« Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest - San Jose State's Bad Writing Contest | Main | Marine has farewell dinner with family before shipping off to Iraq. Stranger picks up the tab. »

July 28, 2005

London Police lied about the man they murdered in an underground station.

Remember when the London plain-clothes police chased the guy into the underground station and shot him seven times in the head and once in the shoulder? In the frenzied aftermath of their kill, Scotland Yard claimed that he "wore a bulky jacket" and "jumped the barrier when police identified themselves and ordered him to stop." The same day the Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said the shooting was "directly linked" to the unprecedented anti-terror operation on London's streets.

Well, it was all lies. Surprise, surprise. As it turns out, he was an "electrician, on his way to a job in north-west London". Instead of jumping the turnstyle, he "used a travel card". Instead of a "bulky jacket", he was wearning a "jean jacket".

One armed officer involved has been given leave, and two have been moved to non-firearm duties. Of course, that won't bring the innocent victim back to life. Spin Dry says It's Okay, He was brown.

Secure Beneath the Watchful Eyes, indeed. RIP Jean Charles de Menezes.

Technorati tags:
Delicious tags:

Folksonomy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share web pages.
digg  Furl  Spurl  Reddit  blinkbits  BlinkList  blogmarks  connotea  De.lirio.us  Fark  feedmelinks  LinkaGoGo  Ma.gnolia  NewsVine  Netvouz  RawSugar  scuttle  Shadows  Simpy  Smarking  TailRank  Wists  YahooMyWeb

Posted by Peenie Wallie on July 28, 2005 at 01:54 PM


Remember when the London plain-clothes police chased the guy into the underground station and shot him seven times in the head and once in the shoulder?

A key factor is that they were plain-clothes cops. If I was in a crime-ridden city, and some guys with guns and not in police uniforms were chasing me, I'd be running toward a crowd, too.

Posted by: Robert on July 28, 2005 at 04:02 PM

No one can verify that the police ever identified themselves. The police say they did, but they've been lying from the start of this affair, so it's not like you can trust them. Then, consider that English is his second language. Finally, the victim had been attacked by a gang a few weeks earlier.

Posted by: Peenie Wallie on July 28, 2005 at 08:22 PM

This is a good point:

With all the millions of cameras they have in London, why can't they clarify this by releasing the film that shows what happened?

Comment by: Jennifer at July 29, 2005 10:51 AM

Posted by: Reasonoid on July 29, 2005 at 11:20 AM

From the article: "Mr de Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder at 10am last Friday ."

At 10am, the temperature in London was aboutg 62 deg. F (17 deg. C) The high temperature that day was 70 deg. F (21 deb. C).

This certainly is not the "hot summer day" that early news reports described. It would not be unreasonable for someone to be wearing a jacket; especially someone from a country on the equator.

Posted by: Robert on July 29, 2005 at 05:03 PM

this is the only site that came up when I googled "london police kill innocent"

What a shame.

1) Plain clothes cops carrying guns were special forces. How many British police, besides special forces, carry guns? The country is renown for its unarmed police force.

2)besides, the special forces were surveilling the electrician from before he left his home until the altercation at the subway. If they were concerned with his coat and manner, they easily could have stopped him long before he neared a subway. Instead, they waited, followed, ambushed, chased and finally executed the man as a public example after throwing him onto a subway car.

3)discrepencies in reports. there are many, but the most important is the number of shots fired and where. I have heard, from major news sources, competing stories of 5 shots in the stomach and head, 5 shots in the head, 7 shots in the head, 7 shots in the head and shoulder. the story that he was shot strictly in the head (not head and chest) conveniently appeared after alex jones and other websites pointed out shooting a man strapped with explosives in the stomach/chest would be a bad idea, and that it went directly against London police policy for terrorist response.

4)the videos. Yes, I have been asking the same thing myself. They have released horrible, grainy images of the supposed bombers, which contain no evidence themselves. Let's see some images of the killing of this man. Let's see what really happened.

