morganpugh84 Posted August 16, 2005 Share Posted August 16, 2005 ITV News has obtained secret documents and photographs that detail why police shot Jean Charles De Menezes dead on the tube.The Brazilian electrician was killed on 22 July, the day after the series of failed bombings on the tube and bus network. The crucial mistake that ultimately led to his death was made at 9.30am when Jean Charles left his flat in Scotia Road, South London. Surveillance officers wrongly believed he could have been Hussain Osman, one of the prime suspects, or another terrorist suspect. By 10am that morning, elite firearms officers were provided with what they describe as "positive identification" and shot De Menezes eight times in the head and upper body. The documents and photographs confirm that Jean Charles was not carrying any bags, and was wearing a denim jacket, not a bulky winter coat, as had previously been claimed. He was behaving normally, and did not vault the barriers, even stopping to pick up a free newspaper. He started running when we saw a tube at the platform. Police HAD agreed they would shoot a suspect if he ran. Source: http://www.itv.com/news/index_1677571.html It was very sad but understandable that he was killed however now their is evidence he was not dressed in a large jacket and he did not run or jump over ticket barriers. He started to jog when he was on the platform but that was just to catch the train before it left. It was a mistake by the police making assumptions and not having good enough intelligence. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha2004 Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Source: http://www.itv.com/news/index_1677571.htmlIt was very sad but understandable that he was killed however now their is evidence he was not dressed in a large jacket and he did not run or jump over ticket barriers. He started to jog when he was on the platform but that was just to catch the train before it left. It was a mistake by the police making assumptions and not having good enough intelligence. :( 586386133[/snapback] That really really sucks. :cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesleyT Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 sad... but i also think police has to take risks, he could have killed hundreds of peeple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlibbyFlobby Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 As much as its interesting to see pictures of the victim, just to get a better picture of what happens, it shows that selling papers is more important than the the familys feelings, seeing as its on the front of half of them today. Also the fact that the police were given a positive id on the guy shows someone further up the ranks probably screwed up, how were they to know the intelligence was wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mx Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 One of the officers outside his flat who should of been videoing him didn't, because he was taking a ****. So they never got a positive ID then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlibbyFlobby Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 One of the officers outside his flat who should of been videoing him didn't, because he was taking a ****. So they never got a positive ID then. 586389279[/snapback] By 10am that morning, elite firearms officers wereprovided> with what they describe as "positive identification" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolchan Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Leaked documents appear to contradict the official account of how police mistook a Brazilian man for a suicide bomber and shot him. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4157892.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowcra Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 I dont care. He shouldnt have run. I know he had an expried visa but still, ****, its the DAY after attempted bombings and you RUN? well buddy, you got what you deserve. Im sorry, but its true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolchan Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 I dont care. He shouldnt have run. I know he had an expried visa but still, ****, its the DAY after attempted bombings and you RUN? well buddy, you got what you deserve. Im sorry, but its true 586389393[/snapback] Read the facts! The latest documents suggest Mr de Menezes had walked into Stockwell Tube station, picked up a free newspaper, walked through ticket barriers, had started to run when he saw a train arriving and was sitting down in a train when he was shot. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4157892.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowcra Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Yeah bud, I did read the facts! But what im trying to say he was on an expired visa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolchan Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Yeah bud, I did read the facts! But what im trying to say he was on an expired visa 586389405[/snapback] So you say it's ok to shoot someone with that excuse? Man, how were you raised? :no: But the fact that the police was trying to hide the truth. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowcra Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 I was raised good ta. No, its not alright. I do see what happend, and it WAS a shame, but the police were on high alert. Shame tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcdShdw Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 I dont care. He shouldnt have run. I know he had an expried visa but still, ****, its the DAY after attempted bombings and you RUN? well buddy, you got what you deserve. Im sorry, but its true 586389393[/snapback] are u that dense, read the facts, and the article and then comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anog Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 I dont care. He shouldnt have run. I know he had an expried visa but still, ****, its the DAY after attempted bombings and you RUN? well buddy, you got what you deserve. Im sorry, but its true 586389393[/snapback] So what you are saying is that if you were there, you'd miss that train because you couldn't run. If complete strangers (I think they were under cover) told you to stop, your first thought would be "This is the police, I better stop" and you wouldn't even think that could be a robbery. Yes, it's very easy to say "he shouldn't have run". The fact is, most of us probably would have start running too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowcra Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 I am entitled to my OWN opinion. However, the POLICE were wrong and i feel very sorry for what happend, make no mistake aboutt hat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlibbyFlobby Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Why arent the officers who confirmed the identity of the man the ones who are getting all the flak, after all the article says the police who shot the man were provided with the positive id, not that they obtained it. Given that information the police had little choice still in my opinion. Although this does seem to be unravelling slowly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morganpugh84 Posted August 17, 2005 Author Share Posted August 17, 2005 I think people don't fully understand the post. The police failed to ientify him correctly. What they didn't know is that this guy left from left 17 whereas they were monitorinng flat 21. The guy had "similar eyes" which is what they state was the "positive identification". They failed to stop him getting on the bus and entering the tube. He was only wearing a light denim jacket so it was very unlikely he was wearing a bomb. He did not run away from the police or jump over the ticket barrier. He walked at normal speed into the tube and stopped to pick up a newspaper. He used his prepaid train ticket to enter the platform area. He they briefly run to catch the train before it left the station. He was sitting down when he was restrained from behind by an armed police officer he was then shot seven times in the head, once in the shoulder and three shots missed him. The big questions are to why such force was used when he displayed no signs of being hostile and was already restrained when the police killed him. It was a catastrophic failure of intelligence by the police. It should never have happened. The "positive id" was not positive enough. In the report the police officer who identified him only said his eyes were similar. How can having similar eyes be a "positive id"? There were also problems with different people in the chain giving contradicting orders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts