Friday, December 12, 2008

So, who's next then?

Not a tragic suicide after all

Just in from Sky News...


The mother of Jean Charles de Menezes has said she feels "reborn" after a jury at an inquest into her son's death rejected a verdict of lawful killing


The 10 jurors returned an open verdict after listening to more than seven weeks of evidence into the 27-year-old's death.

Earlier, Mr de Menezes' family had said the inquest was a "whitewash" after the coroner said the jury could not return a verdict of unlawful killing.

But after the jury rejected a string of claims made by police officers about the events leading up to Mr de Menezes being killed, Maria Otone de Menezes said she was relieved.

In a statement read out at a news conference by the family, Mrs de Menezes said: "Since the moment that the coroner ruled out the option of unlawful killing I was feeling very sad.

"But today I feel as if I have been reborn."

In a damning indictment, they dismissed claims by a firearms officer, codenamed C12, that he shouted "armed police" before opening fire.

The jury also disputed that Mr de Menezes had walked towards officers before he was killed.

The jurors concluded that six police failings caused or contributed to the innocent man's death.

The jury of five men and five women came to a majority of eight to two in delivering their open verdict. Of the remaining 12 questions, the jury were unanimous on all but two of them.

Firearms officers shot Mr de Menezes on a train at Stockwell Tube station in south London on July 22, 2005, after mistaking him for failed suicide bomber Hussain Osman.

As the jury returned its verdict after its sixth day of deliberations, the Menezes family accused coroner Sir Michael Wright of "presiding over a complete whitewash".

In a fierce attack, they said he "failed on every count" during proceedings.

After the hearing, acting Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson said: "We must and do accept full responsibility for his death.

"For someone to lose their life in such circumstances is something the Metropolitan Police regrets.

"In the face of enormous challenges faced by officers on that day, we made a most terrible mistake. I am sorry."

He said officers had been working in a "unique situation" in the wake of the July 7 suicide bombings - in which 52 people were killed - and the attempted terror attacks in the capital on July 21, after which there were potential bombers on the loose.

"No one set out that day to kill an innocent man. The coroner has ruled that on the extensive evidence put to the court that this was not an unlawful killing."

He said the officers who shot the Brazilian "set out with the intent to protect and defend the public".

Some 100 people gave evidence at the inquest into the death of Mr de Menezes.

Among them were 65 police officers, mostly firearms and surveillance experts, 50 of whom were granted anonymity.

The jury also heard from 17 Tube passengers and Mr de Menezes's cousins.

There was much anticipation that former Met Commissioner Sir Ian Blair could give evidence, but he resigned just under two weeks into the inquest.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission called for a review of police procedures in the wake of the shooting.

IPCC chairman Nick Hardwick said the inquest did not "examine the broader issue of how the police should respond to the threat of suicide terrorism.

"I call again for this to have much broader debate and scrutiny by the public and their representatives," he said.

Sky News crime reporter Martin Brunt said it was a "distinct possibility" that the IPCC, which initially cleared those involved of any wrongdoing, would choose to review that decision.

He said that since the jury had effectively decided that the firearms officers had lied about giving a warning before the shooting, disciplinary action was a possibility.


Needless to say, and contrary to the bullshit being parroted by the BBC, Sky and all the others, no-one has yet proved that De Menezes' executioners made any mistake whatsoever when they killed an innocent man.

The only thing that has been proved is that the executioners and their bosses have lied through their fucking teeth about the execution and that the full force of the establishment was used to slander an innocent victim after he was killed

And no amount of corporate media spin can hide that

Fucking disgraceful

and, in the light of the fact that the bastards who ordered the execution are completely unrepentant and have openly, and repeatedly, stated that it could very easily happen again, it's also fucking scary




-

edit: actually, something else was proved in the inquest and that is the police knew full well that JCdM was not carrying anything that could have been a bomb and therefore could not have been a potential bomber

Rest assured that little nugget is going to be filed away in the same memory hole as the revelation earlier this year that the alleged 7/7 bombers supposedly scattered their ID, personal effects and bombs around the crowded tube carriages before setting their bombs off (?!!)

and conspiracy theorists are supposedly mentally unwell because they're sceptical of official narratives? For fuck's sake...

.

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

Sooooooo glad I moved away. Next time I fill in a form, under 'Nationality' I'm going to write 'Ashamedly British'.

Stef said...

I'm particularly impressed by the ingenious use of compulsory questionnaires to put words in the jurors' mouths

'Do you still beat your wife?' was, sadly, missing from the list of questions they were obliged to answer YES or NO

I'm honestly having trouble finding the right word, or combination of words, to describe just how ashamed I feel about what this country is becoming

Anonymous said...

