de Menezes - open verdict

[Apache]

whats going to happen in the next situation where a police officer with a gun hesitates for his own sake in case its just a tourist?!

He wont shoot a tourist?

I'm sorry, but excusing the shooting (six times in the head, hardly accidental) of an innocent can never be excused in the name of protecting us from a barely existant terrorist 'threat'!

How many people have died in terrorist attacks in this country in the last 10 years? How many have died falling over their underwear? Check it out, you'll be amazed!

We are being brainwashed into thinking the UK is a haven for terrorism. It isn't. But what better way can you think of for getting the thicker portion of the UK population to blindingly accepting ID cards (for OUR safety - oh yeah!) or ever more intrusive surveillance?

[RodLeach]

He wont shoot a tourist?

I'm sorry, but excusing the shooting (six times in the head, hardly accidental) of an innocent can never be excused in the name of protecting us from a barely existant terrorist 'threat'!

How many people have died in terrorist attacks in this country in the last 10 years? How many have died falling over their underwear? Check it out, you'll be amazed!

We are being brainwashed into thinking the UK is a haven for terrorism. It isn't. But what better way can you think of for getting the thicker portion of the UK population to blindingly accepting ID cards (for OUR safety - oh yeah!) or ever more intrusive surveillance?

Ok fair enough.

I didn't know it was 6 times in the head. I've not really kept upto speed on the case.

But what im trying to say is basically... Did anyone expect anything else?! It was always going to be misrepresented an a total lack of justice! Now its happened an .... well! Its all been misrepresented an theres a total lack of justice!

quel surf**kingprise!!

[Albannach]

We are being brainwashed into thinking the UK is a haven for terrorism. It isn't. But what better way can you think of for getting the thicker portion of the UK population to blindingly accepting ID cards (for OUR safety - oh yeah!) or ever more intrusive surveillance?

I've yet to have someone properly explain this to me: How will me carrying a bit of plastic in my pocket stop someone flying a plane into a building in America?

[Apache]

I've yet to have someone properly explain this to me: How will me carrying a bit of plastic in my pocket stop omeone flying a plane into a building in America?

And you wont find someone to explain it satisfactorily either.

Thats because 'stopping terrorism' isn't the point, but its a handy excuse, and one they can scare the crap out of the 'hard of thinking' with.

[Darren]

I would like a police officer to 'hesitate for his own sake' if I was sat down, had no weapon, wasn't a criminal and he hadn't identified himself.

They are going through a lot training ATM to remind them to at least tell people who they are before they shoot them repeatedly in the face.

We would all like them to hesitate and reconsider before they shot us but would you want them to if the person their aiming at does have a bomb and he's sat next to your kids or your misses, they were damned if they shot him and equally if they didn't.
I think everyone is also forgetting they thought the bomb was likely to go off anyway, when they rushed on that train they thought they were giving their lives to stop more people getting killed. The shooters didn't make the decision that he had a bomb they were told that and they were willing to get on that train anyway and try to stop him in the only way they have been told will work. I don't think they should be held to blame.

[Bibs]

And you wont find someone to explain it satisfactorily either.

We would all like them to hesitate and reconsider before they shot us but would you want them to if the person their aiming at does have a bomb and he's sat next to your kids of your misses, they were damned if they shot him and equally if they didn't.
I think everyone is also forgetting they thought the bomb was likely to go off anyway, when they rushed on that train they thought they were giving their lives to stop more people getting killed. The shooters didn't make the decision that he had a bomb they were told that and they were willing to get on that train anyway and try to stop him in the only way they have been told will work. I don't think they should be held to blame.

Actually Darren did - quite well I may say.

[RodLeach]

We would all like them to hesitate and reconsider before they shot us but would you want them to if the person their aiming at does have a bomb and he's sat next to your kids of your misses, they were damned if they shot him and equally if they didn't.
I think everyone is also forgetting they thought the bomb was likely to go off anyway, when they rushed on that train they thought they were giving their lives to stop more people getting killed. The shooters didn't make the decision that he had a bomb they were told that and they were willing to get on that train anyway and try to stop him in the only way they have been told will work. I don't think they should be held to blame.

thats the point i was trying to (so badly) make!

[Bogus]

We would all like them to hesitate and reconsider before they shot us but would you want them to if the person their aiming at does have a bomb and he's sat next to your kids or your misses, they were damned if they shot him and equally if they didn't.
I think everyone is also forgetting they thought the bomb was likely to go off anyway, when they rushed on that train they thought they were giving their lives to stop more people getting killed. The shooters didn't make the decision that he had a bomb they were told that and they were willing to get on that train anyway and try to stop him in the only way they have been told will work. I don't think they should be held to blame.

