Man Killed in London Did Not Run From Police

[nicky g]

I know partygirluk already posted about this at the bottom of the original thread but it seems to me it's worth its own new thread for all those who were so quick to blame this man for his own death.



Met accused over shooting confusion

Julia Day
Wednesday August 17, 2005

Confusion surrounding last month's fatal shooting of Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes - who was mistaken for a suicide bomber - could have been alleviated by the Metropolitan police, according to journalists covering the story.

Leaked documents and photographs obtained by ITV News yesterday revealed that some information given by police and witnesses at the time of the Stockwell underground shooting, and in the immediate aftermath, was incorrect.

Early media reports of the circumstances surrounding the killing of Mr de Menezes on July 22 were pieced together from police statements and eyewitness accounts.

But journalists working on the story believe the police should have corrected erroneous witness statements.

"Initially a lot of information was from civilian witnesses, there was a lot of confusion. But the police didn't do anything to clear up the confusion," said the Guardian's Rosie Cowan, who has been covering the story.

"[Metropolitan Police commissioner] Sir Ian Blair said [Mr Menezes] didn't stop when challenged and it wasn't until 4.30pm the next day that the police said they had shot an innocent man," Cowan added.

"I feel the [police] people I was speaking to didn't appear to be properly briefed up and you would have thought they could have been," she added.

Evening Standard journalist Matheus Sanchez, who has been dealing directly with Mr de Menezes' family in Brazil, said: "The family clearly think the police have changed their story.

"It's hard to say where the witness statements end and the police statements begin. What seems to have happened was that men seen running and vaulting the barriers by witnesses were actually the cops."

Another reporter who has worked on the story said that eyewitnesses were very shaken at the time and although they were not purposely making things up, things may not have been as they perceived them to be, and the police statements did not help matters.

Reports the day after the shooting quote the Met's statement that "a man was challenged by officers and was subsequently shot".

Sir Ian was also quoted as saying that the "shooting is directly linked to the ongoing and expanding anti-terrorist operation...I understand the man was challenged and refused to obey. I can't go any further than that at this stage."

Eyewitness accounts printed in the newspapers provided details about a man seen running and vaulting over the tube barriers wearing a padded jacket. Other witnesses said he was an Asian man with a bomb and wires protruding from a heavy jacket.

The police statements and eye-witness accounts given by those traumatised by seeing a man killed together formed what became the accepted account of the day: that a suspect had been warned by the police, ignored the challenge, vaulted over the barriers and ran off into Stockwell tube station wearing a padded jacket.

From the leaked ITV documents and photos from the Independent Police Complaints Commission investigation into the shooting, a completely different story has emerged.

Mr de Menezes was never properly identified; he was unaware he was being followed; he was wearing a denim, not a bulky jacket; he did not run from police and did not jump over the barrier, according to the information leaked to ITV News.

A spokeswoman for the IPCC said that the organisation operates a high level of security that was regularly reviewed and, in any case, it was not necessarily from within its confines that the leaked documents came.

"We are not the only organisation to hold these documents, it is not clear where they came from. We still do not know," she added.

The spokeswoman said the IPCC was refusing to confirm whether the documents were genuine, but added: "We're not accusing ITV of making it up, though."

Last night, as the ITV News story was breaking on ITV1's 6.30pm bulletin, the IPCC published a statement on its website: "The IPCC investigation into the shooting of Mr de Menezes is continuing. Our priority is to disclose any findings direct to the family, who will clearly be distressed that they have received information on television concerning his death.

"The IPCC made it clear that we would not speculate or release partial information about the investigation, and that others should not do so."

A Met spokeswoman said it would be inappropriate for the force to comment on the ITV leak, or other issues surrounding the death of Mr de Menezes, while the IPCC investigation is ongoing.

Metropolitan police statements: How the story changed

Friday 22 July
Man shot at Stockwell tube station: "We can confirm that at just after 10am this morning, Friday 22 July, armed officers from the Metropolitan Police entered Stockwell tube station in south London. A man was challenged by officers and was subsequently shot. London Ambulance Service and the Helicopter Emergency Service attended the scene. The man was pronounced dead at the scene. Stockwell tube station is closed and cordons of 200 metres are in place. As is routine, officers from the Met's directorate of professional standards have been informed."

Friday 22 July
Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Ian Blair: "I can say as part of operations linked to yesterday's incidents, Met police officers have shot a man inside Stockwell underground station at approximately 10am this morning. London Ambulance Service and the air ambulance both attended and the man was pronounced dead at the scene. I understand Stockwell tube station remains closed. The information I have available if that this shooting is directly linked to the ongoing and expanding anti-terrorist operation. Any death is deeply regrettable. I understand the man was challenged and refused to obey. I can't go any further than that at this stage."

Monday 25 July
Police make a further arrest: "Commissioner Sir Ian Blair has expressed 'deep regret' at the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, calling his death 'a tragedy'."

Tuesday 26 July
IPCC leads shooting investigation: "The investigation into the fatal police shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes on Friday 22 July has been handed over to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. This investigation was initially begun by the directorate of professional standards. Detectives have so far obtained over 100 witness statements, secured over 200 documents that may be pertinent to the investigation and ensured appropriate forensic work was conducted. A further statement has been published on the Independent Police Complaints Commission website at www.ipcc.gov.uk."

Pressure grows over tube killing
17 August 2005

Scotland Yard chief Sir Ian Blair should resign if he is found to have deliberately misled the family of an innocent Brazilian electrician shot dead by anti-terror police, their supporters said.

The Commissioner was "ultimately responsible" for the officers who gunned down Jean Charles de Menezes after mistaking him for a suicide bomber and for the "catalogue of disasters" that led to his death, they said.

