De Menezes inquiry: Court hears officer knew suspect wasn't suicide bomber

SelwynOct 15th, 2007 - 17:40:25

I find this case very difficult to understand. The police being taken to court against the Health & Safety laws, in that they failed to protect the safety of the public.

Is that meant, that, they failed to protect the safety of Mr De Menezes, as surely, he was a member of the public. They certainly failed to look after his H&S.

Or that, during the unlawful killing of Mr Menezes, another innocent member of the public, may of been hit by a stay bullet. A stray 9mm Hollow-point, designed to kill with one round. But it still took 7 rounds to the head, at point blank range, to slay Mr Menezes.

Why is there not a police officer standing in court charged with murder, or at least man slaughter?

And why oh why, are there so many innocent people, shot dead by 'Police Marksmen'.

This sucks, the police should be held accountable, and today is a good day for a hanging!

Report this comment

NeilOct 17th, 2007 - 14:45:48

The amateurish bumbling of the Metropolitan Police is unbelievable. Why is no one on trial for manslaughter here? This trial is a farce - the cowboys who shot this innocent man should be facing a jury. Let the jury decide innocence or guilt of manslaughter - not the Establishment, which automatically protects its own. Perhaps they are all Freemasons.

Report this comment

Andrew MilnerOct 31st, 2007 - 04:52:12

The elephant in the room is that officers of the Metropolitan Police Service did NOT shoot and kill Mr. de Menezes in Stockwell Tube Station of 22 July 2005. He was shot by members of the SAS and the MET are being forced to carry the can. Once this simple fact is acknowledge, everything falls into place:
- hollow point ammunition is never used by the MET. It is never issued. It is strictly forbidden.
- four-hour delay in deploying the hit squad. The SAS base in Herefordshire is some four hours by road.
- over-kill and total disregard for third-party safety. Research the shooting of three unarmed IRA members in Gibraltar.
- customised HK weaponry. The MET would never be allowed to modify weapons.
- removal of the Tube station surveillance tapes (perverting the course of justice) was part of the SAS attempted cover up when they realised they’d murdered an innocent man. Some tapes were grudging returned to the MET, but the platform tape never surfaced.
So the MET are lying all the way to the grave to protect the SAS. They must be pissed. Although admittedly their surveillance and intelligence left a lot to be desired. Specifically, mistaking Mr. de Menezes for Hussein Osman, a known bomber. So often it's the cover-up that gets um in the end. Let’s hope that’s the case here. Bottom line: It really stinks.

Report this comment

NeilNov 2nd, 2007 - 14:33:28

What on earth is being 'negatively identified'. Does this policeman mean it wasn't him? I suspect this is jargon being created to disguise the fact that they knew it wasn't a suicide bomber.

Report this comment