Jean Charles De Menezes

[mrph]

http://www.channel4.com/news/content/news-storypage.jsp?id=1677571

I think sheepthief has already said this better, but...

Not wearing a bulky coat.

Not vaulting any barriers.

Buying a paper, acting normally.

And he only ran when he saw that the tube was already at the platform?

Right then. Let's see a response from the police and the government, please. And if it's not a fucking good response, let's see some (relevant) resignations to go with it.

Comments

[smogo.livejournal.com]

Not only "why was he shot?", but also "why were we told all these lies about how he was acting?"

[mrph.livejournal.com]

Because otherwise they'd have to explain why he was shot?

ICSouthLondon is also reporting that CCTV tape of the incident doesn't exist. And sheepthief comments (not sure of source) that he wasn't actually challenged before they fired?

Jesus wept. If this is true, it really was a complete and utter fuck-up.

[zotz]

They may well be saying that. The C4 report, which I've now watched, says that the official inquiry comments on the CCTV footage, which would be difficult if it didn't exist.

[mrph.livejournal.com]

Yup. Saw that myself - but not until after I'd seen the IC report and posted that last comment, unfortunately.

[zotz]

IC seem to be quoting the Mirror on that one.

[mrph.livejournal.com]

Just watched the C4 video of this, which backs up the "no warning" element - seems none of the eyewitnesses heard one, anyway. And the photos of the body make it very clear that there was no heavy jacket and no suspicious wiring.

[zotz]

I haven't seen this, and I'm slightly wary of journalistic exclusives. While this doesn't look good, I'm still going to wait for the inquiry.

Incidentally, someone on a few of the same friends-lists as me said that he was on the escalator when this was happening and there certainly was a verbal warning. Loud enough for him to hear over the music he was listening to. I can't remember whose LJ he said this on, though.

[zotz]

On a separate and comparatively trivial point, what sort of standards are Channel 4 working to these days? "Propoganda"? "Some of the best photo's"?

[zotz]

Any of this is possible. It was clearly tragic and disastrous . . . it's just a question of exactly what sort of tragic disaster it was.

From the articles it sounds like he either didn't hear the warning until he was on the train or didn't think it was him they were interested in, but really I'd rather get a fuller version before coming to that detailed a conclusion.

[mrph.livejournal.com]

Agreed. I'm hoping the inquiry will do the job.

But I'm still angry and still convinced that the leak is a good thing, in this case - because Sir Ian Blair and the met have played up to the (now shown to be false?) claims about leaping turnstiles, bulky clothes and hot pursuit - even when the victim's family said they'd been told this wasn't true.

Lots of people - on LJ and in the media - therefore came to the conclusion that he got killed because he was suspicious and acted stupidly when challenged. The police did nothing to correct this impression.

More worryingly, the information given to the pathologist (as noted on the latest BBC site update) also talks about how "[Mr Menezes] was followed into Stockwell Tube Station where he vaulted over the ticket barrier. He ran downstairs and onto a Tube train" - which, again, seems to be disproved by the leak. And is something they must have known at or near the time. So why did this find its way to the inquest as fact?

I'll let the inquiry say its piece, which should be the final word on this mess. I like to think, though, that this leak means a lot more people will now be listening intently when it does...

[aoakley.livejournal.com]

Quite so - and while we're about it, I'd also like to see those people who spread the rumour that the police didn't shout "police" face libel charges - the document clearly states that they did shout "police". It seems that nobody got the right story.

Well...

[mrph.livejournal.com]

We've got eyewitness accounts (quoted in the C4 video report) that say there was no warning. We've also got a member of the surveillance team saying that he did hear a warning. Still sounds a bit confused on that point.

Re: Well...

[zotz]

I've identified the LJ user I mentioned above, but AFAICT that post either isn't Googlable or is no longer public.

[crashbarrier.livejournal.com]

obviously a danger to society then.. i mean .. running for the tube.. got to be up to somehtign suspcious isn't he