Innocent shooting

The guy suspected to be a terrorist in London shot by armed police 5 times in the head.
Turned out he was innocent, saw it on the news last night but today I've been hearing people saying how it's really wrong and should never have happend etc.

Well I dunno about that, cos if you're being shouted at by armed police to stop of they WILL fire you would stop.
Why did the guy not stop? regardless of a crime he may of commited. At this time especially. Someone said that he may not have understood, again I dissagree. Anyone from anywhere would be able to understand that armed police are pointing guns at you and shouting, obviously they want you to stop.
Dunno, I'm a bit undecided on this one.
As I typing I'm thinking well maybe he thought they would'nt actually shoot, hmmm

So basically as question.....

Trigger happy mistake?

Or

Justified tradgedy?

Jonno :cool:

The thing is that they were plain clothed officers. He was Brazillian so he might not have understood exactly what they were saying - the tube is a noisy place and I suspect lots of people would have been screaming. He may have thought they were just guys with guns and his instinct was to run.

The same officers had also been fed mis-information linking him with terrorists.

You have to think that maybe if these policemen had not been told that he had links to terrorist groups, maybe they wouldn't have shot him. It's difficult to tell.


A great deal of human error was involved with this and a life was lost. It's a tragedy, alright.

Trigger happy mistake?

Or

Justified tradgedy?


However, if they shot him 5 times while pinned...that just sounds fucking criminal and the cops that shot him should be jailed.

The only thing I can think of is that they were afraid of him pulling a rip cord and they made him stop. :dry:

Either way, the fella was an idiot and I think he was there to test security.

I think he was linked to terrorists. Padded coat in July? How hot was it?

I wear a cut-off shirt to go to work and change when I get there, 'cause it's so hot......and this guy is wearing "extra layers to keep warm and shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

The thing is that they were plain clothed officers. He was Brazillian so he might not have understood exactly what they were saying - the tube is a noisy place and I suspect lots of people would have been screaming. He may have thought they were just guys with guns and his instinct was to run.

The same officers had also been fed mis-information linking him with terrorists.

You have to think that maybe if these policemen had not been told that he had links to terrorist groups, maybe they wouldn't have shot him. It's difficult to tell.


A great deal of human error was involved with this and a life was lost. It's a tragedy, alright.

---

I understand that the fella had been there for sometime working. Sounds like he lacked common sense. Padded coat? Did he have on a helmet too?

Well possibly he was linked to something but the fact remains he did'nt do as told when a shoot to kill policy is enforced atm.

Sad but justified.

And as for the coat, well it's actually one of the coldest july's on record in the uk. Whether is shit so the coat means nothing really, also lots of people where padded coats for fashion even when it's hot cos their stupid.

Jonno :cool:

i think i've said in another thread. if someone in plain clothes points a gun at me i'd probably run. for all this guy knew he was being mugged.


he could have been a terrorist ready to blow

the police could have made their presence and intentions better known

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

The thing is that they were plain clothed officers. He was Brazillian so he might not have understood exactly what they were saying - the tube is a noisy place and I suspect lots of people would have been screaming. He may have thought they were just guys with guns and his instinct was to run.

The same officers had also been fed mis-information linking him with terrorists.

You have to think that maybe if these policemen had not been told that he had links to terrorist groups, maybe they wouldn't have shot him. It's difficult to tell.


A great deal of human error was involved with this and a life was lost. It's a tragedy, alright.

---

Good points, it's all a question of if's and why's. I did'nt know they were plain clothed, the pics in the paper showed them as armed police with flack jackets and stuff altho I may have read that wrong was spose to be working lol. If they were plain clothed then it throws another ingriedient into the mix and has started me thinking again. , but yeah it was a tradgedy, but the papers today and like I said general opinion seems to want to jump on the police for this.
Thats whats bugging me, had he been a terrorist they would have been hero's.

I still say altho sad I don't think the officers acted inapropriatly.

Jonno :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

The thing is that they were plain clothed officers. He was Brazillian so he might not have understood exactly what they were saying - the tube is a noisy place and I suspect lots of people would have been screaming. He may have thought they were just guys with guns and his instinct was to run.

The same officers had also been fed mis-information linking him with terrorists.

You have to think that maybe if these policemen had not been told that he had links to terrorist groups, maybe they wouldn't have shot him. It's difficult to tell.


A great deal of human error was involved with this and a life was lost. It's a tragedy, alright.

---

I understand that the fella had been there for sometime working. Sounds like he lacked common sense. Padded coat? Did he have on a helmet too?

---

Maybe it looked like it might rain later. Perhaps he thought he looked good in it. Perhaps he needed extra pockets to carry bits and bobs to work, like tools and stuff.

I really don't know but wearing a big coat in summer isn't so unusual as to warrant being the deciding factor to end a person's life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Well possibly he was linked to something but the fact remains he did'nt do as told when a shoot to kill policy is enforced atm.

Sad but justified.

And as for the coat, well it's actually one of the coldest july's on record in the uk. Whether is shit so the coat means nothing really, also lots of people where padded coats for fashion even when it's hot cos their stupid.

Jonno :cool:

---

How cold was it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

I understand that the fella had been there for sometime working. Sounds like he lacked common sense. Padded coat? Did he have on a helmet too?

---

Maybe it looked like it might rain later. Perhaps he thought he looked good in it. Perhaps he needed extra pockets to carry bits and bobs to work, like tools and stuff.

I really don't know but wearing a big coat in summer isn't so unusual as to warrant being the deciding factor to end a person's life.

---

Agreed. Big coats in the summer must be a usual thing over there. :huh: ...and it must not be as hot as it is here...we push 100 degrees.

Cops were plain clothed too. Another monkey wrench.

I guess it was like, "Who the fuck are they?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

Cops were plain clothed too. Another monkey wrench.

I guess it was like, "Who the fuck are they?"

---

Yeah, that's how I see it too.

Also, the police followed him from his front door, when he took a 15 minute bus journey and on his walk to the tube station.

If the mis-information about terrorist links plus the coat was making them worry - why did they let him get to the tube station before they told him to stop :blink:

i don't think the police officers are to blame, but the people who suggested they go plain clothes and the people said this guy was suspected terrorist with seemingly no evidence to back this

It's very difficult to answer this. However if pushed I have to say tragic loss of life, but with the current climate it's hard to say that the Police should have reacted differently. Particularly if they followed all the relevant protocols.

If they had intelligence that he was associated to terrorism and they identified themselves, but he ran away, onto a tube train I don't see what else they could have done. re the many bullets to the head, I believe the idea is that unless they are certain he is dead then he still presents a risk to the public. In such a situation "shoot to kill" is the only option. (When dealing with terrorists the SAS never take prisoners)

Had they not fired and he had exploded a bomb, killing more members of the public they would have been damned even more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

Cops were plain clothed too. Another monkey wrench.

I guess it was like, "Who the fuck are they?"

---

Yeah, that's how I see it too.

Also, the police followed him from his front door, when he took a 15 minute bus journey and on his walk to the tube station.

If the mis-information about terrorist links plus the coat was making them worry - why did they let him get to the tube station before they told him to stop :blink:

---

Now THAT'S fucking stupid. When it comes down to it, the officers (or decision makers) actually endangered lives.

OMG I'm flip-flopping!!! :ohmy:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JPaul

It's very difficult to answer this. However if pushed I have to say tragic loss of life, but with the current climate it's hard to say that the Police should have reacted differently. Particularly if they followed all the relevant protocols.

If they had intelligence that he was associated to terrorism and they identified themselves, but he ran away, onto a tube train I don't see what else they could have done. re the many bullets to the head, I believe the idea is that unless they are certain he is dead then he still presents a risk to the public. In such a situation "shoot to kill" is the only option. (When dealing with terrorists the SAS never take prisoners)

Had they not fired and he had exploded a bomb, killing more members of the public they would have been damned even more.

---

Why would they not stop him before getting to the train station then? :dry:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

I really don't know but wearing a big coat in summer isn't so unusual as to warrant being the deciding factor to end a person's life.

---

I have to agree with that 100%, like I said, some people wear them for fasion all year round.
And to answer you BM, in my area on that day it was about 18-20c.

This whole plain clothed thing has thrown me, I did'nt know that.

Did they try to arrest him first? was he aware they were police?
Had they aproached him showing him ID?

Jonno :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JPaul

It's very difficult to answer this. However if pushed I have to say tragic loss of life, but with the current climate it's hard to say that the Police should have reacted differently. Particularly if they followed all the relevant protocols.