There was a "professor" of law on BBC4 commenting on the outcome at around 1pm ish if you can find it on the BBC archive give it a listen.It will make you very angry listening to the cunt.

The guys who killed Charles de Menezes are of course cowards and murderers.Tough as fuck armed to the teeth shooting an unarmed civilian in the head.
Grim stuff indeed.


Did officers shout armed police? NO
Did Mr de Menezes move towards officers? NO
Did difficulty in identifying the man under surveillance lead to his death? NO
Did the behaviour of Mr de Menezes increasing suspicion among officers lead to his death? NO

Stef said...

I saw my other 1/2 safely off to somewhere of no geopolitical significance whatsoever earlier in the week. All being well she won't be coming back

Strolling around Heathrow I was struck by just how many more armed police there were on display than even a few months previously

I could see machine guns everywhere

And, based on their terrorist/ innocent victim hit ratio to date, there's absolutely no reason to feel reassured by the sight in any way at all

But they're not really there to reassure, or even protect, anyone are they

Stef said...

'Menezes jury's verdict explained'

by the BBC

thank you BBC

Anonymous said...

I read that BBC explanation earlier. Once again I was reminded why I the UTTERLY HATE dominant elements of the BBC newz. And the (in)justice system, and politicians, and the establishment and...

whispers of lwtc247

Stef said...

C4 News was just as bad just now, complete with a compliant lawyer from the Justice for Jean campaign

Everyone's on message except for those pesky jurors

paul said...

open verdict
Noun:
a finding by a coroner's jury of death without stating the cause


Well, what do you expect for the money?

Stef said...

at least a Lawful Killing and some medals

NotoriousT.O.M. said...

This is not just an offensive composite picture. It's an offensive composite picture with an obscene children's rap theme.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=hHDYGbsBIQo

Stef said...

on the plus side, there's a lot less photoshop than in the fit ups published by the Met

Anonymous said...

I saw my other half safely off to somewhere of no geopolitical significance whatsoever earlier in the week. All being well she won't be coming back

Ah Stef, you should have invited me :p

Can I ask why she won't be coming back?

Stef said...

because she's waiting for me

You don't think I'm daft enough to stick around the UK do you?

Stef said...

not if I can avoid it anyway

2009 is going to be a c**t

Stef said...

back to JCdM for a second

one question that bugs me a lot is why haven't the Justice for Jean campaign screamed from the rooftops about some of the most damming but little publicised aspects of the execution

For example...

- the scrubbed CCTV tapes

- the admission that senior officers that day realised that JCdM wasn't carrying a bomb but were persuaded by an unidentified individual to have his head blown off anyway

- the train driver being chased down a tunnel and having a gun jammed in his face

the possible answers to my question are not good

Anonymous said...

- the scrubbed CCTV tapes

- the admission that senior officers that day realised that JCdM wasn't carrying a bomb but were persuaded by an unidentified individual to have his head blown off anyway

- the train driver being chased down a tunnel and having a gun jammed in his face


I've been asking the same questions. They're evidence in themselves of a cover-up, nevermind the other items. I'm pretty sure on at least one political forum I've viewed, that people either don't know or ignore those three aspects of the case entirely.

Edo said...

controlled opposition?

Stef said...

apologies

when I said '2009 is going to be a c**t' that was a crude and vulgar outburst and beneath the scrupulously high standards of clean language I have set for this blog

what I should have said was...

'2009 is going to be the new 1934'

Stef said...

Just for the sake of completeness...

1. Staff say Stockwell Tube shooting was caught on camera

2. ...the electrician could "run onto Tube as not carrying anything"

3. "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."

and a quick flashback to Mark Whitby's chilling eye witness account which whilst totally misleading just happened to synch with the contemporary official lies beautifully

Stef said...

@edo

I honestly don't know - they could simply be useless

BZ said...

Tasers all round!

2009 should be electrifying.

Hubris said...

I ripped off a paragraph or 2 from your post - hope you don't mind

Smurfs capture Gargamel

Parabellum said...

From the BBC site: Background: Menezes shooting
How did Jean Charles die? A step-by-step guide to the killing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/629/629/7073125.stm

The title makes me sick. And the (graphic-wise very nicely done) flash-presentation explains absolutely nothing. So what other purpose does it serve than to confuse? Why did he have to die?

Yesterday I have been reading on wikipedia about the shot down of KAL007 Reminds me very much of this shooting. A climate of fear, fear of enemies one deems to be capable of any atrocity. People shouting orders over the radio. Uncertain identification. Confusing and contradicting statements after the shot-down. The exception? Jean Charles didn't do anything wrong - he didn't go were he wasn't supposed to be.