TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- British police murder innocent Brazialian
Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]

Re: Police-Shot Brazilian Had Expired Visa

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r More truth comes to the story... >>Source<<

Sad...

Have any of you seen the film The Interpreter yet?

There is a scene there where Sean Penns' character debriefs subordinates on the proper tactic for subduing a suicide bomber by aiming for the base of the skull. It's about 40 plus minutes into the film.

Just thought I'd throw that in there for you people to think about.

quote:

Originally posted by ogvh5150 So you believe a police officers word over someone elses? Sure a cop has to be a trained observer but think about one thing. If you were a cop and your job was on the line over a shooting death wouldn't you try to come up with some kind of story to CYA? After all we still don't know who did the shooting. That alone is suspect of something amiss.

No I wouldn't necessarily believe their word over the word of others. At the same time, I'm not entirely dismissing it either. It's very possible that either the police officers are wrong, or the witness is wrong. It would be helpful to have more than one account from a witness.

quote:

I went back on your posts and something went by way of miscommunication. You were right in getting the facts first. It's just that peeps are trying to gang up one me and I didn't see you standing there trying to break it up a bit. My bad.

No worries.

quote:

This sounds like either a lengthy criminal trial or a short civil trial on behalf of the bereaved. To let a suspect ride the bus on his way to whatever he takes them to just smells fishy. The spin doctors are hard at work here trying to make this a justified shooting. I'd like to see Scotland Yard explain the EIGHT holes in the guys head whilst he was pushed down to kiss the floor.

Well I would hope that there is some kind of investigative review of the event. It would be a good step for transparency and it may correct any procedural errors. However, either which way, I don't think there is enough evidence right now to convict the officers of murder. They were given a blank check to shoot to kill if they reasonably thought an individual was a suicide bomber. Apparentely they though he was going to detonate his bombs (after all, why take the chance to jump on the guy, why not shoot him while you're away from any kind of blast damage?), and unfortunate circumstances led an unfortunate conclusion. I can definetely envision reprimands and people losing their jobs, but I'm not too sure criminal charges are warranted.

You don't suspect someone of being a suicide bomber just because you happened to live in the apartment complex of one of the bombers.

Clearly, there was in intelligence failure as to how they handled the information and assumed as to what his intentions were.

So the blame lies on the law enforcement side. If they had their shit straight and not go after the wrong guy, the situation would've never escalated to the point where an innnocent man's life is now have been lost with five bullets in his head.

quote:

Originally posted by ogvh5150 He BOARDED A BUS before he went to the UNDERGROUND. To say that he was more of a threat in the underground instead of the bus only raises more questions.

Look this is getting gay, they didn't ask him to stop at gun point before he got on the bus did they?

You are just making up all this pish "but what if they didn't ask him to stop...." well what if they wern't even cops what if they were actually terroists and what if he was a special agent that they killed and "the man" is trying to hide the fact to protect other agents...........


no wait that makes no sense.....

The intelligence was all completely wrong which was the root of the problem. The policeman was just following orders. Nobody blames the soldiers in Iraq for what is happeneing there because they are just following orders, as was the policeman who made the shootings. And who on earth decided on a shoot-to-kill policy in the first place?

God I hate this. This country is headed for being a police state and the whole world is headed for one catastrophic mess.

quote:

Originally posted by est God I hate this. This country is headed for being a police state and the whole world is headed for one catastrophic mess.

Sure they are the world will be like 1984

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish Look this is getting gay, they didn't ask him to stop at gun point before he got on the bus did they?

Oddly enough no. Keep in mind he did skip past Brixton to get on at Stockwell which strangely enough is further down the underground line from his flat.

quote:

You are just making up all this pish "but what if they didn't ask him to stop...." well what if they wern't even cops what if they were actually terroists and what if he was a special agent that they killed and "the man" is trying to hide the fact to protect other agents...........no wait that makes no sense.....

I am saying why didn't they just pick him up the moment the saw him step through the door. After all that's where they started tailing him from. You can always pick someone up off the street and whisk them away so you can put him under the hot lamp. If what he says doesn't pan out you can just let him go. But NOOOOO no one wants that, they want summary execution of people because they LOOK LIKE a suspect. You look like a suspect should we be killing you on the street while you go to work?

quote:

Originally posted by est The policeman was just following orders.

This statement does not excuse anyone to violate human rights.

What policeman by the way?

Who is he or she?

There's blindfolds going around for everybody. Make sure you pick yours up.

TALKING POINTS FOR MAN SHOT DEAD

Urgent Release For All Press

Talking Points for man mistakenly killed by UK police. The following
points should be emphasised in your reports:

* The dead man is to be referred to as the "suspect" and never the "victim". The intent of these talking points is to cast suspicision onto the dead man and direct any criticism away from the police.
* He was not Caucasian. Preferably he was of Asian or Arab appearance.
* Do not just mention that he was (mistakenly) taken for a suicide bomber, but describe suicide bombings in detail. Especially the aftermath. The intention should be to frighten the reader.
* Remind the reader what would (never say "might") have happened if the suspect "had" been a suicide bomber and the police had "not" shot him. Exaggerate.
* Imply that he had a rucksack of the same colour, size, and design as preferred by real suicide bombers.
* Blame the terrorists for his death and be sympathetic towards the police at all times.
* When describing the man use imagary drawn only from the CCTV pictures of the real bombers. Conjour up the image of a suicide bomber.
* Mention but do not discuss his innocence. Mention it only when necessary.
* Belittle the suspect. Describe him in negative terms as poorly dressed, unshaven, and nervous, but also as a physically intimidating man, burly, agile, fit, dangerous.
* It should not be written that he "failed" to obey police as failure may be construed as meaning that there was some other possible reason for his not stoping than presumed guilt. Avoid passive associations by describing his actions only with action words commonly associated with guilt such as "refused" or "resisted".
* Give conflicting eye-witness accounts of the actual moments of the shooting so as to protect officers.
* One witness thought he saw a "bomb-belt" on the suspect. Quote this witness extensively and as often as possible. Offer no speculation or implication that he may have been mistaken (which of course he was). Use his observation as if it was the sworn testimony of an expert in suicide bombings requiring no further comment.
* The police began following the suspect after he left an apartment in the same block in which another apartment was under surveillance. Use this in such a way as to connect him to the bombers (by describing the apartment block as a "house", for example). Do not speculate that the police may have followed the wrong man.
* Bury the information that the real bombers are still on the loose by mentioning some vague arrests but do not give details as those arrested in the early days of such crises invariably turn out to be innocent.
* Avoid mention of the suspect's family (especially if it turns out he had a wife and kids) but report in depth on how sorry the police are. Use words like "regret" and "tragic".
* Assert that the way in which the suspect "dived or fell to ground" was cause for suspicion in itself. Never connect this to the simultaneous shouting by armed police for every one to "get down" as this may contradict prior assertions that he refused to obey the police.
* Report it as if "the regulations" required the police to shoot him.
* Report that there will be an internal enquiry as if this is a magnanimous police gesture as opposed to mere routine. Report on the process but not the substance of the enquiry, and phrase process descriptions in terms of thoroughness, accountability, and above all sufficiency. Avoid mention of previous police-shootings that have resulted in public enquiries.
* Don't mention the war.
* Generate debate on the circumstances in which the police *should* shoot to kill, and avoid moral or legal issues. Frame the debate in terms of terrorism only and dismiss mistaken-identity arguments as left-wing or liberal.
* If the suspect turns out to be non-muslim you should still continue to question muslim clerics on matters related to terrorism.
* If the suspect does turn out to be muslim connect muslim sympathy or sorrow over his death with radical extremism.
* Use the tiniest flaw in the suspect's character (drugs, fare-dodging, infidelity, etc) as ultimate justification. For example, "If he hadn't have been deaf, he would have heard the police and still be alive today..."
* Utterly groundless speculation is allowed to be presented as fact only when it results in a positive image for HMG.

quote:

This statement does not excuse anyone to violate human rights.