If they had intelligence that he was associated to terrorism and they identified themselves, but he ran away, onto a tube train I don't see what else they could have done. re the many bullets to the head, I believe the idea is that unless they are certain he is dead then he still presents a risk to the public. In such a situation "shoot to kill" is the only option. (When dealing with terrorists the SAS never take prisoners)

Had they not fired and he had exploded a bomb, killing more members of the public they would have been damned even more.

---

Why would they not stop him before getting to the train station then? :dry:

---

I don't know

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...on_6inf416.gif

1: Jean Charles de Menezes leaves a house under surveillance and arrives at Stockwell station
2: Witnesses say he vaults the automatic ticket barriers and heads for the platforms
3: He then ran down an escalator after being approached by up to 20 plain-clothed police officers and tried to board a train
4: He apparently refuses to obey police instructions and after running onto a northbound Northern line train, he is shot dead.


EDIT - Sorry Source

as far as i know they pulled a gun on him and shouted for him to get down. he legged it and tripped up. where they shot him.


whatever the story is. it's a good way of getting us all to listen to the cops http://moderation.invisionzone.com/s...fault/icke.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

I really don't know but wearing a big coat in summer isn't so unusual as to warrant being the deciding factor to end a person's life.

---

I have to agree with that 100%, like I said, some people wear them for fasion all year round.
And to answer you BM, in my area on that day it was about 18-20c.

---

If he was Brasilian or something, and thus used to somewhat higher temperatures, wearing the coat made perfect sense.

WRT the rest, I say it was a victory for the terrorists, not a big one tho', but I bet they'd be happy with having caused this.

I say it was justified.

I'd not be too upset if there was more

They followed him and challenged him, he refused to stop and legged it, therefore suspecting he was a suicide bomber they took him out, seems fair enough to me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanB

They followed him and challenged him, he refused to stop and legged it, therefore suspecting he was a suicide bomber they took him out, seems fair enough to me

---

Other than the phrase "took him out" I tend to agree.

It seems they were justified (as long as they identified themselves. However, I still don't get the "we let him close to the station" idiocy.

When did they realize "hey let's question this guy"?

I don't mind extra security but be fucking smart about it.

We had police with dogs on our subway platforms and everyone saw them and walked by like it was nothing. We don't mind it....at all.

Apparently it was when he headed for the station and went in that things stepped up a level, it then went form tailing and arresting to possibly watching the guy blow up a tube train.

We have had armed police at our airposts for years and everyone gets on with it too Busy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanB

Apparently it was when he headed for the station and went in that things stepped up a level, it then went form tailing and arresting to possibly watching the guy blow up a tube train.

We have had armed police at our airposts for years and everyone gets on with it too Busy

---

You don't think that before attempting to apprehend him, maybe they should have positioned themselves inbetween him and the entrance to the station. So that he couldn't have run into such a crowded place.

Seems logical to me.

They probably didn't want to let him know that they were tailing him prior to that but with the information they thought they knew about him, letting him get on a crowded bus was bad enough. Particularly when one was blown up a couple of weeks ago.

All the justification of protecting the people in the tube station kinda falls apart when you look at it that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanB

Apparently it was when he headed for the station and went in that things stepped up a level, it then went form tailing and arresting to possibly watching the guy blow up a tube train.

We have had armed police at our airposts for years and everyone gets on with it too Busy

---

You don't think that before attempting to apprehend him, maybe they should have positioned themselves inbetween him and the entrance to the station. So that he couldn't have run into such a crowded place.

Seems logical to me.

They probably didn't want to let him know that they were tailing him prior to that but with the information they thought they knew about him, letting him get on a crowded bus was bad enough. Particularly when one was blown up a couple of weeks ago.

All the justification of protecting the people in the tube station kinda falls apart when you look at it that way.

---

;)

I dare say if they had had suspicions when he was on the bus they would have dealt with him too.

Bah, 1 down X00 to go

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanB

I dare say if they had had suspicions when he was on the bus they would have dealt with him too.

---

What extra suspicions did they have in the short space of time he left the bus til when he walked toward the tube station? The fella was on his way to work. They would have known he had to get the tube as well as the bus, he'd been under surveillance for weeks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanB

Bah, 1 down X00 to go

---

What have you got against Brazilian electricians :lol:

They can't wire for shit :dry:

thats probably whyt hey didn't go off :lol: :pinch:

I think, to the police, this guy wasn't that important until he started to flee. So he wasn't important enough to stop him from getting on a bus or getting near a tube station. He was, perhaps, a potential lead who may not even have been followed up on if things had gone differently.

