News The Ultimate Loss of Civil Liberties: Innocent Man Shot Dead in UK

  • Thread starter Thread starter alexandra
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Civil Loss Uk
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the police shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, a Brazilian man mistakenly identified as a terrorist following recent bomb attacks in London. His family expressed outrage, emphasizing that there was no reason to suspect him of terrorism. The police admitted regret over the incident, describing it as a tragedy. Participants in the discussion debated the justification for the use of deadly force, with some arguing that the police acted out of panic and fear, while others suggested that the circumstances—such as de Menezes wearing a heavy coat in warm weather and fleeing from plainclothes officers—raised suspicions. Eyewitness accounts described the chaotic scene, where de Menezes was pinned down and shot multiple times. The conversation highlighted concerns about police protocols in high-stress situations and the implications for civil liberties, questioning whether the police's actions were warranted given the context of recent terrorist threats. Participants emphasized the need for a thorough investigation into the incident and the broader implications for public safety and police conduct.
  • #151
Smurf
:smile: :smile: :smile:
No... Not a 'wrong doing' at all. You were totally right DM. Good Catch.

Validate your derision, please. I have heard in the news, two eye-witnesses, unequivocally stating that the "police shot 5 times".
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #152
BBC news today says that it's since been discovered that 8 shots were fired, not 5.

I'll try and link you up.


Edit:

Here you go.

BBC said:
Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder, at Stockwell Tube station, south London, on Friday.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4713753.stm
 
Last edited:
  • #153
DM said:
Smurf


Validate your derision, please. I have heard in the news, two eye-witnesses, unequivocally stating that the "police shot 5 times".
SHOT SEVEN TIMES IN HEAD

Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes was shot eight times by anti-terror police at Stockwell Tube station.

An inquest opened into the death of the 27-year-old at Southwark Coroner's Court heard he was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder.
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-13394581,00.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #154
DM said:
Smurf


Validate your derision, please. I have heard in the news, two eye-witnesses, unequivocally stating that the "police shot 5 times".
Because it would be such a huge difference if it was discovered that was a lie. 5 Times is totally acceptable, don't you agree?
 
  • #155
I don't see the problem with 5, or even 8 bullets.

If you're shooting to kill as quickly as possible, what's a few extra bullets?
 
  • #156
Smurf
Because it would be such a huge difference if it was discovered that was a lie. 5 Times is totally acceptable, don't you agree?

To your question:

Hence why officers who believe persons are a terrorist threat are required to "kill the brain" with 5 shots to the head.
 
  • #157
brewnog said:
I don't see the problem with 5, or even 8 bullets.

If you're shooting to kill as quickly as possible, what's a few extra bullets?
It's the shooting to kill in the first place that disgusts me. I'm insulted by DM's claim this is not a 'wrong doing' at all. An Innocent man gets killed for no reason by the police who are supposed to be protecting him. If that happened in my town I'd be down town egging the police station right now. I'm shocked how people can take this stuff so calmly, not only accepting it, but defending these acts. It's disgusting.
 
  • #158
DM said:
To your question:

Hence why officers who believe persons are a terrorist threat are required to "kill the brain" with 5 shots to the head.
Yeah... Again, doesn't change a single thing, an innocent man still got his head blown off.
 
  • #159
Smurf said:
It's the shooting to kill in the first place that disgusts me. I'm insulted by DM's claim this is not a 'wrong doing' at all. An Innocent man gets killed for no reason by the police who are supposed to be protecting him. If that happened in my town I'd be down town egging the police station right now. I'm shocked how people can take this stuff so calmly, not only accepting it, but defending these acts. It's disgusting.


It's very sad that an innocent man was killed. I'm sure that no amount of sympathy will console his family.

However, I firmly stand by the actions of the police, and firmly support the shoot-to-kill policy which has been introduced for these circumstances. Obviously we don't have a full story yet, but suggestions have been that the man was knowingly running from armed police (for reasons which have been suggested), and had failed to comply with their demands.

If this had happened differently, and the suspect had detonated a bomb on that train, those highly trained police officers would have had hell to pay for not doing what they did on Friday. It's just a great shame that an innocent man died.
 
  • #160
Nothing is really fair enough...
 
  • #161
Smurf
I'm insulted by DM's claim this is not a 'wrong doing' at all. An Innocent man gets killed for no reason by the police who are supposed to be protecting him.

What? don't manipulate information.

Delta

When told to "stop, armed police" he began to jump the barriers and run (why the hell run from armed police in this state of climate especially considering how often tube trains arrive at the station)

My response:

Precisely the reason I don't construe this as "barbaric" or "wrong doing".

The police was alarmed by his behaviour, hence were led to believe he could've been a potential terrorist after he was challanged. This is not wrong doing.

Yeah... Again, doesn't change a single thing, an innocent man still got his head blown off.

