socially explosive (to its eternal credit) area are hired by private contractors on depleted, casual wages and pisspoor conditions?  
    Finally, yes I would have been glad to raise these points with the officer concerned at the meeting itself, but as soon as he had finished speaking the discussion returned to the normal agenda, featuring important issues like police 'asset management'.


----------



## Pie 1 (May 7, 2008)

I'm not trying to be funny, but can you paragraph this post? - it's making my eyes hurt.


----------



## ajdown (May 7, 2008)

lumpenprinzess said:


> Certainly Brixton police are making a point of being seen to investigate the 'incident' and the 'death by dangerous driving' charge, and for all anyone knows they may really be taking it seriously.  But who does a senior policeman think he's kidding by trying to REASSURE bereaved friends of someone killed by the Criminal Justice[sic] system on the grounds that it's all in the hands of the CPS?!!



I have one question.

If Naomi had been run over by a bus, or a 'white van man', would there have been this much uproar?  I doubt it, in all honesty.

One dangerous piece of driving by one individual resulting in one death (does anyone know how many hundreds, perhaps thousands of similar journeys around the country are made each day without incident) does not make her 'killed by the system'.

From what I can understand, the banner down there was placed by some anarchist hijacking the memorial to push 'his cause' - whatever it might be - and not one of Naomi's friends.  Why has it not been removed by these 'friends' if it a) is blatantly wrong, b) is completely irrelevant, and c) insults her memory by making what happened a 'political statement'?


----------



## peterkro (May 7, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I have one question.
> 
> If Naomi had been run over by a bus, or a 'white van man', would there have been this much uproar?  I doubt it, in all honesty.
> 
> ...


Maybe because it is not wrong nor irrelevant nor insults her memory.
Just a thought.


----------



## ajdown (May 7, 2008)

peterkro said:


> Maybe because it is not wrong nor irrelevant nor insults her memory.
> Just a thought.



We'll have to disagree on that one then.  Adults can do that, right?

What about the other question, of whether if anything else had run her over, there would have been so much uproar?


----------



## detective-boy (May 7, 2008)

lumpenprinzess said:


> Why was the driver given bail, given the seriousness of the potential charge?  The friend of Naomi (and 'incident' witness) who asked the question put this in context by mentioning the petty drug-related charges on which so many other people spend months rotting on remand, in many cases delivered to HMP Brixton courtesy of Serco.


The law does not allow the continued detention of a person prior to charge (which is why there is the whole debate about extending the pre-charge period of detention for suspected terrorists to 42 days).  The police HAVE TO, by law (Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984) to either charge or release a suspect within 24 hours (can be extended to 36 hrs by a Supt, to 72 hrs by a Magistrate).  In any case, even within that period, further detention can only be allowed if it is _necessary_ for investigative reasons (e.g. to allow further questioning, to prevent interference with other witnesses being interviewed, etc.).

Charging can ONLY happen by law if there is a _prima facie_ case (i.e. there is sufficient evidence on which a properly directed jury could convict).  In practice it can ONLY happen if there is sufficient evidence to make a conviction more likely than not (CPS rules, brought in to PREVENT suspects against whom there is weak evidence being persecuted by the police charging them just to piss them about).

Both PACE and the CPS were brought in to protect the interests of suspects (and they have done so in a _massive_ way).  Unfortunately what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander and when police officers or other agents of the State are the suspects they have exactly the same rights and protections.  

In a case like this, unless there was an admission of the running over being deliberate, there would never be sufficient evidence to charge in the standard detention period.  You see "proper" murderers bailed for long periods of time whilst scientific evidence and other long-term investigations are completed, being re-arrested weeks or months later, being re-interviewed and then charged.  

In short, the driver being bailed pending further investigations is entirely standard practice.