However, as soon as he started to flee he became a major threat. He went from someone who might have a connection to "OMG this guy might have a bomb" in a small space of time. I don't agree with what happened but I can (kind of) understand why it happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MCHeshPants420

I think, to the police, this guy wasn't that important until he started to flee. So he wasn't important enough to stop him from getting on a bus or getting near a tube station. He was, perhaps, a potential lead who may not even have been followed up on if things had gone differently.

However, as soon as he started to flee he became a major threat. He went from someone who might have a connection to "OMG this guy might have a bomb" in a small space of time. I don't agree with what happened but I can (kind of) understand why it happened.

---

Good point, CheeseHesh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

They would have known he had to get the tube as well as the bus, he'd been under surveillance for weeks.

---

Quote:

---

The block of flats in Tulse Hill, south London, where Mr Mr De Menezes lived, was under surveillance following the discovery of its address in a rucksack containing one of four bombs which failed to explode in the capital last Thursday.

---

Source

If he had realised before he reached the station that he was being followed, that may have been the reason he jumped the barrier and fled, he may never have heard the request to stop. That's if he did jump the barrier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RioDeLeo

Quote:

---

The block of flats in Tulse Hill, south London, where Mr Mr De Menezes lived, was under surveillance following the discovery of its address in a rucksack containing one of four bombs which failed to explode in the capital last Thursday.

---

Source

If he had realised before he reached the station that he was being followed, that may have been the reason he jumped the barrier and fled, he may never have heard the request to stop. That's if he did jump the barrier.

---

That's a fairly unimportant point but it appears I did misrepresent the time he'd been under surveilance. I thought it was since the initial bombings.

My premis was that the police should have attempted to apprehend him in a manner which prevented him darting into the busy tube station.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

My premis was that the police should have attempted to apprehend him in a manner which prevented him darting into the busy tube station.

---

Or onto a bus.

I am a bit disturbed about this whole thing. There are a number of factors that worked against him, and I have equal sympathy for him, his family, and for the police officers involved.

1). He came out of a building that was under surveillance.
2). He was wearing thick padded clothing.
3). He was of a dark complexion.
4). He panicking and reacted in an irrational manner when challenged.
5). It was only one day after an attempted suicide attack.

One could argue, that if any one of the above five points was not true, he would still be alive today.

On the one hand, the guy was a complete idiot for jumping over the turnstiles and trying to desperately reach the train, I can understand that he did look like a suicide bomber, and so I can understand the desperate need to stop him being able to detonate a bomb. A shoot-to-kill policy is the only 100% effective way to stop a suicide bomber, and aiming at the head is the sensible way to avoid accidentally detonating any explosives he may have about his torso.

On the other hand, firing 5 shots into the head at extremely close range does seem really brutal, and it's the sort of thing we usually hear about in the news from other countries, not in our capital city.

I think this incidident is going to have ramifications, both socially and politically for some time to come. (in the same way as those IRA bombers being gunned down in Gibraltar by the SAS in 1988)

I just hope we won't have to learn to get used to it. :(

Seems his visa may have expired.

If this had happened to a Westerner in Iraq a few years ago there would have been calls for action to be taken against Saddam and his "thugs".

Had Iraq been attacked by western suicide bombers then? :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanB

Had Iraq been attacked by western suicide bombers then? :unsure:

---

Why do you ask?
Is it because you think cold blooded murder by armed police is acceptable once suicide bombers commit atrocities in our country?

It certainly gives more of a justification than if he was just a ticket dodger.

Do you think if we hadn't have endured the recent terrorist attacks they would have shot him 5 times in the head? :unsure:

Or would you rather they had just let him get on the train and see if it had blown up? Is that a risk you would be prepared to take if you were in that officer's position?

And in answer to your question my answer is yes. If they fully believe that it is someone that needs taking out to prevent something terrible happening then I see no reson why they shouldn't.

I agree with Dan. I can see no justification in criticising the police under the present circumstances. What would and should worry me/us is if the police/authorities are/were aware of the intentions of other bombers and did not shoot them.
It seems strange to me that within hours they are knocking on doors. Unless they have CCTV cameras that give the name and address of everyone appearing on them.:ph34r: