police coverup – Wis[s]e Words

Police get away with murder

Published on July 17, 2006

Last year, Jean Charles de Menezes was murdered by Metropolitian police officers. It took the Crown Prosecution Service more then a year to decide, surprise, surprise, not to prosecute his murderers:

I have now completed my review into the circumstances surrounding the death of Jean Charles de Menezes.

Following the investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, their report and supporting evidence was sent to me.

I asked them to carry out some additional enquiries, which they have done, and I am now satisfied that I have sufficient evidence to reach a decision in this matter.

The offences I considered included murder, manslaughter, forgery, and breaches of health and safety legislation.

All cases are considered in accordance with the principles in the Code for Crown Prosecutors, which states that before a prosecution can commence, there must be a realistic prospect of conviction.

If there is not sufficient evidence then a case cannot proceed, no matter how important or serious it may be.

After the most careful consideration I have concluded that there is insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against any individual police officer.

But I am satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to prosecute the Office of Commissioner of Police for an offence under sections 3 and 33 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 of failing to provide for the health, safety and welfare of Jean Charles de Menezes on 22 July 2005.

It seems The Sun was right then, when it said the Menezes killers would not be charged. This despite all the evidence that Menezes was never a threat, that the police officers in question knew this and that they tried their best to cover their murder up. Despite all that, these murderers not only walk away without charges, but they can resume their career of killing innocent civilians in the name of “combatting terrorism”.

Disgusting.

Inquiry in the Menezes murder is finished

Published on January 18, 2006

Menezes lying in the carriage after his murder

The BBC reports that the “Independent” Police Complaints Commission has finished its inquiry into the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian electrician mistaken for a terrorist and murdered by gung-ho Metropolitan police officers, though of course they don’t call it a murder. That it was murder proves the eyewitness report quoted by the BBC:

The BBC has obtained an eyewitness statement, given to the IPCC, which described how anti-terror
officers shot at Mr Menezes 11 times.

The statement read: “The shots were evenly spaced, with about three seconds between the shots
for the first few shots.

“Then a gap of a little longer. Then the shots were evenly spaced again.”

Mr Menezes, an electrician from Gonzaga in south-eastern Brazil, was hit seven times in the head.

On the six o’clock news, it was said that if prosecutions of the police officers were started, most if not all Metropolitan gun officers would refuse to carry them any longer, once more confirmed that the police think themselves above the law. Here’s hoping the prosecution services will not given in to this common blackmail.

Earlier posts about the murder of Menezes:

Sliming the Justice 4 Jean campaign

Published on August 23, 2005

For some reason best known to the local cable company, our local BBC station is BBC London and it was on their local news bulletin that I saw the worst smear attempt I’ve seen in a long time. Apparantly, with Jean Charles de Menezes now entirely blameless in his own killing, the Metropolitan Police and/or its allies have shifted their focus on his family and the Justice 4 Jean campaign. Dimly realising that smearing the family themselves may backfire, the police or its allies have chosen to smear their advisors, which resulted in this “news” item: “is the Menezes family’s campaign for justice hijacked by the far-left?”

The common sense answer is of course “no”, but that’s not what the BBC wanted to show so we got treated to several minutes of ominous, slo-mo shots of two of the family’s advicers, one Asad Rehman, who turned out to be connected to George Galloway and Respect (no!), the other, Yasmin Khan who, so the BBC revealed after some intensive googlin^wresearch revealed to be behind the Corporate Pirates website, which is devoted to the plundering of Iraq by big business. At no point was explained why this was so sinister; any appeal was emotional not reasoned.

Two talking heads were asked to comment, one some wet behind the ears police spokesman, who adviced the Menezes family to change advisors — as if they’d take the advice of their son’s killers— the second Brian Coleman, who was indentified as being on the Greater London Assembly, but not as a Tory, strangely enough, who saw it all as a “far-left plot” to damage the police and “sir” Ian Blair. Neither had any political agenda themselves, I’m sure.

