The Ultimate Loss of Civil Liberties: Innocent Man Shot Dead in UK

[Anttech]

Occasionally police shoot the wrong person. It happens. It shows that police like everyone else are imperfect. Get over it

very sympathetic! We arent used to Police gunning people down in public in the UK.. Perhaps where your from this is a common happening, but in the UK it aint! Its a good thing that we keep talking about our civil liberties! We need to make sure that this stays an excpetion to the rule, not the other way round

 

[arildno]

However, on the other hand, police are trained observers.

Certainly, but that is not the issue here.
In ordinary violent deaths investigations (say, a woman found strangled in her home), the police officers are 3.persons not directly involved in the death.
The woman's husband's testimony (say that he was out in the garden when she must have been strangled) must in principle be regarded as less reliable than next-door-neighbour Mrs. Watson's testimony that she couldn't hear him in the garden although she ought to have done so.

Although a possibility exists that Mrs.Watson rushed over to her neighbour and strangled the woman when she saw that the husband went out in the garden, the standard attitude would be to regard the husband's testimony with more suspicion than Mrs.Watson's, since he should in principle be the one with most interest in being believed.
(If the police doesn't believe him, they might think he strangled his own wife..).

In the London case, the police officers themselves are the ones whose testimony should be examined with great care, because they face grave personal risks if their actual testimonies are shown to be highly inaccurate.
Not so with the innocent by-stander; there exist for them (typically, that is) few motives other than telling the truth AS THEY SAW IT.
Whether what they saw is credible is of course a matter of further investigation; however, we should not at the outset harbour strong suspicions as to whether their motives for telling their version are more complicated than simply to tell what they honestly believe they saw.

Such suspicions as to the POLICE VERSION cannot be as summarily dismissed at the outset of an investigation.

No "instant" conspiracy theory here; the official version is as riddled with holes as a Swiss cheese.

 

[The Smoking Man]

Home Office slammed over Brazilian's shooting

The Home Office has been strongly criticised by the official leading the inquiry into the shooting of a Brazilian man wrongly thought to have been a suicide bomber.

Nick Hardwick, chairman of the Independent Police Complaints Commission, said the department should stop issuing "partial information" after government officials released details about the immigration status of the 27-year-old Brazilian electrician.

He added that people should "shut up" until his independent investigation had established the facts.

Jean Charles de Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder by plain clothes officers last week at Stockwell tube station. Police had followed him from a block of flats that had been under surveillance in Tulse Hill, south London.

Hardwick's comments follow the Home Office’s decision to confirm that De Menezes' visa had expired and implied he had a forged stamp in his passport.

But this was described as “entirely irrelevant information”, by Nick Hardwick today.

"I'm rather surprised the Home Office should issue it. We won't be releasing partial information until we've independently established the facts.

"I think a lot of people would do better to shut up for the moment until our independent investigation has established the facts. I won't speculate and I won't release partial information and it would be better if other people did the same."

And Asad Rehman, a spokesman for De Menezes' family, said it was "distasteful and disgraceful" that the Home Office should release information about him.

http://www.epolitix.com/EN/News/200507/4a51e799-b8a9-44d0-8b1f-65114087e377.htm

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

Here here. Oh, that doesn't include us, does it?

 

[Anttech]

:-) ... Hope not *slaps wrists*

 

[The Smoking Man]

Here here. Oh, that doesn't include us, does it?

Nor them apparently:

SHOOTING OF INNOCENT BRAZILIAN WAS NOT 'CAVALIER OR CAPRICIOUS'
By Roger Blitz
Published: July 29 2005 03:00 | Last updated: July 29 2005 03:00

The police shoot-to-kill operation that led to the death of an innocent Brazilian man at Stockwell Underground station involved nothing that was "cavalier or capricious", the Metropolitan Police commissioner has said, writes Roger Blitz.

Sir Ian Blair continued to defend the actions of his officers even though they are now the subject of an official inquiry by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

The officers involved "clearly thought they were faced with a suicide bomber and they were running towards him", Sir Ian said. "They were running towards what might have been certain death. Whatever else has happened, that has to be taken into account.''