> It's not true, he claimed, that the death has been called accidental: the witness appeal boards say "collision".  Well maybe some of them do, but the ones I've seen say "incident", and there's an important difference.  "Incident" is the term introduced by (Department for Transport? Home Office?) decree in the last couple of years to REPLACE 'accident', which was seen as letting drivers off too lightly by suggesting that crashes might be nobody's fault.  In other words 'incident' is a euphemism for 'accident': in the absence of an officially allowed alternative IT MEANS THE SAME THING.


"Alternative" does not mean "euphemism".

After years of pressure by road safety campaigners the police were persuaded to ditch the traditional "Accident" as it implied it was just that - an accident as opposed to being someone's fault.  The campaigners (rightly in my view) argued that no, most "accidents" were someone's fault and the continued use of this misnomer contributed to the public attitude to them as being unavoidable when, in fact, the majority were entirely avoidable if agencies / individuals acted differently.

As a result the police service replaced "Accident" with "Collision" or "Incident".  They are ALTERNATIVE ways of describing the situation and neither of them imply anything as to causation, they are simply factual.

What would you prefer they said?


----------



## pk (May 7, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I have one question.
> 
> If Naomi had been run over by a bus, or a 'white van man', would there have been this much uproar?  I doubt it, in all honesty.



From what I gather she wasn't just run over, she was shoved forward and deliberately driven over by a driver who made eye contact with her directly in front of his truck.

And the white van man would have been treated far differently than this Serco driver appears to have been.

And the community are justifiably concerned that because she was pissed she somehow "doesn't matter", whereas had it been Peaches Geldof or some Hollyoaks starlet pissed up stumbling out of the Fridge there would have been an uproar of Vesuvian proportions.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 7, 2008)

Where's all the flowers gone?


----------



## ajdown (May 7, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Where's all the flowers gone?



As I came past this morning I noticed that everything had gone.  When did it disappear?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 7, 2008)

ajdown said:


> As I came past this morning I noticed that everything had gone. When did it disappear?


 

Dunno.  Sure it was there yesterday.  Maybe after that meeting, people decided to take it down


----------



## ajdown (May 7, 2008)

pk said:


> From what I gather she wasn't just run over, she was shoved forward and deliberately driven over by a driver who made eye contact with her directly in front of his truck.
> 
> And the white van man would have been treated far differently than this Serco driver appears to have been.
> 
> And the community are justifiably concerned that because she was pissed she somehow "doesn't matter", whereas had it been Peaches Geldof or some Hollyoaks starlet pissed up stumbling out of the Fridge there would have been an uproar of Vesuvian proportions.



What 'community' are we talking about?  Brixton as a whole, or just a few people that called her a friend?  

I think if it had been some celebrity wannabe that got hit, the media would have made much of a bigger thing about it, but most people in Brixton probably couldn't care less about it.

An interesting juxtaposition really.


----------



## detective-boy (May 7, 2008)

pk said:


> And the white van man would have been treated far differently than this Serco driver appears to have been.


No.  They wouldn't.


----------



## pk (May 7, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> No.  They wouldn't.



If the Serco driver has been granted bail and is back at work already, I will have to disagree with that.


----------



## pk (May 7, 2008)

ajdown said:


> What 'community' are we talking about?  Brixton as a whole, or just a few people that called her a friend?



Both one and the same.



> I think if it had been some celebrity wannabe that got hit, the media would have made much of a bigger thing about it, but most people in Brixton probably couldn't care less about it.
> 
> An interesting juxtaposition really.



I think if said celeb had been deliberately accelerated over, as is alleged in this case, most people in Brixton would be asking serious questions about the nature of prison transportation in their town.


----------



## ajdown (May 7, 2008)

pk said:


> I think if said celeb had been deliberately accelerated over, as is alleged in this case, most people in Brixton would be asking serious questions about the nature of prison transportation in their town.


Let's drop the point about it being 'prison transportation' and just take it as a vehicle allegedly deliberately running over an individual.

That makes it an issue of bad driving, which surely does affect everyone - and, thus, are there particular things about that junction that makes it more dangerous than others that need dealing with?

