The BBC are reporting that the second post mortem carried out on Ian Tomlinson has shown that he died from internal bleeding and not a heart attack, or 'natural causes' as the police were so quick to claim.

This is shocking, not simply because of the very real possibility that Mr Tomlinson was killed by a police officer, but because there are clear indications that from the very moment he died the Met were moving to spin the facts and cover up the truth.

Questions have already been raised about the speed with which the post mortem was arranged and the choice of pathologist, who has some questionable form. With the second post mortem suggesting the first might be a whitewash, are we now looking at a deliberate attempt by some within the Met, essentially a conspiracy, to pervert the course of justice and conceal a murder / manslaughter?

It's sobering to remember that the second post mortem only came about because of the amateur video footage showing the assault. Before that, there had been no real suggestion of a challenge to the police's version of events, despite the fact that many officers must have known it to be suspect. Moreover, the IPCC initially claimed that there was no CCTV footage available to the enquiry, although that proved to be untrue (and where is that, by the way? God knows there are enough cameras...)

The impression one gets is that the police, and to some extent the IPCC, were quietly and efficiently closing ranks until the video footage made it impossible for them to pretend nothing had happened.

The crisis in UK policing goes far deeper than the actions of one brutal officer.