Yes, very regrattably an innocent man has been killed but this does not overule the fact at the time of considering him as a potential terrorist where hundreds could've been killed.
 
  • #162
brewnog
It's very sad that an innocent man was killed. I'm sure that no amount of sympathy will console his family.

However, I firmly stand by the actions of the police, and firmly support the shoot-to-kill policy which has been introduced for these circumstances. Obviously we don't have a full story yet, but suggestions have been that the man was knowingly running from armed police (for reasons which have been suggested), and had failed to comply with their demands.

If this had happened differently, and the suspect had detonated a bomb on that train, those highly trained police officers would have had hell to pay for not doing what they did on Friday. It's just a great shame that an innocent man died.

Totally agree.
 
  • #163
brewnog said:
It's very sad that an innocent man was killed. I'm sure that no amount of sympathy will console his family.

However, I firmly stand by the actions of the police, and firmly support the shoot-to-kill policy which has been introduced for these circumstances. Obviously we don't have a full story yet, but suggestions have been that the man was knowingly running from armed police (for reasons which have been suggested), and had failed to comply with their demands.
Seeing as how apart from an initial flurry of misinformation, the police have been extremely reticent in providing any information in regard to their brutal execution of this innocent man it is hard to see how you can claim to "firmly stand by the actions of the police"??
Is this part of the new pre-emptive philosophy? We've had pre-emptive wars, pre-emptive executions and now pre-emptive exonerations. So hundreds of years of law just gets flushed down the toilet?
 
  • #164
We seem to be getting mixed reports over when he started running and if the police actually did give warning. A classic case of chinese whispers I think.

All I know is I wouldn't trust the news reports of other countries ( e.g. sky news or CNN). And of the news reports of the UK I would put my beliefs in eye witness accounts (below) over police press conferences. And that still leads to suspicious circumstances by the victim.

http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=400
http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=399
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm

Smurf
An Innocent man gets killed
. Only in hindsight. The police could have let the person on the train and allowed another 56 or more to be killed.

This is a very regretable mistake but in light of what could've of happened ...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #165
Art
Is this part of the new pre-emptive philosophy? We've had pre-emptive wars, pre-emptive executions and now pre-emptive exonerations. So hundreds of years of law just gets flushed down the toilet?

I fail to comprehend, Art, why you regard this as an exonoration. The police conducted the enshrined policy, there are no culprits. Furthermore 'pre-emptive' is indeed the appropriate the term.
 
  • #166
Delta said:
And of the news reports of the UK I would put my beliefs in eye witness accounts (below) over police press conferences. And that still leads to suspicious circumstances by the victim.

http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=400
http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=399
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm
Yes eye witness reports are always so reliable
Another passenger on the train, Anthony Larkin, told BBC News the man appeared to be wearing a "bomb belt with wires coming out".
:smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #167
BBC says that this poor Brazilian had expired visa. so now they gona kill lots of people there.
 
  • #168
DM said:
Art
I fail to comprehend, Art, why you regard this as an exonoration. The police conducted the enshrined policy, there are no culprits. Furthermore 'pre-emptive' is indeed the appropriate the term.
Brewnog claimed
However, I firmly stand by the actions of the police
Despite a dearth of actually facts surrounding both the actions and the circumstances he is exonerating the police of culpability whilst not having a clue whether they were justified or not. In fact the longer it goes without the police making a formal statement backed by video footage of such things as the victim 'jumping the ticket barrier' etc. the more suspicious it becomes that the police are now operating in coverup mode.
 
  • #169
stoned said:
BBC says that this poor Brazilian had expired visa. so now they gona kill lots of people there.
This is an example of the unsubstantiated, unattributed comments the police are leaking to the media to try and set the scene to accord with how they want people to believe this execution went down.

These are the exact same tactics the police used to obfuscate their blinding incompetence during the Hillsborough stadium disastor when the police officer in charge informally briefed the press with the appalling lie that the Notts Forest fans looted the bodies of the dead Liverpool fans. He admitted during the inquiry that he invented this to deflect the public's anger from his officers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #170
Ok, I feel a poll coming on here.
 
  • #171
so, if british now execute people for visa violations, i wonder what are penalties for parking infringements ?
 
  • #172
brewnog said:
It's very sad that an innocent man was killed. I'm sure that no amount of sympathy will console his family.

However, I firmly stand by the actions of the police, and firmly support the shoot-to-kill policy which has been introduced for these circumstances. Obviously we don't have a full story yet, but suggestions have been that the man was knowingly running from armed police (for reasons which have been suggested), and had failed to comply with their demands.

If this had happened differently, and the suspect had detonated a bomb on that train, those highly trained police officers would have had hell to pay for not doing what they did on Friday. It's just a great shame that an innocent man died.
There are a few things that are reprehensible about this whole thing that few people take into consideration.