He said that the Metropolitan Police took full responsibility for the death of Jean Charles de Menezes, the electrician shot eight times. But he added: "Had that person been a suicide bomber and had the officers not fired and the Tube doors had closed and 25 yards up the track the bomb had exploded with terrible loss of life, the officers would be in a worse situation than they are now."

Sir Ian described the tactic of shooting towards the head of a suspect suicide bomber as not necessarily the right procedure, but "the least-worst option". Advice sought by the Met from Israel's experience is that explosives could still be detonated if a bomber was not immediately incapacitated.

Nick Hardwick, chairman of the IPCC, declined to be drawn on whether Sir Ian's comments breached commission rules. He said only that it was too early for the commission to draw any conclusions about the incident.

The Home Office yesterday indicated that the visa held by Mr de Menezes was out of date. He was granted leave to remain until June 30 2003, but the department had no record of any further application.

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/cd6350a8-ffcd-11d9-86df-00000e2511c8.html

 

[Spin_Network]

SHHHH..DONT MENTION THE SHOOTING!



He added that people should "shut up" until his independent investigation had established the facts.

And just how are witnesses suppose to communicate what they saw?

http://cms.met.police.uk/news/major...ist_attacks/ipcc_leads_shooting_investigation

 

[The Smoking Man]

Sir Ian described the tactic of shooting towards the head of a suspect suicide bomber as not necessarily the right procedure, but "the least-worst option". Advice sought by the Met from Israel's experience is that explosives could still be detonated if a bomber was not immediately incapacitated.

I must say that this is a strange statement.

 

[ray b]

Just how old are you two?

I am 21 years older then YOU
and far wiser as I DO NOT TRUST THE STATE to tell the truth
or ever hold it's minions accountable for their crimes

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

"But he added: "Had that person been a suicide bomber and had the officers not fired and the Tube doors had closed and 25 yards up the track the bomb had exploded with terrible loss of life, the officers would be in a worse situation than they are now." "

Uhhh... that could be said of... EVERYONE WHO EVER USES THE TUBE! Why not just let the suicide bombers blow the entire Underground up, thus eliminating ALL would be suicide bombers! Jesus!

 

[Andy]

Origionally posted by some wise guy
The date is september the 12th 2001 and you are on a flying from (lets just say Iran) to Washington. All of a sudden you decide that you want to stretch your legs and go check on the pilot, so you start to walk to the front of the airplane. When you try to open the cockpit door someone shouts "STOP, ARMED POLICE!" Upon hearing this you burst through the door in pannick falling as you do.

Would you be surprised if you got shot in the back of the head?

So people would you be surprised?

P.S. Sorry mum couldn't resist!

 

[Smurf]

I must say that this is a strange statement.

I'll say. least-worst!? Come on! My 6 year old cousin speaks better english than that!

 

[Daminc]

I am 21 years older then YOU
and far wiser as I DO NOT TRUST THE STATE to tell the truth
or ever hold it's minions accountable for their crimes

These comments:

what should be done with killer cops
do they now have a license to kill WITHOUT any care

at a minimum they should be fired least they kill again
better would be for them charged with manslauter or murder
but oops that's the policy just is not acceptable
better their leaders should be charged also
as the policy is WRONG
but some how leaders are never acountable for bad policys

and those by that other gentleman:

Yes, trigger-happy murderers of innocents who lie through their teeth in the aftermath as to what happened have no place within the police force, but they do have a place behind prison bars.

is something I'd expect from a teenager. If you really are 60 odd then perhaps you should act accordingly and wait until you get all the facts. But then, if you automatically disbelieve anything you hear that's remotely official then you'll just believe anything you want regardless won't you?

and far wiser as I DO NOT TRUST THE STATE

I don't trust the States either :)
As I've mentioned before. I do not take anything at face value but I also don't jump to conclusions.

 

[Andy]

you'll just believe anything you want regardless won't you?

They do that alot.

 

[arildno]

Seems the police were lying a lot after all:
http://www.itv.com/news/index_312121.html

 

[PerennialII]

Makes one want to try the performance of the board word censoring property. KGB couldn't have handled this worse.

 

[arildno]

Makes one want to try the performance of the board word censoring property. KGB couldn't have handled this worse.

