London Metroplitan Police may face public inquiry over shooting of Brazilian

international | miscellaneous | other press

Saturday August 20, 2005 13:44

by JOhn

Details from the post-mortem examination of the innocent Brazilian shot dead by police suggest Scotland Yard officers lied about the circumstances of the death.

Police may face public inquiry over shooting of Brazilian
By Jason Bennetto, Crime Correspondent
Published: 20 August 2005
Details from the post-mortem examination of the innocent Brazilian shot dead by police suggest Scotland Yard officers lied about the circumstances of the death.

Notes presented to the pathologist examining Jean Charles de Menezes, five days after he died, wrongly indicated the electrician was fleeing police shortly before he was shot.

The apparently misleading account could be highly damaging for Scotland Yard if, as claimed, it is proven to have been written by the Metropolitan Police. It would provide evidence the police continued to portray Mr de Menezes in a negative light and provided false information days after his innocence had been established.

The material, contained in leaked documents from the Independent Police Complaints Commission, could provide ammunition for the family and lawyers of the dead man who have accused the Met of an attempted cover-up over the botched operation.

The new material, obtained by ITV News, is contained in the post-mortem details of Mr de Menezes dated on 27 July. The note states the suspected bomber was followed by police into Stockwell Tube station in south London and "he vaulted over the ticket barrier, ran down the stairs on the Tube station".

This account has been directly contradicted by witness statements from police surveillance officers and CCTV footage that suggests the 27-year-old picked up a newspaper at Stockwell Tube station before calmly walking down the escalator.

It was also disclosed that the dead man only had a piece of paper, a watch, a key, and £1.20 in change when he was shot dead.

Meanwhile the head of the authority that oversees the Metropolitan Police said that a public inquiry into Scotland Yard's "shoot-to-kill" policy looks increasingly likely.

Len Duvall, chairman of the Metropolitan Police Authority, also said Scotland Yard was carrying out its own investigation into the policy in the aftermath of the shooting.

His comments come as Mr de Menezes's cousin, Alessandro Pereira, called for the resignation of Sir Ian Blair, the Met's Commissioner, and the prosecution of those responsible.

Brazilian investigators are to fly to London next week for talks with the IPCC to clarify conflicting reports of how he died.

There has been growing unrest about the "shoot-to -kill" strategy contained in the Met's Kratos policy - whereby suspected suicide attackers are shot in the head to prevent them from detonating any explosives.

Mr Duvall, whose authority oversees the running and budget of the Met, said yesterday that there was a growing consensus among "opinion formers and politicians" that some form of public inquiry should be held into the shoot-to-kill policy. "The Met are also beginning to say, maybe it's time to do that," he said.

"I accept there is growing pressure for an inquiry. I have no objection to further scrutiny of the policy. If greater oversight of operations provides public reassurance then that can only be a good thing.

"The MPA will be looking at these issues and the Met are carrying out their own review. Ultimately, however, it is up to the Government to set up a public inquiry."

He added: "But I urge caution if people think there is some kind of magical solution or alternative. The issue of suicide bombers is not going away and there needs to be an effective way of dealing with this threat."

There also remains confusion about what instructions the firearms team that carried out the shooting received from their superiors.

Details from the post-mortem examination of the innocent Brazilian shot dead by police suggest Scotland Yard officers lied about the circumstances of the death.

Notes presented to the pathologist examining Jean Charles de Menezes, five days after he died, wrongly indicated the electrician was fleeing police shortly before he was shot.

The apparently misleading account could be highly damaging for Scotland Yard if, as claimed, it is proven to have been written by the Metropolitan Police. It would provide evidence the police continued to portray Mr de Menezes in a negative light and provided false information days after his innocence had been established.

The material, contained in leaked documents from the Independent Police Complaints Commission, could provide ammunition for the family and lawyers of the dead man who have accused the Met of an attempted cover-up over the botched operation.

The new material, obtained by ITV News, is contained in the post-mortem details of Mr de Menezes dated on 27 July. The note states the suspected bomber was followed by police into Stockwell Tube station in south London and "he vaulted over the ticket barrier, ran down the stairs on the Tube station".

This account has been directly contradicted by witness statements from police surveillance officers and CCTV footage that suggests the 27-year-old picked up a newspaper at Stockwell Tube station before calmly walking down the escalator.

It was also disclosed that the dead man only had a piece of paper, a watch, a key, and £1.20 in change when he was shot dead.

Meanwhile the head of the authority that oversees the Metropolitan Police said that a public inquiry into Scotland Yard's "shoot-to-kill" policy looks increasingly likely.
Len Duvall, chairman of the Metropolitan Police Authority, also said Scotland Yard was carrying out its own investigation into the policy in the aftermath of the shooting.

His comments come as Mr de Menezes's cousin, Alessandro Pereira, called for the resignation of Sir Ian Blair, the Met's Commissioner, and the prosecution of those responsible.

Brazilian investigators are to fly to London next week for talks with the IPCC to clarify conflicting reports of how he died.

There has been growing unrest about the "shoot-to -kill" strategy contained in the Met's Kratos policy - whereby suspected suicide attackers are shot in the head to prevent them from detonating any explosives.

Mr Duvall, whose authority oversees the running and budget of the Met, said yesterday that there was a growing consensus among "opinion formers and politicians" that some form of public inquiry should be held into the shoot-to-kill policy. "The Met are also beginning to say, maybe it's time to do that," he said.

"I accept there is growing pressure for an inquiry. I have no objection to further scrutiny of the policy. If greater oversight of operations provides public reassurance then that can only be a good thing.

"The MPA will be looking at these issues and the Met are carrying out their own review. Ultimately, however, it is up to the Government to set up a public inquiry."

He added: "But I urge caution if people think there is some kind of magical solution or alternative. The issue of suicide bombers is not going away and there needs to be an effective way of dealing with this threat."

There also remains confusion about what instructions the firearms team that carried out the shooting received from their superiors.

save preference

Comments (12 of 12)

the de Menezes family lawyers who made the statement at the link in the last comment

by &..,

Wed Aug 24, 2005 01:01

belong to the firm founded by Gareth Pierce whose legal career is long familiar to many readers & has been a vocal opponent of the general anti-terrorist thrust of the blair regime in the last years.

the Brazilian state is represented by Wagner Goncalves of the state prosecution office and Marcio Pereira Pinto García of the ministry of justice.

They have limited their visit to interviews with the police and the police complaints board they met with the family yesterday though have distanced themselves from their statements, will visit the coroner's court on friday and have confirmed they are seeking a meeting with the de menezes' lawyers G. Pierce and Harriet Wistrich.

As to the spin in brazilian and latin american and spanish language press, the brazilian state delegation are being described as "prudent".

There is considerable interest in the case, and a general feeling that the British police under Blair the cop are guilty and the British government under Blair the strong leader, are attempting a whitewash, but there is also a very mature attitude to these type of lies and manipulation and no-one is jumping to conclusions or granting any benefit of any doubts.

The next stage of inquest has been put off till february 23 2006.

The figure of 27,000$ has now been confirmed as the amount offered to the family though the police now say that money was "ex gratia" and not meant in any way to alter any future compensation claim...

27,000$ would cover transfer of the corpse and not much else.

the offer was rejected. Gareth Pierce noting the disgust of the family.

yep Ali. each imc has its style and volume and own editorial flavour

by iosaf

Tue Aug 23, 2005 17:03

but something is wrong with uk imc at the moment.

To touch on your first sentance in that comment, "spin", manipulation, witheld information, lies, half-lies or half-truths, inaccuracies on the day and most of all the conditions set by the previous weeks meant that many people jumped to conclusions that the murder was justifiable.

They had already accepted as inarguable fact the notion that "the british were under sustained attack" & that pushed them mostly over the morality question of how to deal with it.

Because there is no public inquiry, and the most obvious cover-up has been staged, we will never know were they actually "under sustained attack".

The blatent lies have called one day so into question, that all the official version of all the other days is now much less credible.

That discredit began with the rejection of a public inquiry into July 7 will last till any or every case hearing relating to the whole period.

What saddens me so, is that some of facts held room for being optimistic, they offered so much hope, "bombs" didn't go off, = thank God,
people didn't die, even though the average crowd in a london underground train at rush hour tops three hundred, there were remarkably few victims = thank God.
the emergency services worked so well =
thank God in all his holy names.

& now...
That poor Brazilian family are asking for truth and justice.

this is the statement of their lawyers in pdf file.
http://www.blink.org.uk/docs/de_menezes_statement.pdf

Iosaf

by Ali H.

Tue Aug 23, 2005 16:41

I saw the BBC article you mentioned yesterday and thought it interesting that where as many bloggers came out initially in support of the police on the basis of misinformation have since changed their positions.

This is in marked contrast to many of the neocon trolls who frequent this forum, most notable Juvenal who was a particularly rabid cheerleader for summary injustice.

On the subject of UK Indymedia I have found it to be vastly inferior to this forum in both quality and quantity of posts.

Even our resident trolls appear to be superior in a positive sense to those on UK Indymedia in that they have reasoned positions which they are capable of defending with some degree of logic (albeit warped) and of skill.

Surprising n'est pas given the difference in population?

Though it pains me to say it I feel some of the quality is due to the constant and sometimes over-zealous policing by IMCers which appears to be largely absent from the UK forum.

Or perhaps it's just that the Irish like to gab?

Perhaps readers haven't noticed that the UK imc site has not published any new article since 16/8

Tue Aug 23, 2005 14:39

There is a gap in the record. Whereas we would have normally been able to read about the Brazilian family going to Downing street yesterday, and the ongoing campaign in London on this issue, and the other 2 issues - the investigation into July 7 and the needs for a public inquiry and the investigation into july 21 and the needs for a public inquiry - there is nothing to read.

nothing to watch either.
no CCTV coverage is available of bombing,
bombing attempt or shoot to kill.

To my suspicious little mind which enjoys background noise so much, that's quite a gap in the record. I don't like having to bounce to the blogroll to read thoughts, an issue that brought this article to the BBC yesterday:-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4173060.stm

It has been one month since I started this thread:-

http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=71065
and in the first comment i used the author name "non constat de jure" which means "nothing counts by law".

this is the thread which covered the "attempted bombing" incident: July 21-
http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=71037

There is a lot of material missing indeed.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/london/2005/07/319991.html
& today there will be the second requiem mass in london for -
Jean Charles de Menezes
RIP
7 January 1978 – 22 July 2005

Interesting take from xymphora

Tue Aug 23, 2005 14:06

"Press photographs of members of the armed response team taken in the immediate aftermath of the killing show at least one man carrying a special forces weapon that is not issued to SO19, the Metropolitan police firearms unit.

The man, wearing civilian clothes with a blue cap marked 'Police', was carrying a specially modified Heckler & Koch G3K rifle with a shortened barrel and a butt from a PSG-1 sniper rifle fitted to it — a combination used by the SAS.

Another man, dressed in a T-shirt, jeans and trainers, was carrying a Heckler & Koch G36C. Although this weapon is used on occasion by SO19 it appears to be fitted with a target illuminator purchased as an 'urgent operational requirement' for UK special forces involved in the war on terror."

Although the official position is that the SAS was only involved in surveillance, and the London police did the shooting, it is impossible to believe anything they say anymore, and more and more evidence points to this being a full-fledged military operation. Smith goes on (my emphasis in bold):

"The use of multiple shots to the head is the modus operandi of the special forces, whether from the SAS, the SBS or the undercover intelligence operators used in the Stockwell operation. Over the past 30 years the SAS has developed a reputation for never allowing gunmen to remain alive, an attitude shown most graphically during the 1980 Iranian hostages siege and the Gibraltar IRA killings eight years later.

'It is vital to strike fear into the minds of the terrorists,' one former SAS officer said. 'In an ongoing situation such as we have now the fear must be directed to the fact that we are watching them and will eventually (get) them. They need to know that they cannot escape.

'We know they are happy to kill themselves but that doesn't mean they are happy to be killed by others. As long as they evade the police they will think they are in control but the minute they are intercepted they lose control.'"

Despite all the talk about the Israeli 'shoot to kill' policy, the execution of Jean Charles de Menezes appears to be an example of a long-standing British military policy. It was irrelevant to them whether he was a terrorist or not. They decided to pursue him, and literally grabbed him out of the hands of the London police, because they wanted to set an example. The complete ruthlessness with which they acted was meant to show any prospective terrorists that they would not live to be heroes. You simply can't have incompetent military murderers running around in a civilized country. Apart from dealing with this specific problem, the British people have a bigger job to do: keep Britain from becoming infected with the threat of military violence against its own people.

Maybe it's acceptable to you

Tue Aug 23, 2005 13:54

but a 100% failure rate in the shoot to kill policy is not acceptable. The police shot once (so far) and got it completely wrong once.

Even if you look at it in terms of body count 1/46 or 2.2% this rate of killing of innocent victims by the state is not acceptable. In a civil and supposedly democratic society we have a right to expect better than this.

By the way to put terrorism in perspective 3,508 people were killed on Britain’s roads in 2003 (http://www.fiafoundation.com/policy/road_safety/policy_monitor/pm_06a102004.html)

So terrorists killed 1/76 (1.3%) the number of people killed by car drivers, yet we hear no calls for a shoot to kill policy towards dangerous drivers which might actually be much more effective in terms of saving human lives if thats what the British government is really worried about (and not a threat to their political power).

Correct

by Al

Tue Aug 23, 2005 13:47

I stand corrected, 4 bombs. Just proves my point more.

Not a bomb

by Correcter

Tue Aug 23, 2005 13:42

"and a bomb killed 56 people just over 1 month ago."

That was four bombs.

Thats also a lie

Tue Aug 23, 2005 13:39

"There's a statistically better chance of someone being shot "in error" by a security man, than there is of being blown to bits" - Care to back that up with some evidence? Considering security men dont carry guns and a bomb killed 56 people just over 1 month ago.

yes. its déjà vu. who does the timing?

by .:.

Mon Aug 22, 2005 16:33

& a lot of people are missing the really galling bit, I suspect they didn't see it coming. So we have commentators and editorial writers throughout europe voicing the opinion that "spin won't save Blair the cop". Really?

Blair the cop was appointed as spin.

& the spin goes sickeningly on, witness this weekend's "remember remember the 5th of november story" - Al Qaeda plotting to attack Westminister with nerve gas!

Really?

Do any of you believe that?
Do any of you believe a "Al Qaeda supergrass" [sic] has unravelled a plot for a "postcard super terror attack" [sic]?

doesn't it all have a little bit of déjà vu in it?
Isn't that why it works so well?
Have all these good experts forgotten the "postcard super terror attack submerged barge bomb" in the 90s?
Have all these good terror experts forgotten the counter terror London nerve gas exercise in the 90s?

Hmmm..maybe they didn't know about them, maybe they were still apprentices then.
Now when did these lies begin?
What was it we were thinking and talking about when this sordid wicked manipulation and blatent disregard for the value of human life launched?
Can anyone check the archives and remind us?
or is it so historic we have forgotten?

deja vu, all over again

by Kevin Quinn

Sun Aug 21, 2005 19:10

At least in the bad old days they had some ex-cambridge aristo running the shop and were able to rationalise their bad behaviour in terms of defending the Empire, civilization, freedom, good government .....oh, the rationalization remains the same, but the 'head' quarters now spring from the hoi polloi and speak with Yorkshire accents, just like on TV.

Using the same tactics that 'successfully' defused the threat of IRA bombing, the new and improved security forces might be better used sitting watching snoop camera monitors to see if they know anybody. Or they could always bust a family or two at the Airport andmake sure they get locked-up for a decade or so.

The notion of armed 'officials' with questionable intelligence quotients and a strong dose of paranoia shooting to kill whomever they might sense to be a bomber is terrifying. There's a statistically better chance of someone being shot "in error" by a security man, than there is of being blown to bits - given the numbers of active participants.

PS noted the kudoes to Sir Ian Blair from the PM on the MET's outstanding performance (Brothers in bad times)

nice cop / nasty cop : nice state / nasty state : nice blair / nasty blair

Sat Aug 20, 2005 16:56

Sorry, but let's get it straight.
There is no suggestion that they lied.
They did lie.

& we have the proof on the indymedia network.
From the morning of the 22nd of July to date, we have articles and comments and links to media and official press statements including the statement made by Ian Blair and the anti-terrorist deputy chief constable.
It has been almost a month since I asked for the resignation of Ian Blair on imc uk, pointing out that he had only been in his job a few months when he was part of the decision to scale down security, that the failure of the bombs to go off on 21st of july can in no way be attributed to the police, but rather would have been seen by many as an "act of God" and the day after, we know the police were volative in stockwell from an article published on london imc, one hour before the de menezes shooting.

The metropolitan police failed under the leadership of Blair, who seems to have only got the job because of his name, or was it his CV in information management? Did that mean saying a man had been shot 5 times when he was shot 8 times? & now that hold an inquiry would prejudice intelligence reports? What reports? that de menezes looked like a member of al q and lived in a London borough where twenty people out of the population of almost a million were known to be associated with the Abu Hamza mosque?
Wow! fancy that. More than 15,000 people passed through that mosque from 1992 to 2003 and many of themfound themselves there because they were homeless had been released from prison had no no jobs no food and had found god, and there they slept and watched videos.

They Lied.
They killed an innocent man.
& they lied.
& they have never stopped lying.
& we know.
point blank - period.

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Voltaire Network

London Metroplitan Police may face public inquiry over shooting of Brazilian

Comments (12 of 12)