De Menezes killers go free

[Bob]

I wouldn't want to be a cop in that sort of situation, if the bloke had turned out to be the right guy and they hesitated they would be under the same sort of hammering.

[faceless]

What's the betting that the cops get away with it again? I was hearing at the weekend that the technique used to murder Jean Charles was taught to the Met by Israeli security services, described as a 'destruction' of a person thought to be carrying a bomb. That makes me wonder how many innocent Palestinians they have murdered in the same kind of situation.

[faceless]

Police 'thought Menezes had bomb'
The police officers who shot Jean Charles de Menezes dead were "convinced" at the time that he was a suicide bomber, an inquest has heard. Coroner Sir Michael Wright said the two officers had thought Mr de Menezes was about to detonate a device on the Tube. His comments came at the opening of a three-month inquest in London.

The Brazilian, 27, was shot at Stockwell Tube station, south London, in mistake for a bomber on the day after the failed 21 July 2005 attacks.

Taking the inquest jury through events leading up to the electrician's death, Sir Michael listed a number of occasions where officers were unclear whether or not they thought they were pursuing a bomber. He told them of differences between what was being relayed on radio and logged in the Scotland Yard control room - and how officers were interpreting the information.

Sir Michael said that as Mr de Menezes entered the Tube at Stockwell, no member of the surveillance team had positively identified him as Hussain Osman, one of the four 21/7 bombers they were hunting. Turning to the decision of the two marksmen to shoot, Sir Michael said they had jointly fired nine rounds, seven of which entered the Brazilian's head at point blank range.

"Both officers state that they were convinced that Mr de Menezes was a suicide bomber, that he was about to detonate a bomb, and that unless they prevented him from doing so, everyone in that carriage was going to die," said Sir Michael. "Each officer says that he was convinced that an instant killing was the only option open to him. Mr de Menezes was killed instantly. He could hardly have had an opportunity to appreciate was happening."

'No terrorism link'

The inquest will continue with the jury visiting key locations on Tuesday including Stockwell Tube station and flats in Scotia Road in Tulse Hill, south London, where Mr de Menezes lived. The jury will consider whether or not Mr de Menezes was unlawfully killed.

Former High Court judge Sir Michael, assistant deputy coroner for Inner South London, had earlier sworn in the jury of six women and five men. He told jurors: "The facts of the case are that two firearms officers shot dead Mr de Menezes because they thought he was a suicide bomber, but the facts were that Mr de Menezes was in no way associated with any form of terrorism." Sir Michael added: "It will be for you to consider what level of identification was made at different stages, what was communicated to the firearms officers, and what those officers believed the position to be." He said the inquest was a fact-finding exercise and "not a forum to determine culpability or compensation, still less to dispense punishment".

'Pain and injustice'

Three of Mr de Menezes' cousins, Alex and Alessandro Pereira and Patricia da Silva Armani, and members of the Justice 4 Jean campaign were at the inquest. They and other relatives have campaigned for police officers involved in the shooting to be prosecuted. Patricia da Silva Armani reads out a statement from the family

Outside the court, Ms da Silva Armani said: "Today is the first day of a process, which we hope will bring my family closer to the truth. We are hoping that, at the end of the inquest, we will get the answer we need about how my cousin died. Hearing the coroner tell the history again bought back the pain and injustice of Jean's killing. This will be a long and painful three months for us, but we will be here until the end - to get to the truth and to get justice for Jean."

--------------------

The inquest is purely a fact-finding mission? Hopefully they'll find out then why it is that a man who doesn't look like he's carrying a bomb (the police lied about the jacket he was supposed to be wearing originally) is considered dangerous?

I'd say the facts in this case point precisely to a deliberate operation to put fear in the mind of potential bombers (real or imagined). Jean Charles was merely a lamb to the slaughter. They knew that he wasn't a threat but killed him for political reasons, to show that they were prepared to.

[faceless]

The jury in the inquest in to Jean-Charles' death has returned an 'open' verdict on the case - against the wishes of the judge and government. Brilliant.

There's now a genuine backlash happening against the bullshit that we've been fed by the government in regards to 'the war on terror', and the more that normal people point it out the better.

Well done those jurors for going against what the judge told them to do.

[faceless]

Counter terrorism officer sues Met over De Menezes 'cover-up'
27th August 2011

A Christian counter-terrorism officer involved in the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes is suing the Metropolitan Police over allegations that senior officers tried to cover-up vital evidence. He says his faith compelled him to blow the whistle and he is now claiming thousands of pounds for loss of overtime pay and promotions after Special Branch bosses allegedly sidelined him. One allegation involves anti-terror officers perverting justice by replacing a chief inspector with another to give more favourable evidence at the 2008 inquest into de Menezes’s death.

An inquest jury returned an open verdict into the shooting of the 27-year-old Brazilian who was mistaken for a suicide bomber in 2005 – rejecting the police view that he was killed lawfully. The detective sergeant, who cannot be named for legal reasons, first made his concerns known after he gave evidence under a codename at the inquest.

Two more serious concerns were reported about issues within the Met Police’s counter-terrorism department, known as SO15, last December that form the main part of his tribunal case. He is also suing for religious discrimination and loss of earnings.

A senior source said: ‘The allegations are about such a sensitive subject that top brass are very worried about what could come out in a tribunal. As this has been going on for such a long-time he was moved to another department and believes that his career was stalled because he spoke out.’

Mr de Menezes was shot seven times in the head at Stockwell Underground Station in South London after police mistook him for bomber Hussain Osman. He was killed on July 22, 2005, the day after Osman and three fellow terrorists had gone on the run after trying to bomb the Tube in a follow-up attack to the July 7 London bombings which killed 52 and injured 977.

The jury at the inquest on the Brazilian electrician rejected the account of police marksmen, branding them ‘liars’, and sided with Tube passengers who said the officers failed to issue a warning before opening fire. They returned an open verdict, which was the most strongly critical option available to them after the judge instructed them there was insufficient evidence to rule that de Menezes was unlawfully killed by police.

The Crown Prosecution Service ruled out criminal charges against anti-terror officers in 2006 and after the inquest in 2009. The Met was instead fined £175,000 under health and safety laws. The Independent Police Complaints Commision has investigated one of the detective sergeant’s claims finding no evidence to support the allegation.

An IPCC spokesman said: ‘We received a referral from the Metropolitan Police Service on 4 January 2011, as a result of an allegation made by a detective sergeant to the Directorate of Professional Standards in December 2010. The allegation had also been the subject of employment tribunal proceedings. The IPCC independently investigated the allegation, examining statements given to the Employment Tribunal and interviewing key people involved. The decision to call the DCI was made by counsel on the basis that he was better able to answer the questions. The investigation found that there was no evidence to support the Detective Sergeant’s allegation.’

A Met spokesman said: ‘The Metropolitan Police Service can confirm that it has received two employment tribunal claims from a Detective Sergeant lodged at London Central employment tribunal offices.’