Innocent shooting

[JPaul]

Was it the Police who issued the original version of what happened, or was that put together by reporters.

It is unlike the Met to issue statements regarding this type of thing if they themselves have not held an enquiry

It did run in all newspapers, so it's unlikely they all made up the coat and barrier leap story.

I can only assume it came from an official source.

Naturally, I stand to be corrected on that assumption.

It may have come from an "official source" that does not mean it was the Police. It may have come from Journalists speaking to "eye witnesses" who would tell different reporters the same story. It may have come from a news service, which the others picked up on. The story could have come from a variety of places, in fact it probably did and was cobbled together from there. My question is, how much of it came from the Police.

To me, only guessing here, if it was an official source it would be more likely to be political than the Met. They are usually accused of not releasing statements quickly enough, because of their internal enquiries. It just seems unlikely to me that in this instance they would break with that practice.

Like you I stand to be corrected.

If someone knows where the original version came from I would appreciate it.

[manker]

It did run in all newspapers, so it's unlikely they all made up the coat and barrier leap story.

I can only assume it came from an official source.

Naturally, I stand to be corrected on that assumption.

It may have come from an "official source" that does not mean it was the Police. It may have come from Journalists speaking to "eye witnesses" who would tell different reporters the same story. It may have come from a news service, which the others picked up on. The story could have come from a variety of places, in fact it probably did and was cobbled together from there. My question is, how much of it came from the Police.

To me, only guessing here, if it was an official source it would be more likely to be political than the Met. They are usually accused of not releasing statements quickly enough, because of their internal enquiries. It just seems unlikely to me that in this instance they would break with that practice.

Like you I stand to be corrected.

If someone knows where the original version came from I would appreciate it.

I've just watched the BBC News.

It seems the MET released a statement shortly after the shooting saying that he was shot partly due to his behaviour in the station and the attire he was wearing at the time. The Commisioner of the MET, forgotten his name, said that he didn't obey the directions of his oficers.

At no time did the MET say that he jumped over a barrier nor that he ran. However, commentators on the News reported that the MET could have done more to dispell these rumours which originated from (unreliable) eyewitnesses - instead they chose to stay silent.

So basically, it seems as if the MET have issued an official statement that was, at best, partly incorrect - at worst, downright misleading.

The Press, it appears, used that statement by the MET and fleshed it out with unsubstantiated reports of duffle-coats and barrier leaps.

[Rat Faced]

On the day of the incident, Ian Blaire said only that someone had been shot; that he was a direct suspect, and couldnt comment further until he had read the Police Officers reports.

The day after, in a TV interview, he said it was mis-identification and mentioned specifically the coat and his actions. The Interview certainly mentioned everything that had been reported, the only thing he said was incorrect was the identity.

It has now emerged that the Met tried to stop the inquiry, and was over ruled by the home Office.


manker,

I didnt hear about the claim he was actually sitting down on the train until tonight... this is obviously an emerging story with more and more things coming out. On the 7 O'Clock news yesterday it was definitly stated that he hadnt been running, however it was implied about the hurrying.. as i stated last night.

Also, re: the warning... The Public Witness Statements did not mention any warnings, none were heard. Yours is from a Police Statement, which i hadnt heard until now.

I also did not hear anything about him getting up and approaching the police.. not surprising as i didnt hear he was sitting down as i said.



This gets more and more interesting... there has obviously been an almighty cock-up and the umbrellas are up. Therefore i will give more weight to witness statements than officers atm..

You will notice that there is now pressure to charge the police involved with Criminal Charges.

Good, the minimum is Manslaughter.. however, it was cold blooded and intended so i hope they get Murder.

[JPaul]

manker

That seems much more likely, thanks for that.

"However, commentators on the News reported that the MET could have done more to dispell these rumours which originated from (unreliable) eyewitnesses - instead they chose to stay silent."

The staying silent is what I would have expected. To release a quick, short statement soon after the event to give the bare facts. To then wait until they have made their own enquiries before making a more comprehensive one.

I think the newspapers are deflecting here, it was them who misled the public and they are now saying "Ah, but the Met should have told the public we were printing nonsense". It seems it was their reporting which was at most fault.

As an aside, one doesn't report what the Met (or anyone else) should have done, one opines it. One reports what they did do.

[DanB]

So whats the difference between the Police killing someone by mistake and the Army killing people by mistake?

8 bullets in head compared to large bomb on house or an Embassy perhaps ?

[Rat Faced]

So whats the difference between the Police killing someone by mistake and the Army killing people by mistake?

8 bullets in head compared to large bomb on house or an Embassy perhaps ?

Absolutely none... you have been reading my posts re: Iraq?

[JPaul]

there has obviously been an almighty cock-up and the umbrellas are up. Therefore i will give more weight to witness statements than officers atm..

That's a matter for you, however I am more likely to listen to the highly trained, experienced, professional witnesses. Rather than the panicking members of the public in an entirely strange and stressful situation.

[manker]

manker,

I didnt hear about the claim he was actually sitting down on the train until tonight... this is obviously an emerging story with more and more things coming out. On the 7 O'Clock news yesterday it was definitly stated that he hadnt been running, however it was implied about the hurrying.. as i stated last night.

Also, re: the warning... The Public Witness Statements did not mention any warnings, none were heard. Yours is from a Police Statement, which i hadnt heard until now.

I also did not hear anything about him getting up and approaching the police.. not surprising as i didnt hear he was sitting down as i said.



This gets more and more interesting... there has obviously been an almighty cock-up and the umbrellas are up. Therefore i will give more weight to witness statements than officers atm..

You will notice that there is now pressure to charge the police involved with Criminal Charges.

Good, the minimum is Manslaughter.. however, it was cold blooded and intended so i hope they get Murder.

It's really difficult to keep an open mind on this. On one hand you've got multiple unreliable 'eyewitness' accounts, as reported by the popular press. On the other you've got the MET putting up a smokescreen and telling, what amounts to, barefaced lies.

You're right, new details are emerging all of the time. in the hour or so last night between when I posted that CH4 link and when I subsequently referenced it. The details had altered drastically.

I'm going to sit on the fence wrt to the armed police on the ground til all the details are known. However, I definitely believe inexcusable errors were made at a higher, intelligence, level.

[DanB]

This gets more and more interesting... there has obviously been an almighty cock-up and the umbrellas are up. Therefore i will give more weight to witness statements than officers atm..

The same ones who mentioned the jumping and heavy coats in the first place?

[Rat Faced]

highly trained, experienced, professional witnesses.