5)circumstantial evidence. the two London bombings have distracted from the Valerie Plame scandal, have allowed renewal of the Patriot Act, reduction of civil liberties is coming in England, law-abiding Americans are now subject to random search and seizure on airlines, subways, and buses. Highways are next.

6)no logic. every "anti-terror" step seems to strip more rights away from americans, while doing nothing to stop the problem. i.e. Grandma gets searched at the airport, while the borders flow with illegals. Bush and the Congress have the power to change that, but prefer to focus on other things.

i.e. New York Subway searches. Upon entering a search zone, travelers are informed they have the choice of proceeding and being searched or leaving the subway. If a terrorist, who "wants to kill us because he hates our freedom" sees this, he will simply run toward the line of searchees and blow himself up. Meanwhile, we are expected to endure a security state, asking permission to go to the bathroom and wipe our asses....

7)lest we forget. What happened in London on July 7 happens every day in Iraq, times 10.

What kind of a "civilization" are we, who weep for the dead of 9-11-2001 and 7-7-2005 but care not for the innocent dead and dying on every side in our new war?

Posted by: justin pissenfield on July 29, 2005 at 11:50 PM

The man's visa expired more than a year ago. Is it a little strange that an illegal alien was working as an electrician? Strange that an electrician was going to work at 10AM?

More than a few possibilities why the guy ran when ordered to stop.

Posted by: johncorn on July 30, 2005 at 05:55 PM

What kind of a "civilization" are we, who weep for the dead of 9-11-2001 and 7-7-2005 but care not for the innocent dead and dying on every side in our new war?

Like we "cared" for those innocents when Saddam was in power? Saddam was killing far more innocents that the terrorist filth are in Iraq now, but that was apparently all right - or at least ingnorable.

And I'm never more ashamed of being
part of the West than when I see some of our so called "progressives" calling for us to remove our troops and abandon the Iraqis and Afghans to the anti-democracy cowardly terrorist scum that are doing nearly ALL the killing of innocent muslims now.

Posted by: John on July 30, 2005 at 10:07 PM

Is it a little strange that an illegal alien was working as an electrician? Strange that an electrician was going to work at 10AM?

No. Maybe a bit odd, but hardly evidence that he was a terorrist.

And speaking of illegal aliens in London, check out Dirty Pretty Things. Well worth an hour-and-a-half of your time.

It's got that chick from Amelie and the assassin from the upcoming Serenity.

Posted by: Robert on July 31, 2005 at 07:44 AM

Nowhere in the article you linked do the police withdraw their claim that the Brazillian, Jean Charles de Menezes, was wearing a heavy jacket and jumped the turnstile. Really, they don't. Read it carefully and see.

What the article does say is that de Menezes's cousin denies these things. I guess we are supposed to automatically believe the cousin because hey, he's obviously an impartial, unbiased third party.

Although how the cousin would know what de Menezes was wearing and whether de Menezes jumped the turnstile is an interesting puzzle indeed, given that the cousin was (apparently) not present when de Menezes was shot.

Posted by: Gaijin Biker on July 31, 2005 at 11:32 PM

Your point is valid, that some of the details were quotes from the relatives of the deceased, not the police. However, the police have access to thousands of CCTV cameras, and I haven't seen jack from those cameras, which seems odd to me. Also, keep in mind, they said he was related to the bombings, then changed their mind. If they tracked him from a house they had under surveillance, and then killed him as he dove into the Tube, then they farked up BIG time. Like, why not intercept him sooner?

BTW, when you have a house under "surveillance", you don't kill the people that come out. That's not the definition of "surveillance". Conversely, if you think the people in the house are so dangerous that if they walk outside, you're going to need to shoot them 8 times, then you RAID the house, you don't put it under SURVEILLANCE. The police screwed this up BIG time, and anyone that looks at the facts objectively can see this.

Posted by: Peenie Wallie on August 01, 2005 at 12:21 AM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)