Unfortunately for its thousands of victims and the victims' relatives, KGB was a lot more ruthlessly efficient and professional when they went about with their killings than the UK police ever were.

 

[The Smoking Man]

Seems the police were lying a lot after all:
http://www.itv.com/news/index_312121.html

It certainly backs the criticisms we posted here when it initially happened!

 

[arildno]

It certainly backs the criticisms we posted here when it initially happened!

At least those parts of the criticism that said the official police version was a complete fabrication and deliberate lie.

As yet the criticism (from me, amongst others), that the police officers should be regarded as murderers is not as yet backed up with hard evidence (apart from the sorry fact that De Menezes was a murdered innocent, that is).
I still think they were precisely that, even though as yet, the police officers come off as "only" a gang of bumbling, lying incompetents.

 

[The Smoking Man]

At least those parts of the criticism that said the official police version was a complete fabrication and deliberate lie.

As yet the criticism (from me, amongst others), that the police officers should be regarded as murderers is not as yet backed up with hard evidence (apart from the sorry fact that De Menezes was a murdered innocent, that is).
I still think they were precisely that, even though as yet, the police officers come off as "only" a gang of bumbling, lying incompetents.

Padded Jacket??

Jumped the gate?

Cripes ... he jogged on and sat down.

Now they are claiming that not only 8 bullets were fired into him but another three bullets are missing!

They don't have surveillance footage because the cameraman was out for a 'slash'?

 

[arildno]

Even worse, it is only a member of the SURVEILLANCE team who says he heard the word "police" ever mentioned..

Look at the following snippet:

A man sitting opposite saw a man boarding and firing his first shot from a handgun at the head of Mr de Menezes from 12 inches away.

A member of the surveillance team said in the report that he heard shouting including the word police before turning to face Mr de Menezes

HEY?
What about that man sitting opposite who just saw a guy entering and firing off a shot at De Menezes??
Didn't he hear the word "police"?

 

[The Smoking Man]

Even worse, it is only a member of the SURVEILLANCE team who says he heard the word "police" ever mentioned..

Look at the following snippet:


HEY?
What about that man sitting opposite who just saw a guy entering and firing off a shot at De Menezes??
Didn't he hear the word "police"?

Even HE denies understanding what was said ... but he heard the word 'police'.

If the same can be said for the victim, maybe he, a Brazillian, heard a Cockney accesnt saying don't try and call for the police!?

 

[arildno]

Even HE denies understanding what was said ... but he heard the word 'police'.

If the same can be said for the victim, maybe he, a Brazillian, heard a Cockney accesnt saying don't try and call for the police!?

And, if he had been a Muslim terrorist (who couldn't possibly be thought to carry a bomb that day; where could he have hid it??) with a bad grasp of English, I don't think the word "police" would have registered with him, either..

 

[Daminc]

I find this extemely strange and worrying.

In a weird way it's like that horror film "The Birds". I mean, birds are professional right? There are very proficient at flying and catching bugs, eating seed etc, etc and then one day they all swarm together and attack a human.

It doesn't make sense.

The few that are crying out 'murder', 'liers' etc are missing the point IMO. This to me, and probably many of the posters here who are British, is like peering through the 'looking glass' and seeing Alice.

 

[arildno]

I find this extemely strange and worrying.

In a weird way it's like that horror film "The Birds". I mean, birds are professional right? There are very proficient at flying and catching bugs, eating seed etc, etc and then one day they all swarm together and attack a human.

Hysteria IS extremely strange and worrying, in particular because it makes OTHERWISE PROFESSIONAL individuals act in singularly unprofessional and irrational ways.

There is no reason that you should adopt my view on these matters (which I know you wouldn't anyway), but perhaps you on your own should make up your mind on how hysteria affects people.

I would however mention that, assuming ITV reports the truth, it is then an undeniable fact that the police deliberately cooked up a bunch of lies to serve to the general public.
To emphasize this is NOT to miss the point.

 

[The Smoking Man]

I find this extemely strange and worrying.

In a weird way it's like that horror film "The Birds". I mean, birds are professional right? There are very proficient at flying and catching bugs, eating seed etc, etc and then one day they all swarm together and attack a human.

