Wednesday, August 01, 2007

The IPCC and the Stockwell Shooting - What's another day?

Today was the day (or at least that's what I read somewhere) that the IPCC was going to publish the report of its investigation into police behaviour after the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes

A few papers, especially The Guardian, had gone so far as to disclose some of the report's contents in advance of its release

But, whoopsies, it’s looking like the IPCC has decided to hold back the report just one more day to make some final, final, last minute alterations to its contents

Apparently, the report included some faint residual whiff of a hint of a suggestion that someone was actually responsible for the Head of the Metropolitan Police lying to everyone about the circumstances surrounding the shooting

Ah well, it’s been two years already so what’s another day

And if anyone thinks the timing of the report is conveniently slap bang in the middle of the summer holidays look on the bright side – the IPCC could have published between Christmas and New Year which would have been even an quieter time

There again, at this rate, it still might

I've been watching the big news organisations' coverage of this story on and off all day and there's been some serious retrospective 'updating' of their relevant pages and 'shaping' of the story in the last couple of hours.

I've also noticed that somebody appears to have slipped some Sodium Pentothal in The Independent’s James Macintyre’s afternoon tea…

“The Stockwell shooting could yet turn into one of the great public scandals of the decade. Initially, police - who blacked out elements of the CCTV footage - claimed that de Menezes was in a bulky coat and sprinted over the underground barrier. These claims turned out to be false.”

Well, quite

This entire business stinks to high heaven and a lot more people have lied about what happened that day than just Sir Ian Blair. Not that you would notice from the mainstream media's treatment of the story

And still we are no nearer the answers to the questions…

‘Why did the Metropolitan Police shoot an innocent man in the face seven times when he clearly wasn’t carrying a bomb and why hasn't the person responsible been held to account?’

And we never will be


(and yes, that clip I've linked to was ripped off from an Alex Jones video)


edit: On the 22 July 2005 the Tube Drivers' union the RMT published a press release on its website relating to the incident at Stockwell. I've linked to it a couple of the times in the past but it is now no longer available on the RMT website (edit: it's been moved to here). It read...

"Our members and all LUL staff have shown immense courage and commitment through the awful events of the last two weeks, but their concerns at the way yesterday’s alert was handled are serious and there are many other issues that remain to be resolved.

"Their concerns will have been fuelled by the revelation that an innocent Tube driver today found himself with a police gun at his head during the incident in Stockwell station in which a suspect was shot dead.

"No apology could ever be enough ever take away the trauma that that driver has suffered and there should be a full inquiry into the handling of the incident

Now WTF is that all about?


NB! When I refer to the IPCC above I am of course referring to the Independent Police Complaints Commission and not the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which is a very different beast altogether. One of them publishes supposedly objective investigative reports which in reality are selectively edited and distorted to suit covert political agendas...

and the other is the IPCC.

Anyway, after the publication of tomorrow's report there's a good chance that the
Independent Police Complaints Commission will be simply known as the PCC and that should be the end of any potential confusion



brendadada said...

If you ever think stuff is being shifted/deleted/whatever, I can post on my blog which isn't on Blogger/Google/Yahoo or whatever.

Are enough people able to 'mirror' this stuff, or whatever is the technical term? Doesn't seem enough merely to link.

This case is so obviously, patently, shatteringly outrageous. Everybody we know is blind, deaf, and cannot read.

lwtc247 said...

Its getting towards the end of my day now stef and I'm pretty much tapped out, but let test my understanding with you...

The report has been altered because it would have allowed legal action against the Police.

So now the report now is (or will be once released) just a work of fiction. Is that right?

Stef said...

@lwtc247 - my understanding is that it would have resulted in legal action by representatives of three officers who were criticized in the unpublished report

Per the Times...

The BBC coverage on that point is a lot less clear and a bit of a lash-up

You can just detect the faintest ripples of what I suspect was some fairly frenetic activity behind the scenes today

Stef said...


I think the RMT press release was just moved as the result of a site reorganisation but I am now in the habit of routinely saving anything like that. The folks at J7T are also very good at pasting extracts wholesale into their forum threads

and in the absence of a coherent account of what happened that day yes the situation is patently outrageous

Stef said...

Some people have hypothesised about a connection between the rubbish performance of the IPCC in this matter and the Cash for Peerages fiasco.

The timings of key events in both sagas were quite close and the outcomes of both (Government in the clear. Police in the Clear) have fueled speculation that some kind of quid pro quo was at work

Personally I haven't given this line of thought much time - not because it's impossible, far from it, but because it's almost certainly unverifiable

Wolfie said...

"The timings of key events in both sagas were quite close and the outcomes of both (Government in the clear. Police in the Clear) have fueled speculation that some kind of quid pro quo was at work"

Mind you Stef, it was my first thought and we won't be alone.

lwtc247 said...

"I think people should give up their liberty for freedom."

Somebody somewhere must have a very large erection.

Stef said...

/ turns off webcam

Merkin said...

What a Godsend the Minneapolis Bridge disaster has been to the IPCC.
It certainly allowed the Beeb to switch from the family of Jean De Menezes to the local police chief in the States.
The De Menezes cousin was busy telling us how his phone number was passed to the press as apart of the spin campaign.
On a side note, the report from the states showed us footage of the of the actual collapse taken with security cameras.
Oh that footage from the Pentagon or Stockwell was so speedily made available.

Anonymous said...

According to Joanne Moore the 11th September 2001 was a 'good day to bury bad news'.

Perhaps someone thought that 22nd July 2005 was a good day to send death squads after someone? I wonder who they were intending to murder?

Anonymous said...

I see that John Gieve, the Permanent Under-Secretary of State in the Home Office [under Jack Straw (2001), David Blunkett (2001- 2004) and Charles Clarke], responsible for amongst other things, police and MI5, has been exonerated due to Fall Guy Andy Hayman.

Sir John Gieve took up his new appointment as Deputy Governor of the Bank of England in early January 2006, leaving behind a financial mess. The National Audit Office (NAO) press release at the end of January 2006 stated that “the Home Office was unable to reconcile its cash position during 2004-05, i.e. match its own records of cash payments and receipts with those shown on its bank statements. This is a key control for the prevention and detection of fraud. Following significant work by the Home Office to investigate a £3.035 million discrepancy, it had to make adjustments of £946 million to reconcile its cash position.” The figures were such a mess that the NAO refused to approve the Home Office's accounts as they were riddled with inconsistencies and were handed in 10 weeks late.

Now I wonder what John Gieve allowed all that additional unreconciled money to be spent on in 2005? The July 7th/July 21st/de Menezes shenanigans?

Such management/accounting prowess hardly warrants a top job at the bank of England, but he must've done something right to get the BoE cushty number.


Sinclair said...

@ Annonymous 2:32

Perhaps it was Abdi Omar, a reported flatmate of Hussein Osman, who rented a flat above that of Jean Charles de Menezes.

Nonetheless the Met Police did still manage to duff up the Wife, child & Mother-in-law of Mr Omar (who was out of the country on July 21st).

I reckon that that JCdM was the unfortunate person who was wiped out spectacularly in order to put the shits into the 4 J21 suspects (who were named at 3.30pm that afternoon - 22/7/05) & their friends/associates/family, in order to make the them fear for their lives.

More info/research is here.

Anonymous said...

The Daily Express has turned all Conspiraloon!!??!! It is an odd and disconcerting experience when one can't rely on the Daily Express to aid and abet criminality by belittling those who point it out. Anyway, the link above is to the old, old story of orphans being used in mind control experiments.

(Did Cameron ever get buried in Scotland or did the protestors succeed in keeping the vile scum's corpse away from Scotland).