This has been expressed in an Iraqi news service:
[PLAIN said:
http://electroniciraq.net/news/2074.shtml]What[/PLAIN] is already known, therefore, is that almost 24 hours before they saw de Menezes emerge from his house, police had put it under surveillance based on information they found at the scene of one of the attempted bombings at lunchtime the day before. If the overriding goal of the police is to prevent further attacks, why did they not raid the house right away? They might have discovered sooner what they found out too late -- that de Menezes was totally uninvolved in any terrorist plot. The police clearly had more than a "split-second" to act and they need to explain why they did not act.
That was an analysis of people who face bombings on a daily basis.

This person was spotted leaving a house and followed for all the reasons described.

Why was he not challenged while he was not near a populated area?

In Evo's link, witnesses stated that the police did not identify themselves vocally but put on their blue baseball caps.

Some of you have stated he rode a bus to the station ... Nope. But even if he had, this was a target on a previous bombing. Don't you remember the top ripped off a London bus a few days earlier?

The padded coat is now a 'fleece jacket' ... Translation ... Sweatshirt for you Americans. He was wearing a baseball cap, sweatshirt and a pair of baggy pants.

They say they challenged him while he stood in a line to purchase tickets on the tube. So ... that means he was surrounded by probably 20 people at one of 4 ticket machines minimum. Why didn't he detonate.

Why wasn't he shot going down the escalators? If he ran down them, there was nobody else on them. Anyone else ever run for the tube before?

One of you has stated they shot him because a train was entering the station ... no, he was shot ON THE TRAIN.

When they speak of a 'toroso shot' vs. a 'head shot' they are talking about over a distance... sniping him. In this case, they had control of his person. Two police were holding him down while the shot between 5 and 8 bullets into him.

One of you has described the handgun as a Glock 18 set to fully automatic. Have you seen one of these things? http://www.glock.com/g18.htm So tell me what kind of a jacket the plain clothes policeman was wearing to hide this thing that he criticises the suspect.

Also ... FULLY AUTOMATIC ... In a TUBE STATION? A head shot is a precisions shot, not something that is squeezed off with a fully automatic handgun. If there is fear of detonating explosives or shooting bystanders, why fully automatic?

Try an experiment right now. Cock your finger 8 times and see how long it takes. Your finger must travel a full half inch and exert 2.5kg pressure.

I just heard a repoet on Fox News ... they jokingly said, "There are more cameras in these tube stations than they are in this building".

Yeah? So where are all the pictures to back up the story of the police?

Now, about the nature of the explosives ... So far, all the explosives have been delivered in napsacks containing a 1.5 gallon tupperware container for the liquid explosive. EVERY BOMBING WITHOUT EXCEPTION. So did the police suddenly think they got access to better explosives and technology? If so, again, why did they not raid the premesis 24 hours earlier when they had secured the address?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #173
I think everyone should stop assuming that what they read or hear about this story is correct, the truth about this will never come out now.

And the reason why i brought up how many innocent people get shot in america is because your police officers are supposed to be some of the best but i bet they still make mistakes.

Art, your long list of incidents happens to contain two incidents and that's including this one. Like to show me some more? i doubt you will find that many and with the few that you do find you will also be able to see how the officers could have made a mistake in the heat of the moment.
 
  • #174
Andy said:
I think everyone should stop assuming that what they read or hear about this story is correct, the truth about this will never come out now.

And the reason why i brought up how many innocent people get shot in america is because your police officers are supposed to be some of the best but i bet they still make mistakes.

Art, your long list of incidents happens to contain two incidents and that's including this one. Like to show me some more? i doubt you will find that many and with the few that you do find you will also be able to see how the officers could have made a mistake in the heat of the moment.
Not quite Andy.

In the UK, CCTV especially in the tube station ensures that every one of these incidents is yet another 'Rodney King' video.

Until the video is released, the police will always be considered to be covering-up.
 
  • #175
Funnily enough i know all about the CCTV in the UK, i happen to live here. And i can almost guarantee that thos video tapes are locked away somewhere nice and safe until the 'authorities' decide to let it see the light of day. Snapshots will probably be released but nothing to give people enough information to see what went on.
 
  • #176
Andy said:
I think everyone should stop assuming that what they read or hear about this story is correct, the truth about this will never come out now.
Do you mean one should disbelieve anything that contradicts your theories or do you mean in general, irrelevant of the source? Should we not believe for instance this whole incident ever happened?
I agree the truth probably never will come out.

Andy said:
And the reason why i brought up how many innocent people get shot in america is because your police officers are supposed to be some of the best but i bet they still make mistakes.
My police officers? This is a quintessential example of how you reach conclusions without any supporting facts. I am not american and nor do I reside in America.