Yes Darren, but he didnt have a bomb, did he, he was just another commuter, he was you or me, not only did he not have a bomb, he had no links or even any vague affiliations with any known or suspected terrorists, and I think that is why people are entitled to believe that he was actually murdered, or at least killed unlawfully. What we all want to know is why were those officers told he had a bomb, who decided he had a bomb, what evidence was there that he had a bomb? When was it decided he had a bomb, why was he allowed down the underground if he had a bomb. As I said in my post I wouldnt necessarily blame the trigger pullers, but there is no doubt that things went wrong somewhere and this event is akin to corporate manslaughter. It is all of course made worse by the fact that the police chose to lie about it ( like common criminals) rather than fess up to mistakes. I think it would be a mistake just to brush it off as being a bit unfortunate, and while you are on about potential bombers sitting next to your kids or missus, dont forget that Jean Charles was someones kid too. When innocents are killed by terrorists, we are outraged. We are entitled to be even more outraged when innocents are killed by the Police, and we are entitled to be further outraged when they choose to lie about it. We expect terrorists and criminals to lie, but although deep down we know that our police are human and will also lie, I guess we would rather not see such blatant evidence of it.
His death was unlawful and his death was avoidable, its as simple as that. It cant be undone but it would be nice if the authorities were to to stop with the excuses and try to identify and remove the root cause. If they cant be seen to do that then we should all be worried. It could be you or yours next.
If I was the officer who shot him, I would certainly want to know why I had been put in a situation where I had been forced to shoot a commuting electrician. I would find it hard to carry on performing for the people who had covered me in the blood of an innocent

Bogus

Bogus

[Darren]

I would only argue in the defense of the shooters, I agree completely something went horribly wrong in the decision making and thats where blame should lie.

[div3r]

completly agree mate, But the problem is what happens to the officers if it was an unlawful death?

If a Jury was allowed, based on the evidence presented, found that matey was killed unlawfully then the law should take its course. I want an armed police officer to know that if he gets it wrong he will have to defend himself in court, if its good enough for British Soldiers then its good enough for our police. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/apr/18/paulkelso I know there is not a direct comparison but the principle of armed personnel not being held accountable for their actions scares me, this case stinks from top to bottom. This was an innocent man doing no more than going to work like the rest of us.

[Predictable Bob]

The point is that the coppers with the guns DIDN'T get it wrong - they did their job very effectively .....

Unfortunately the intelligence was flawed and the people that made the mistakes won't be brought to book - although I think their careers will take a long time to recover

[Apache]

I would only argue in the defense of the shooters, I agree completely something went horribly wrong in the decision making and thats where blame should lie.

Seems you're another one who's swallowed the lie that we live in a terrorist filled country and everyone on a bus, plane, train or whatever with a beard needs to be feared.

It's BS Mr. A scared population wont ask questions when their freedom is being eroded, hence my comment about ID cards.

In my eyes, it is absolutely UNFORGIVABLE that a young person lost their life, that a mother is grieving her son, due to a 'mistake'. Fact is, the police lied from day one. They could have held their hands up immediately it happened and said 'we screwed up - we shot an innocent man'. Fact is they tried to cover their blunder.

"He ran and vaulted the turnstiles" they said.

Witnesses said, no he didn't, he walked through as a normal commuter.

"He was wearing a padded jacket"

Witnesses disagreed - I dont recall exactly what it was he was wearing but think they said a denim jacket.

"He was carrying a rucksack"

Witnesses disagreed - he wasn't carrying a bag.

A mob of plain clothes were shouting agressively at him on the platform, and he didn't understand english too well. What would you do? Hang around and get beaten up by what COULD be a racist mob, or get on the train where there's other people?

Did they restrain him and stop him setting off a bomb he couldn't conceal in no bag / no puffy jacket? Not according to the witnesses. They threw him to the ground and shot him 6 times in the head.

The police lost control of themselves. Those guys should NOT be allowed to carry guns because next time they get xenophobic and lose the plot, it could be you, me, or your son, and THAT my friend, is what's unacceptable.

[da SLUG man]

i wasn't there on the day, i wasn't in court listening to evidence... there's no way i can comment!

i could tell you some half truths from the papers though!

[MattF]

The point is that the coppers with the guns DIDN'T get it wrong - they did their job very effectively .....

Unfortunately the intelligence was flawed and the people that made the mistakes won't be brought to book - although I think their careers will take a long time to recover

The point is not what they did specifically upon that train. The point is the fact that a supposedly unbiased judgement cannot be unbiased because all options were not available. You have a justice system or you do not. You cannot pick and choose which parts are relevant depending upon the circumstances. If a jury can decide something was a lawful killing, then by virtue they cannot be refused the opposite option. They were. That is not justice.

Btw, with regards to your point above. They didn't get it wrong? They did their job effectively? If that is the case, I'm sure the Met could save thousands per year by teaching monkeys to shoot instead of training Officers to do so. Obviously, the consideration of any consequences of ones actions are irrelevant, judging by your opinion. Monkeys could do that job just as effectively.

[MattF]

Actually Darren did - quite well I may say.

Andy was referring to I.D cards.