How many thousands of prison transport vans have driven past that exact same spot over the years with no incidents occuring at all?  How many millions of other vehicles have passed through with no accidents happening?

As someone who occasionally drives round St Matthew's extended roundabout, I utterly despise that section of road, especially with the diversion at the moment meaning you have to cross several lanes of traffic that won't stop in order to get round and then up Brixton Hill.  That's not even bringing into the equation cyclists with no regard for other road users or pedestrians.

Most of the information boards we see round Brixton are stabbings, shootings, muggings, burglary or a combination somehow.  Rarely do you see transport-related incidents occuring, and with the A23 being one of the main busy routes out of London, that does seem quite something, don't you think?


----------



## rennie (May 7, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Dunno.  Sure it was there yesterday.  Maybe after that meeting, people decided to take it down



I noticed they were gone this morning too.


----------



## ymu (May 7, 2008)

lumpenprinzess said:


> Apologies for not putting this in the other thread, but it stops at April 24, and it didn't look like anyone would ever read something added to it now.


When you post on a thread it will get "bumped" to the top of that forum and the new posts list. The date the thread was last posted on has no effect on the chances of people seeing it if a new post is made.

I'm quoting the rest of your post with paragraphs to make it easier for to read, for anyone who gave up on it before (it is very hard to read!). Good post though - and thanks for the info. 



lumpenprinzess said:


> _The 'incident' was discussed at the Lambeth Police Consultation Group meeting this evening, although not until after Naomi's friends and supporters had been made to sit through a Powerpoint presentation AND a DVD about new police 'business areas' etc (maybe diversifying into COMMITTING crime -- cutting out the middleman so to speak -- this year?).
> 
> Anyway the moment the chair saw fit to raise the matter that everyone except 'community safety' professionals and self-appointed 'spokespeople' had come to talk about just happened to coincide with the ejection of Naomi's loudest supporter/mourner.  When she returned some time later the chair snapped, "I thought I told security not to let her back in".  Fortunately though, the unwelcome member of the community had prepared a written list of questions, which were read out by someone from Lambeth Unison (although not without an ambivalent comment linking the killing to a lack of "adult services" for "people like Naomi", as if the answer was better medication to keep "people like this" out of the way of prison vans on their important mission.)
> 
> ...


----------



## hendo (May 7, 2008)

Does anyone know when the inquest is? And does it happen prior to charges being brought against the driver, or afterwards?


----------



## lighterthief (May 7, 2008)

hendo said:


> And does it happen prior to charges being brought against the driver, or afterwards?


Assuming charges *are* brought.


----------



## detective-boy (May 7, 2008)

hendo said:


> Does anyone know when the inquest is? And does it happen prior to charges being brought against the driver, or afterwards?


An inquest would be opened and adjourned within a day or two of death.

It then remains adjourned pending any investigation and a decision as to any charges.  If no charges are brought then it would be re-opened and the Coroner would decide how to proceed (with, or without, a jury; full public hearing with all witnesses called or a far more truncated version basically dealt with on the basis of statements, etc.)

If, after a reasonable period (which varies widely depending on the circumstances - it would usually be at least 6 months, usually more - the Coroner would periodically ask for an update on the progress of the investigation) the police have not found the suspects responsible, the Coroner may decide to go ahead with an inquest anyway.  (This doesn't apply here - the suspect is known).

If after the investigation it IS decided to bring charges, the inquest remains adjourned until the criminal prosecution is completed.  If there is a conviction for homicide then the Coroner usually formally records an administrative finding consistent with the conviction entered.  If there is no conviction the Coroner has a choice.  If they conclude that all the relevant issues have been fully explored during the criminal trial, then they may simply record an administrative finding consistent with the decision of the criminal court.  If they conclude that there are issues still to be fully explored, they will then reopen the inquest and decide how to proceed.


----------



## hendo (May 7, 2008)

Thanks db.


----------



## slcr (May 7, 2008)

lumpenprinzess said:


> Fortunately though, the unwelcome member of the community had prepared a written list of questions, which were read out by someone from Lambeth Unison (although not without an ambivalent comment linking the killing to a lack of "adult services" for "people like Naomi", as if the answer was better medication to keep "people like this" out of the way of prison vans on their important mission.)



Is that referring to the regrading of mental health service users' needs and the subsequent allocation of resources to focus on only those in the new "critical" category?  Can't remember what bill/Act it's under but remember a protest outside the town hall by some service users a few months back.  Anyone else know?


----------



## shygirl (May 7, 2008)

lumpenprinzess said:


> "Apologies for not putting this in the other thread, but it stops at April 24, and it didn't look like anyone would ever read something added to it now.  The 'incident' was discussed at the Lambeth Police Consultation Group meeting this evening, although not until after Naomi's friends and supporters had been made to sit through a Powerpoint presentation AND a DVD about new police 'business areas' etc (maybe diversifying into COMMITTING crime -- cutting out the middleman so to speak -- this year?).  Anyway the moment the chair saw fit to raise the matter that everyone except 'community safety' professionals and self-appointed 'spokespeople' had come to talk about just happened to coincide with the ejection of Naomi's loudest supporter/mourner.  When she returned some time later the chair snapped, "I thought I told security not to let her back in".
> 
> As you well know, self-appointed member/solicitor/politician, that you are, cpcg meetings have a set agenda and to suggest that the friends and mourners of naomi were 'made to sit through' anything is a lie.  Ideally the discussion about Naomi's death could have come first, not least, cos we wouldn't have had to put it with the fucking noise coming from someone who was so pissed she could barely stand up to begin with.  The chair made very few moves to have the lady ejected and only did so following complaints from numerous attendees about the disruption.  When the time came to discuss what happened to naomi, speakers were almost drowned out by the woman who, frankly, should have been escorted away by a friend to preserve her own and naomi's dignity. Shame on you for allowing her to behave as she did, and just sit back and enjoy the circus.
> 
> Your dishonesty and ability to twist and distort even the most obvious truths never ceases to amaze me.


----------



## shygirl (May 7, 2008)

oh, and the lady whom you say was ejected or ejected, left of her own accord, in absolute disgust at the behaviour of the drunken lady.  another blatant untruth on your part.


----------



## critical1 (May 17, 2008)

Naomi RIP.
I was chatgting to her on the Monday before the (murder) whilst waiting for the Libary to open, She was her normal jubilant self and we had a nice discussion,  Naomi was a woman that had hidden depths and chose who to reveal them too, some only saw one aspect, whilst a chosen few saw the whole person.

                                                                              >>>RIP  Naomi 2008<<<


----------



## Gramsci (May 18, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> After years of pressure by road safety campaigners the police were persuaded to ditch the traditional "Accident" as it implied it was just that - an accident as opposed to being someone's fault.  The campaigners (rightly in my view) argued that no, most "accidents" were someone's fault and the continued use of this misnomer contributed to the public attitude to them as being unavoidable when, in fact, the majority were entirely avoidable if agencies / individuals acted differently.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## john x (May 19, 2008)

critical1 said:


> whilst a chosen few saw the whole person.



Were you one of the chosen few?

john x


----------



## andrewdroid (Dec 14, 2008)

here is a slide show I found on Naomi 
http://www.foto8.com/home/content/view/710/136/


----------



## ovaltina (Dec 14, 2008)

Those pictures are heartbreaking. I know who she was now. RIP


----------



## Blagsta (Dec 15, 2008)

Mind - what makes you think that Naomi could have been sectioned? Because that's what you're talking about.

From my recollection from past discussion with you, you're not the most...ermmm...understanding person when it comes to mental health anyway, so I find it rather ironic that you're getting het up now!


----------



## Crispy (Dec 15, 2008)

GO HERE:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=247946


----------