Andy said:
Art, your long list of incidents happens to contain two incidents and that's including this one. Like to show me some more? i doubt you will find that many and with the few that you do find you will also be able to see how the officers could have made a mistake in the heat of the moment.
Andy the quote;
the latest in a long line of controversies involving firearms officers
came from the BBC. Here's the link (again) if you wish to research further http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4711619.stm
 
  • #177
The Smoking Man said:
There are a few things that are reprehensible about this whole thing that few people take into consideration.

This has been expressed in an Iraqi news service:That was an analysis of people who face bombings on a daily basis.

This person was spotted leaving a house and followed for all the reasons described.

Why was he not challenged while he was not near a populated area?

In Evo's link, witnesses stated that the police did not identify themselves vocally but put on their blue baseball caps.

Some of you have stated he rode a bus to the station ... Nope. But even if he had, this was a target on a previous bombing. Don't you remember the top ripped off a London bus a few days earlier?

The padded coat is now a 'fleece jacket' ... Translation ... Sweatshirt for you Americans. He was wearing a baseball cap, sweatshirt and a pair of baggy pants.

They say they challenged him while he stood in a line to purchase tickets on the tube. So ... that means he was surrounded by probably 20 people at one of 4 ticket machines minimum. Why didn't he detonate.

Why wasn't he shot going down the escalators? If he ran down them, there was nobody else on them. Anyone else ever run for the tube before?

One of you has stated they shot him because a train was entering the station ... no, he was shot ON THE TRAIN.

When they speak of a 'toroso shot' vs. a 'head shot' they are talking about over a distance... sniping him. In this case, they had control of his person. Two police were holding him down while the shot between 5 and 8 bullets into him.

One of you has described the handgun as a Glock 18 set to fully automatic. Have you seen one of these things? http://www.glock.com/g18.htm So tell me what kind of a jacket the plain clothes policeman was wearing to hide this thing that he criticises the suspect.

Also ... FULLY AUTOMATIC ... In a TUBE STATION? A head shot is a precisions shot, not something that is squeezed off with a fully automatic handgun. If there is fear of detonating explosives or shooting bystanders, why fully automatic?

Try an experiment right now. Cock your finger 8 times and see how long it takes. Your finger must travel a full half inch and exert 2.5kg pressure.

I just heard a repoet on Fox News ... they jokingly said, "There are more cameras in these tube stations than they are in this building".

Yeah? So where are all the pictures to back up the story of the police?

Now, about the nature of the explosives ... So far, all the explosives have been delivered in napsacks containing a 1.5 gallon tupperware container for the liquid explosive. EVERY BOMBING WITHOUT EXCEPTION. So did the police suddenly think they got access to better explosives and technology? If so, again, why did they not raid the premesis 24 hours earlier when they had secured the address?
QF ****ing E


They botched the entire job in so many ways, and someone should be held responsible. Personally I blame the police for not giving out any information nor holding anyone responsible, and the media for not putting any pressure on the police to do so.

Edit: Where ARE you from anyways Arty?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #178
That long line is what 4 instances? Not including the SAS because they don't happen to be police.

I assumed that you where american my apolagies.

Do you mean one should disbelieve anything that contradicts your theories or do you mean in general, irrelevant of the source? Should we not believe for instance this whole incident ever happened?
I agree the truth probably never will come out.

I mean in general the only people who know exactly what happened are the officers involved, and their seniors. No reporter is going to be able to dig up this can of worms.
 
  • #179
Andy said:
That long line is what 4 instances? Not including the SAS because they don't happen to be police.
Direct your complaints to the BBC; it's their article. :-p

Andy said:
I assumed that you where american my apolagies.
Why? Have you not seen the hate mail I receive from the US neocons?? :biggrin:

Andy said:
I mean in general the only people who know exactly what happened are the officers involved, and their seniors. No reporter is going to be able to dig up this can of worms.
That's why forums such as this are useful. They allow people to share information and resources and so people can formulate opinions based on a greater evidential base rather than accept the spoonfed versions of 'what happened' slanted to represent a particular broadcasters political bias.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #180
Andy said:
Funnily enough i know all about the CCTV in the UK, i happen to live here. And i can almost guarantee that thos video tapes are locked away somewhere nice and safe until the 'authorities' decide to let it see the light of day. Snapshots will probably be released but nothing to give people enough information to see what went on.
Yup ... and I was born there.

We all kow that when the video is not released, they are covering up, don't we.

If you flick on the news or even some television programs you'll see this footage aired all the time.

Remember the woman who pushed another woman out of a parkeing spot with her car when she snuck in? That was on a program called 'Britain's worst Drivers'. It also included a person who drove through a Zebra crossing and hit about 3 people.

Remember them airing the footage of missing children moving around at night?

The police are covering their asses.

They could settle this whole thing in about two minutes if all their procedures have been followed.

Unfortunately they haven't.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K