De Menezes police case

Yorkie said:

You're right, but people love to be judgemental about such situations, especially with hindsight.

Click to expand...

You could say that about the Trade Towers, in defence of the terrorists, then.

We "love to be judgemental" is a cover-all for any public opinion, for a heinous act of wasteful violence and murder, is it?

Yes, the difference is that it was a mistake - but the difference is also that it was carried out by people entrusted to protect the public, and they did terrorism a FAVOUR by completely and utterly, royally screwing up.....whilst avoiding admittance and blame at every turn (except for their opportunism in blaming the victim).
THAT is why it's big news, and more outrageous than so many other everyday mistakes.

Soft soap and whitewash might work for 'some', but since the people entrusted with responsibility actually squirm and try to excuse themselves and STILL SMEAR THE NAME OF THE VICTIM EVEN NOW - I'd say that they should be on trial, and Ian Blair should face the music and dance his irresponsible arse out of his cozy office.

seagullsovergrimsby said:

I believe the reason why everything has been whitewashed is that some of the "policemen" were actually SAS. (allegedly)

Click to expand...

So do I.

seagullsovergrimsby said:

I believe the reason why everything has been whitewashed is that some of the "policemen" were actually SAS. (allegedly)

Click to expand...

Yorkie said:

So do I.

Click to expand...

Ah well, that's alright then

seagullsovergrimsby said:

I believe the reason why everything has been whitewashed is that some of the "policemen" were actually SAS. (allegedly)

Click to expand...

Well that would be an entirely differant ball game, taking us out of a country policed by Police and one that is effectively under partial Military rule. A small but significant stepfor the very worse.

I still think Blair might go now. Either the systems and procedures in place are shite - which is his fault - or he is in charge of a large number of reckless cowboys who lie to cover up their mistakes - which ultimately is also his fault. Only one honourable course of action.

I am one of those that does believe the police should be given a lot more leeway in times of a terrorist threat, but even with that latitude there have to be limits and it seems to me they were well exceeded here.

Monkster said:

Hang on.....the police were convicted in a HEALTH & SAFETY Case.

Wait until the Inquest before deciding it was a tragic mistake

Click to expand...

The Health and Safety case was found proved because the safety of the public was proved to be compromised........but surely the safety of the public was not compromised, as the police knew exactly who they were after and (although in most people's eyes made a horrendous mistake) made sure that it was only him who was dealt with.

Surely the safety of the public would have been more compromised if in fact he had have been a bomber and he had ignited a device killing many people and the police had done nothing.

Was it an urban myth that it was reported that his Visa to stay in the county had expired and he was living here illegally ( hardly a crime to be exexuted for) but it does beggar the question that if he had gone home when required, he would probably still be alive.....tenuous argument i know

Dave the Gaffer said:

The Health and Safety case was found proved because the safety of the public was proved to be compromised........but surely the safety of the public was not compromised, as the police knew exactly who they were after and (although in most people's eyes made a horrendous mistake) made sure that it was only him who was dealt with.

Surely the safety of the public would have been more compromised if in fact he had have been a bomber and he had ignited a device killing many people and the police had done nothing.

Was it an urban myth that it was reported that his Visa to stay in the county had expired and he was living here illegally ( hardly a crime to be exexuted for) but it does beggar the question that if he had gone home when required, he would probably still be alive.....tenuous argument i know

Click to expand...

The safety of the public was compromised as they let him get on a bus and then into a train station, if he was a bomber he could have done it while they watched him

keaton said:

The safety of the public was compromised as they let him get on a bus and then into a train station, if he was a bomber he could have done it while they watched him

Click to expand...

ah, if that was the ruling, then fair enough...

Sir Ian Blair vowed yesterday to stay on as Britain's top police officer, despite sustained calls for his resignation, after his force was found guilty of "catastrophic" failings that led to the shooting dead of Jean Charles de Menezes.
An Old Bailey jury found the Metropolitan police guilty of breaking health and safety law in July 2005 when De Menezes was killed after being mistaken for a suicide bomber. Fining the force £175,000 and ordering it to pay £385,000 in costs, judge Mr Justice Henriques called on the force to learn lessons.


He said: "Every single failure here has been disputed. Some of these failings have been simply beyond explanation. There has been no single admission to any one of the alleged 19 failings."
The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats demanded Sir Ian resign as commissioner of the Met. But he was given public backing by home secretary, Jacqui Smith, and prime minister, Gordon Brown.