It doesn't make sense.

The few that are crying out 'murder', 'liers' etc are missing the point IMO. This to me, and probably many of the posters here who are British, is like peering through the 'looking glass' and seeing Alice.

Did you read the link?

Did you see the picture of him wearing a denim jacket?

 

[Daminc]

Hysteria IS extremely strange and worrying, in particular because it makes OTHERWISE PROFESSIONAL individuals act in singularly unprofessional and irrational ways.

I've come across 'combat stress' but it's something a lot less likely to happen in a 'group' of professionals. I think it's the same as hysteria. The actions taken were far too extreme to be 'hysteria' IMO.

To emphasize this is NOT to miss the point.

Did you read the link?

Did you see the picture of him wearing a denim jacket?

I'm not dispute your positions gentlemen. I'm just looking at it from a different direction. This sort of thing just doesn't happen here as far as I'm aware. The fact that it did, in public, and certain things were lied about is the 'Alice in Wonderland' type scenario I was referring to. It's kind of like the Queen striding out of her palace and start break-dancing in front of the media. You would never expect it and if it did happen you would hear the jaws drop all over the world.

 

[arildno]

Perhaps "hysteria" in English has not the strong non-medical connotation as it has in Norwegian.

I chose, however, that word, because I thought "frenzy" might have come off a bit too strong..

 

[Art]

Looks like vindication for those of us who questioned the 'official' version of events at the time.

However there are now several serious issues here;
First the training and screening of armed police which led to the brutal murder of an innocent man then the question of who authorised the shooting and who created and circulated the original fictitious account of the events surrounding it. Next the role of Sir Ian Blair and his attempts to influence the inquiry and finally who leaked the report and why?

I suspect ultimately the family of the victim will be paid off and the whole sorry mess will be swept under the carpet and forgotten. Anyone trying to get to the bottom of it will be accused of being unpatriotic and terrorist supporters so after another day or two in the headlines the whole story will simply disappear into oblivion.

I'm not dispute your positions gentlemen. I'm just looking at it from a different direction. This sort of thing just doesn't happen here as far as I'm aware. The fact that it did, in public, and certain things were lied about is the 'Alice in Wonderland' type scenario I was referring to. It's kind of like the Queen striding out of her palace and start break-dancing in front of the media. You would never expect it and if it did happen you would hear the jaws drop all over the world.

I suspect this type of thing happens a lot more often than you may think. It is just that normally the cover up story is not investigated so thoroughly and so the police escape public scrutiny.

From report dated 2001

Since 1990, figures compiled by the campaign group Inquest show, there have been 551 deaths in police custody and 992 deaths in prison custody. Although the numbers dying in police care are falling (from a high of 65 in 1998, to 41 in 1999 and 27 in 2000), the trend of numbers of deaths in prison is upward: with 117 deaths in 1997, 134 in 1998, 146 in 1999, and 142 in 2000.

http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/press/press-releases-2001/deaths-in-custody.shtml

 

[arildno]

Looks like vindication for those of us who questioned the 'official' version of events at the time.

However there are now several serious issues here;
First the training and screening of armed police which led to the brutal murder of an innocent man then the question of who authorised the shooting and who created and circulated the original fictitious account of the events surrounding it.

Very good point!
One does NOT make a police officer into a PROFESSIONAL adversary of terrorism by feeding him horror stories about what terrorists are capable of doing.
This leads only to irrationalism in the individual copper, not to the development of a cool, efficient rational mind.
Unfortunately, I strongly suspect that a large portion of so-called "training" was precisely this type of horror story telling, and precious little besides.

Next the role of Sir Ian Blair and his attempts to influence the inquiry and finally who leaked the report and why?

As for the leak, perhaps an individual disgusted by the whole affair, along with a justified apprehension that if he did not leak, these issues would be swept under the carpet by his superiors?

I suspect ultimately the family of the victim will be paid off and the whole sorry mess will be swept under the carpet and forgotten. Anyone trying to get to the bottom of it will be accused of being unpatriotic and terrorist supporters so after another day or two in the headlines the whole story will simply disappear into oblivion.

Too true..

I suspect this type of thing happens a lot more often than you may think. It is just that normally the cover up story is not investigated so thoroughly and so the police escape public scrutiny.