OK, but these violations began higher up in the system than the officer. The officer pulled the trigger, but would never have done so if not for the orders from above: a) to treat Menezes as a suspect and b) the shoot-to-kill policy. The more airing the officer gets, the more attention is distracted from whoever authorized a shoot-to-kill policy in the first place (is this even legal?) and the fatally wrong intelligence.

quote:

Originally posted by est OK, but these violations began higher up in the system than the officer. The officer pulled the trigger, but would never have done so if not for the orders from above: a) to treat Menezes as a suspect and b) the shoot-to-kill policy. The more airing the officer gets, the more attention is distracted from whoever authorized a shoot-to-kill policy in the first place (is this even legal?) and the fatally wrong intelligence.

Shifting the blame on superior officers never excused the Nazi's at Nuremberg.

Who in the world is this officer anyway? If he were in New York City he'd be an instant celebrity and pariah.

quote:

Originally posted by ogvh5150 Shifting the blame on superior officers never excused the Nazi's at Nuremberg.

I'm not so much shifting the blame as pointing out that there are other people who need to take responsibility here. As for the Nazis, I think most people would agree that Hitler was at fault more than the individuals that were following his orders to kill. Simiarly, Bush/Blair are blamed for Iraq, not the soldiers that are out there and so on...

The dead man, killed at Stockwell tube station on Friday after fleeing from armed police, was named as 27-year-old Jean Charles de Menezes. His body was identified by Alex Pereira, a cousin who lives in London and who afterwards told The Observer: 'I can't believe they shot him, because he was not a terrorist. He was an honest man.
'We [the family] are still too shocked to talk about it. But I am sure [that] he didn't do anything wrong. It was not right for the police to do that.'
Pereira said that the most upsetting part of identifying his cousin was 'to see bullet wounds in his back and his neck when I went to the mortuary in Greenwich.'
Man shot in terror hunt was innocent young Brazilian

Wednesday, July 27, 2005
The more they tell us, the less we know
As the Official Story of the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes develops, it gets weirder and weirder :

1. The police were staking out the block of flats in which he was living because the address had been found in documents left in one of the abandoned rucksacks that didn't blow up in the last series of attacks. That's a good place to leave the address of your safe house!
   
2. There were eight separate flats in the block, and he did not look like any of the suspects, but the police decided to follow him anyway.
   
3. Although they feared he might be a suicide bomber, they let him get on a bus!
   
4. For some reason, they decided he must not be allowed to get on the subway platform, even though it was fine for him to take a ten-minute bus ride.
   
5. His cousin, Alex Alves, claimed in one account that the victim was "playing around with a friend in a game of chase outside the station", although the police story is that he was alone (and playing around in a game of chase is an interesting thing to do before you go and blow yourself up).
   
6. They claim they gave a shouted warning to him - odd if they really thought he was going to blow himself up so quickly that shoot-to-kill was necessary - although witnesses heard no such warning.
   
7. The latest version is that he was shot eight times at close range, seven times in the head and once in the shoulder (although this is inconsistent with the original reports of five shots and inconsistent with the report of Alex Pereira, another cousin - ? - who saw the body when he identified it). If a coroner saw a corpse shot seven times in the head at close range, he would assume that the shooter was extremely angry and emotionally involved, and that this was a crime of passion. The overkill is inconsistent with a professional shooter, and was potentially dangerous as an errant shot could have set off the bombs the victim supposedly carried.
   

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said it was "likely" to send its report to the Crown Prosecution Service to consider.

The IPCC did not quiz Met Police chief Sir Ian Blair in person for its report. The Tories branded this "inexplicable".

Mr Menezes, from Brazil, was shot dead in Stockwell in July after officers mistook him for a suicide bomb suspect.

'Lower threshold'

IPCC chairman Nick Hardwick said its investigation had to decide whether its findings indicated that criminal offences may have taken place.