Within the police service, the Guardian has learned that senior figures argued the force should plead guilty, but Sir Ian decided to fight the case. The unprecedented trial came after prosecutors said no individual officer could be held responsible for the electrician's death, but that the force should be tried for failing to protect the public from risk.

At the heart of the trial was the Met's failure to follow its own plan on the morning of July 22 2005, thereby placing the public at risk. The force was hunting suicide bombers who had launched failed attacks on the capital's transport system the previous day.

Evidence led detectives to a block of flats in south London, and at 5am a senior commander ordered surveillance officers to be posted outside with support from elite firearms officers to stop and question anyone who emerged.

But the firearms officers were not in place for more than four hours, so when De Menezes left the flats he was allowed to travel on two buses and then on to a tube train at Stockwell. It was only there that firearms officers caught up with him and he was shot seven times.

Delivering their guilty verdict, the jury made clear that Cressida Dick, who led the operation, bore "no personal culpability". Mr Justice Henriques said a "corporate failure" lay behind the tragedy. "This was very much an isolated breach brought about by quite extraordinary circumstances," he said.

But he said the failure to have firearms officers in place had led to the killing of the 27-year-old Brazilian. If the strategy had been followed, he said, it "would have prevented any suspect boarding the public transportation system and would ... have avoided this terrible tragedy".

The prosecution had outlined 19 separate failures. Sentencing the Met, the judge highlighted particular shortcomings including commanding officers' mistaken belief that surveillance officers following De Menezes had "positively" identified him as a terrorist. The control room at Scotland Yard was noisy, making communications difficult, said the judge, who added that the briefing firearms officers received was inaccurate and "unbalanced".

The judge praised the bravery of individual officers but said the force should learn lessons and questioned its tactics in the trial. He said the bill to the taxpayer could "very easily have been minimised".

After the verdict Sir Ian refused to consider resigning, saying the failings were not systemic: "The difficulties shown in this trial were those of an organisation struggling, on a single day, to get to grips with a simply extraordinary situation."

One of Britain's most senior officers told the Guardian: "The Met should have pleaded guilty. The stuff that comes out is embarrassing for the Met even if it's found not guilty." He added: "Stockwell will damage him in the end. It's his millstone and will be with him to the end."

The furore over the shooting will continue. The Independent Police Complaints Commission is considering the release of a report into the failings within days. A full inquest into the killing will take place next year, and the De Menezes family will also issue civil proceedings.

Later this month Sir Ian will face a meeting of his police authority where he will be questioned about the guilty verdict.

The shadow home secretary, David Davis, said the commissioner's position was "untenable" and the Lib Dem home affairs spokesman, Nick Clegg, said his resignation was unavoidable.

The Met is under fire for its trial tactics. The closing speech of its barrister Ronald Thwaites QC angered De Menezes's family, who said it was a "smear". They demanded Sir Ian resign.

Yorkie said:

My police state?
Where is the evidence that the police did anything but make a tragic mistake in the heat of the moment?

Click to expand...

There would have been no 'heat of the moment' if the police had acted correctly in the first place. Due to their incompetence an innocent man is dead and the a large number of the public were put at risk.

Blair and Dick must be relived of their duties and their big fat police pensions awarded to Menezes' family in compensation.

jonny.rainbow said:

There would have been no 'heat of the moment' if the police had acted correctly in the first place. Due to their incompetence an innocent man is dead and the a large number of the public were put at risk.

Click to expand...

Exactly.
THEY freakin' PLANNED it, Jean Carlos Menezes was caught in the 'heat of a moment' that they had been sitting in wait for him for.

But the old bill here, have been the epitomy of a law-unto-themselves - so what makes anyone think the high leader of a law unto its' own self is going to do what HIS EMPLOYERS (that's us, Joe Public) ask him to do?

Interesting...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/629/629/7073125.stm

It certainly dispels the 'heat of the moment' argument.

Barrel of Fun said:

Interesting...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/629/629/7073125.stm

It certainly dispels the 'heat of the moment' argument.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that, it's interesting reading alright. I can't recall an exciting spy novel that sinks you so much at the end, but knowing this was an actual innocent has that effect.

The excuses, cover-ups and smearing of the victim afterwards, only sickens me more to think about it. The ob would have done much better to bow their heads and own up to a heinous and tragic screw-up, and take the criticism, ridicule and media/public flak on the chin.

So much for the 'Great British Bobby' now, eh?

Part 2 tonight


Still need to catch up on the first ep.

Yorkie said:

So do I.

Click to expand...

me too