I'm not altogether convinced of this:
I believe that severe outbreaks of unprofessionalism in the police force is strongly connected to what the particular crime is about.
Matters of extreme emotional content (like terrorism, or cases of child molestation) are, IMO, more liable to degenerate in this manner.

The ordinary mugging&death of an old woman will not provoke similar reactions in the police force..

 

[Art]

I'm not altogether convinced of this:
I believe that severe outbreaks of unprofessionalism in the police force is strongly connected to what the particular crime is about.
Matters of extreme emotional content (like terrorism, or cases of child molestation) are, IMO, more liable to degenerate in this manner.

The ordinary mugging&death of an old woman will not provoke similar reactions in the police force..

Sometimes I believe there is no emotional content involved in police brutality. There are simply some officers that are violent sadists whose actions are covered up to protect the reputation of the force. A policy which I believe whilst in the short term may appear pragmatic does in the longterm undermine public confidence and so leads to the good and honest police being tarred with the same brush as their violent colleagues.

Deaths in custody film halted by legal threat

Special report: deaths in custody

David Brown
Saturday July 7, 2001
The Guardian

The screening of a documentary naming eight serving police officers as murderers was canceled last night by the threat of legal action.
Relatives of some of the highest-profile victims of deaths in custody were in the audience to watch the film, Injustice.

Less than 20 minutes before the start, the Metro cinema in London's West End halted the event after receiving a fax of a letter from lawyers acting for two officers.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/celldeaths/article/0,2763,518203,00.html

A review of the documentary film -

TIME OUT

Injustice (Ken Fero & Tariq Mehmood, 2001, UK) With the relatives of Shiji Lapite, Brian Douglas, Ibrahima Sey and Joy Gardner. 100 mins. Documentary.

It's not about Apartheid-era South Africa, and neither is it about the Aboriginal victims of the Western Australian authorities. No, this is about down home, English-style oppression, and it features some of the worst cases of violent death in police custody of modern times. Since David Oluwale became the first black person to die in just this way in the UK in 1969, 1000 others have followed him to a similar end. No police officer has been convicted in relation to any of these cases.

http://www.injusticefilm.co.uk/timeout-review.html

 

[The Smoking Man]

ANYONE who forgives this debacle on the threat of 'terrorism' obviously has not been aware of the situation in the UK for a number of years.

You do remember the IRA, don't you?

The only thing different with THIS form of terrorism is that the skin of the suspected terrorists was darker in colour.

Don't let the location fool you Ladies and Gents I lived over half my life in the UK and was actually born in Yorkshire, near Middlesbrough and my father was a Sgt. in British Intel.

So cut the CRAP about us 'foreigners'.

I used to work at EMI in Hayes and walked to work through Southall every day.

 

[arildno]

Art:
Well, I would say that police brutality (as in interrogation settings) isn't quite the same
as acts of violence done in the exhilirating chase of the "bad guy".

I'm not defending instances of torture happening during interrogations, but I think that that is a different route by which police work may degenerate than the route by which it degenerated in the De Menezes case.

 

[arildno]

ANYONE who forgives this debacle on the threat of 'terrorism' obviously has not been aware of the situation in the UK for a number of years.

You do remember the IRA, don't you?

The only thing different with THIS form of terrorism is that the skin of the suspected terrorists was darker in colour.

Don't let the location fool you Ladies and Gents I lived over half my life in the UK and was actually born in Yorkshire, near Middlesbrough and my father was a Sgt. in British Intel.

So cut the CRAP about us 'foreigners'.

I used to work at EMI in Hayes and walked to work through Southall every day.

I assume you wish to point to the possible, even probable, element of racism in the De Menezes case?
You might well be right..

 

[Art]

Art:
Well, I would say that police brutality (as in interrogation settings) isn't quite the same
as acts of violence done in the exhilirating chase of the "bad guy".

I'm not defending instances of torture happening during interrogations, but I think that that is a different route by which police work may degenerate than the route by which it degenerated in the De Menezes case.

I fully agree with you that the motivations are very different in the different circumstances Arildno, it is the subsequent coverup that I was drawing a parallel with.