The interesting thing was how this was presented. I’m sure the BBC London news team meant this all to be outrageous, but it just fell flat. Course, I might not be the best person to judge this by, but I don’t think this would convince anybody who didn’t already think Menezes had it coming and “those lefties” should stop hassling the police. It was all too American, too Republican and while the British public can be just as ignorant, pigheaded and stupid as the American, it’s not this stupid. Anti-war is not a scary word in the UK, not like it is in the US: the gulf between cant and reality in this programme was just too great for anybody to swallow…

Which does not mean this wasn’t a slimy piece of biased crap for which everybody responsible at the BBC should be sacked, of course. But that’s no more then we’ve come to expect from the post-election, post-spine BBC.

No coverup? Suuuure

Published on August 19, 2005

Yes, we figured the police lied from day one about the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes, but as usual the police bosses, Ian Blair first, were adamant this was all a ghastly mistake and the police behaved properly. Even after hard evidence emerged that the version of events the police put forth was simply not true, they kept denying wrong doing. Yesterday the other shoe dropped: the Metropolitan police chief Ian Blair tried to stop the independent investigation without which we would’ve never known the truth:

Britain’s top police officer, the Scotland Yard commissioner Sir Ian Blair, attempted to stop an independent external investigation into the shooting of a young Brazilian mistaken for a suicide bomber, it emerged yesterday.

Sir Ian wrote to John Gieve, the permanent secretary at the Home Office, on July 22, the morning Jean Charles de Menezes was shot at short range on the London tube. The commissioner argued for an internal inquiry into the killing on the grounds that the ongoing anti-terrorist investigation took precedence over any independent look into his death.

Further down in the article:

But a statement from the Met yesterday showed that despite the agreement to allow in independent investigators, the IPCC was kept away from Stockwell tube in south London, the scene of the shooting, for a further three days. This runs counter to usual practice, where the IPCC would expect to be at the scene within hours.

Gee, such a departure from normal procedure. I wonder why? Blair can “reject the concept of a coverup” as much as he wants, but I have only one response:

bliar

Stop Press! Police lied about CCTV footage

Published on August 17, 2005

Yesterday I posted that there was no cctv footage of the killing of Menezes, according to the police. Turns out they lied, as the British tv network ITN has gotten its hands on internal police documents, including the supposedly missing CCTV footage!
Apparantely, footage of it was shown on air yesterday; since I’m not in the UK, I haven’t seen it myself. From the article:

A document describes CCTV footage, which shows Mr de Menezes entered Stockwell station at a “normal walking pace” and descended slowly on an escalator.

The document said: “At some point near the bottom he is seen to run across the concourse and enter
the carriage before sitting in an available seat.

“Almost simultaneously armed officers were provided with positive identification.”

A member of the surveillance team is quoted in the report. He said: “I heard shouting which included the word `police’ and turned to face the male in the denim jacket.

“He immediately stood up and advanced towards me and the CO19 officers. I grabbed the male in the denim jacket by wrapping both my arms around his torso, pinning his arms to his side.

“I then pushed him back on to the seat where he had been previously sitting. I then heard a gun shot
very close to my left ear and was dragged away onto the floor of the carriage.”

Emphasis mine.

What is clear from this (and see also the Channel 4 report (WMV file)) is that the Metropolitan Police have been lying about this killing from the start. None of the initial statements, apart from the bare fact of his killing, were true.

Menezes wasn’t killed because he behaved in any way suspicious or even looked suspicious: none of the excuses made for the officers who shot him are valid. He wasn’t wearing bulky clothing, he didn’t run into the station, but used his travelcard and even picked up a free Metro, ran to catch his train than sat down. When an officer shouted “police” he stood up and faced them, at which point he was pushed into his seat and murdered.

In other words, this wasn’t a man chased by police, but a man whose first awareness that he is chased is with the bullet entering his head! He wasn’t a criminal, did nothing wrong and still was killed. The moral? In the UK today, anyone of us can be killed without warning because some police officer gets jumpy and there’s nothing you can do about it. Even if you comply with all police directions you can and will be shot: Menezes was.