As anger grew among Mr de Menezes's relatives after Tuesday night's dramatic new disclosures, his cousin said the officers involved should be "jailed for life" for what amounted to "murder". With reports claiming that the police marksmen could potentially face criminal charges, one of the family's lawyers said it was beginning to look like there were grounds for a criminal prosecution.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission promised a "thorough and impartial" investigation into the shooting and said it was planning to update the family's lawyers on its latest findings on Thursday.

Despite mounting pressure on the Metropolitan Police, there was still no official comment on the documents obtained by ITV News on Tuesday which re-ignited the controversy over the affair.

They appeared to suggest that Mr de Menezes had done little to arouse suspicion before he was shot dead at Stockwell Tube station, other than to emerge from a flat that had been under surveillance. (NB this is wrong - he emerged from a block of NINE flats).

Far from vaulting a ticket barrier and running down an escalator to escape firearms officers, he had actually walked into the station at a normal pace and had even paused to pick up a free newspaper, the documents said.

Reports that he had been wearing a bulky coat that added to suspicions were also incorrect, they revealed. He was clad only in a light denim jacket.

One police officer was also quoted as saying he was able to grab Mr de Menezes and pin his arms to his side before the shooting started. Another said he had been unable to record video footage of the Brazilian because he had been "relieving himself".

Asad Rehman, from the Justice4Jean campaign, said the latest disclosures vindicated everything Mr de Menezes's family had said and again repeated their call for a public inquiry. He said that if Sir Ian was found to have misled Mr de Menezes's family, his position would be "no longer tenable". He said Sir Ian must take responsibility for his force's controversial shoot-to-kill policy.

Mr de Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder at point blank range the day after the failed July 21 bomb attacks on the London transport network after being mistaken for one of the suspects.

Pressure grows over tube killing

[Bez]

I didn't read your whole post due to it's length, but from what I've seen, the police lied about a hell of a lot.

I generally give the police the benefit of the doubt in tricky situations, but they [censored] up big style here. Surely heads will roll.

How about sacking that twat Ian Blair who praised the officers involved despite knowing it was all lies?

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
How about sacking that twat Ian Blair who praised the officers involved despite knowing it was all lies?

[/ QUOTE ]

This guy wouldn't do this, he's a politican not a police man, my guess is he praised them before reading the report. He should go, he is nothing more than a Tony Blair place-man.

Most people won't care about this guy having been shot for no other reason than he lived near terrorists. He wasn't challenged, he didn't jump the barrier, he didn't run onto train (except as we all do when late). He had been sitting in his seat for a while when police got there, pulled him off his chair, pinned him down and fired into his head seven times, lastly the jacket he wore could not conceal a device. I've heard a lot of people say, he was a foreigner an illegal (expired visa), well since when did that carry the death penalty in the UK?

We need to question our faith in authority, we need to question how much power and responsibility we want to give them, they are not infalable;

* They will make mistakes and then lie

* They will not always act in our best interests

* They will not always know what is in our best interests

* They get scared, which leads to poor judgements

* They won't always be good or fair people

* They are often self-interested or corrupt

Trust them, sure. Ask yourself everyday if they still deserve it though.

Mack

[BonJoviJones]

I was pretty firmly behind the cops when the story first broke. Clearly it sucked for all involved, but accidents happen, right?

The newest allegations, if true (and I have no reason to doubt them), are pretty damning. Those officers need to be charged with some sort of serious crime.

The shoot-to-kill policy should probably be kept (but the exact ROE should be reviewed)

[Boris]

IUnless you think the police in this case are homicidal thugs, it doesn't change the fact that the shooting was an unfortunate yet understandable mistake.

[andyfox]

If the new information is correct, it's still unfortunate, but less understandable.

[Cyrus]

Sometimes, the mind just boggles with posts from this page (supposedly the Politics page of a forum frequented by Advantage Players, i.e. smart people).

I mean, really! Why are the extreme pro-war/anti-terror folks so ready to offer excuses for the London shooting and downplay its significance?

Don't they realize that, first and foremost, any fatal, criminal errors such as the London shooting will obstruct the anti-terror effort?

Do the pooh-poohing posters actually believe that the effort against terror is HELPED by
(a) not recognizing the shooting as criminal/murderous negligence which should be porosecuted as a crime,
(b) not taking measures that will prevent such incidents in the future (or, at least, make them less probable), and
(c) not having the public opinion trusting the authorities and firmly behind the anti-terror effort ?

The mind, as I said, boggles.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
Do the pooh-poohing posters actually believe that the effort against terror is HELPED by
(a) not recognizing the shooting as criminal/murderous negligence which should be porosecuted as a crime,
(b) not taking measures that will prevent such incidents in the future (or, at least, make them less probable), and
(c) not having the public opinion trusting the authorities and firmly behind the anti-terror effort ?

The mind, as I said, boggles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I am afraid they do, they seem to imply that the shooting was 'understandable', and therefore that any kind of questioning of the police actions is tantamount to high treason. Auf with his head gov.

Mack

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
IUnless you think the police in this case are homicidal thugs, it doesn't change the fact that the shooting was an unfortunate yet understandable mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really have a hard time figuring out how this can be remotely understandible. Those officers should be put in jail.

[Oblomov]

[ QUOTE ]
I really have a hard time figuring out how this can be remotely understandible. Those officers should be put in jail.

[/ QUOTE ]
It was understandable in a sense, because of the fear of more suicide bombings and the enormous pressure on the police to stop further attacks. That doesn't justify what happened, off course.

As to your last remark. Personally I think the people that came up with this reckless 'shoot to kill' policy should shoulder the blame, not necessarily the policeman that did the shooting.