We are confident we know, second by second, what happened on that train
Nick Hardwick, IPCC chairman

This was a lower threshold than for the CPS, which would then have to decide whether to bring actual charges against any of the officers involved, he said.

Mr Hardwick said it was "likely" but not definite that the report would be sent the CPS to consider bringing charges.

"It's for the CPS to decide, not us whether there are criminal charges to be brought against anybody and if so what they are," he said.

The IPCC's director of legal services John Tate said that if the report was sent to the CPS, it would include a list of the criminal offences which may have been committed.

The IPCC would not detail the nature of the alleged offences which the CPS could potentially have to consider, although it is believed they could include offences as serious as murder or manslaughter.
Tube shooting charges 'possible'
Officers involved in the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes on the Tube could face charges, it has emerged.

quote:

London police 'faked evidence' on shot Brazilian: report Undercover London police officers faked vital evidence to cover up their fatal role in the shooting of innocent Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes, mistaken for a suicide bomber, a newspaper has alleged. Special Branch officers from London's Metropolitan Police tried to change a surveillance log detailing the electrician's movements to hide the fact that they had wrongly identified him, the News of the World weekly claimed. De Menezes, 27, was shot seven times in the head on a London Underground train at Stockwell station in south London. He was killed on July 22 last year, the day after an alleged attempt to replicate the July 7 attacks by four suspected suicide bombers which killed 52 innocent Underground and bus commuters. The alleged cover-up meant the blame for the tragedy would have been pinned on senior Met Police commanders or the armed police who fired the bullets -- leaving them open to murder charges, the newspaper said. The revelations are apparently contained in the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)'s report into the death, which was delivered to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) 10 days ago. A Special Branch officer mistakenly reported that De Menezes was Hussein Osman, 27, who is facing charges of conspiracy to murder in connection with the July 21 incident. However, once they realised their fatal error, the log was altered to read that no positive identification had been made. A government department source told the tabloid: "It says the log was actually tampered with in a major way. "In particular the words AND and NOT were inserted about the Osman ID, so it read 'and it was not Osman' rather than 'it was Osman'." The log was allegedly changed at a debriefing meeting 10 hours after the Brazilian was gunned down. It had been produced by colleagues of the officers listening to the team's radio messages. During the debriefing, the officers were allowed to check for errors and amend them -- but crucially, the alterations were not explained and signed as they apparently should have been. The newspaper quoted the IPCC report as reading: "This looks like an attempt to try and distance Special Branch from the decision (to shoot De Menezes)." The source said: "It was blatant, it was clumsy. "By doing that forgery they potentially made their colleagues back at the control room at central command at the Yard (police headquarters), and particularly their firearm officer colleagues, liable to be out in the dock for murder." An IPCC spokesman said the organisation "would neither confirm nor deny" anything in the alleged leak. "We do not comment on speculation," he said. Asad Rehman, who represents the victim's family, said the alleged leak strengthened relatives' demands to see the report. "From the family's perspective this is just one more in a long line in lies and deception surrounding the circumstances of Jean's death. "It makes them more adamant to learn how and why he died. The only way that can be done is by a full public inquiry. "They are at the end of their tether in the manner the whole death has been treated. There has been such a catalogue of disaster surrounding this case." The IPCC investigates deaths with either direct or indirect police involvement as a matter of course. The CPS handles criminal cases and is expected to take several months to decide whether to bring charges.

Ouch! If that's true then that makes it even worse

I guess the report has not been made public, but the quote refernced does say the alterations made are allowed. The problem lies in that they were not 'signed and explained'.
Not sure if that makes it a conspiracy tho. Admittedly it does not look favourable.

Hussein Osman.

Can't those spooks come up with a better name?

quote:

Originally posted by ogvh5150 Hussein Osman. Can't those spooks come up with a better name?

I think there's enough of a case for criminal court indictments?

quote:

Originally posted by occrider I think there's enough of a case for criminal court indictments?

There definetly is, not gonna happen though.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z

I guess John Bush or George Kerry would have been too obvious.

I wonder if he's related to Tim Osman.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.