Can't find a thread dealing with this...

[SnoopDog]

....but apparently the guy that the London police shot was innocent.

Jesus.

When things like that happen you get the feeling the terrorists get what they want.


Snoopy,

 

[erise]

It's reported in Tatelou's thread

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=355895

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

. . . Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old electrician who had been living in London for three years. . . .

. . . who apparently possessed terminally bad judgement about how to react in a crises.

 

[SeaCat]

Yes they did shoot someone who wasn't a terrorist, however they were following their directives and the man shoot did earn it.

Yes I can hear the screams of outrage out there. How did he earn it? He was an innocent.

Yep, maybe he was an innocent. However he screwed up. He knew the "mood" in London yet when he was told to stop he decided it was in his best interests to run. He ran when he knew London as well as the rest of England is in a heightened state of alert. People are on a hair trigger. Again, HE RAN! Now tell me, what did he expect? Pats on the back and a "Better luck next time mate?" The ones I feel sorry for are the police who shot him. They were doing their jobs yet now they have to live with the knowledge they shot an innocent. Now they have to live with the recriminations that they were too trigger happy, too American in their aproach. They will be vilified in the tabloids. Would you wish to live with that following you? British Police have my utmost respect, they do their jobs in a profesional manner while being for the most part unarmed. (I can't see that happening here in the United States.)

I can see the reaction if this had happened in New York or any of our larger cities. It would have been a bloodbath with uninvolved people joining in.

Cat

 

[Op_Cit]

Yes they did shoot someone who wasn't a terrorist, however they were following their directives and the man shoot did earn it.

Unless you mean that we all earn death at the whim of cops because we choose to live in a place where we surrender our personal responsibilities to big brother..., well, I guess then that you are one of the really scarey mass.

First, you don't have all the details, only what you've read. Formost, though, what if the guy didn't know the cops were shouting at him? I know that when I'm ambling around minding my own business, I do not leap to the conclusion that someone yelling, "hey, you!" is yelling at me. And if I were a more timid individual, and things were as dangerous as you describe, I might try to run for cover if I saw people waving guns around and yelling. It would be a logical survival action to get out of the way fast.

What if the guy was was deaf, late, and running to meet his ride home?

The nazis in america accept the standard Rodney King reasoning that, "they needed a platoon of cops beating on him because he was a bad guy probably hopped up on PCP." But what if he was a straight A, scholarship earning, junior college, never-hurt-a-flea-in-his-life (black) linebacker that was driving home from a party where somebody slipped him a mickey without him knowing? The kid could be hopped up on PCP and out of his mind on some other drug that someone else gave him without his knowledge, or perhaps had bad interaction with some other physical condition... The point is, most of the time cops don't know at the moment that they're beating the shit out of someone (or killing them) whether they're guilty or not. They don't know anything other than "this guy's not doing what I told him to do."

So, how is today in America or Britain different from feudal times where the samurais or knights could cut down a person at will, needing only to cite disobedience to be legitimate (if even that)?

Seriously, a friend's brother-in-law was a big city undercover narc, and that guy and his police buddies killed in cold blood on many occasions. They once handcuffed a guy to the outside of a car and dragged him around, when they got back the bloody cuffs were still attached to the car sans body. While several cops were participants or witnesses, never did any result in steps taken against the officers because the events never even got into any paperwork.

A few weeks ago a local police officer ran over a guy who was standing at a bus stop in full view of a bus load of passengers and other traffic. He backed up, put it in gear and drove off. Witnesses had to chase him down and confront him to get him to return to the scene. Not one local news agency reported the fact that it was hit and run, it was merely a simple unfortunate accident to them, even after the each of the reporters were subsequently informed by witnesses. The point here is that what you hear or read is not always what happened.

Are you one of those that finds it acceptible that one innocent man is punished as long as we get ten real bad guys? How about 2 for 8?

But, then again, for all we know, that man may infact have been a terrorist, deeply undercover, so much so that the authorities think he's innocent, and it was the luckiest of circumstance that this cop happened to shoot him.

 

[rikaaim]

A few weeks ago a local police officer ran over a guy who was standing at a bus stop in full view of a bus load of passengers and other traffic. He backed up, put it in gear and drove off. Witnesses had to chase him down and confront him to get him to return to the scene. Not one local news agency reported the fact that it was hit and run, it was merely a simple unfortunate accident to them, even after the each of the reporters were subsequently informed by witnesses. The point here is that what you hear or read is not always what happened.

What I'd like to know is how you can base your argument on "what if's" and hypothetical situations? The aforementioned post used logic and facts to depict and set up a reasonable argument that one could indeed counter and debate against in like terms, meaning using equal logic and factual statements. You say the only reason SeaCat says what he says is because he read the paper. What's wrong with that? Someone actually doing a little bit of research before posting an intelligent and reasonable response, how dare they?!

At any rate, yeah, you make some good points, hypothetically. Now, if you'll excuse me I might just go do a bio on this guy and find out some facts.

While I most heartedly agree that the news reports are not the best way to find information, all I'm really saying is that stating possible scenarios is not the best way to conduct an arugment.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Innocent people, do not in general run from the police. It would seem more likely that innocent of being involved with the bombings is more accurate. Semantics aside, you have to be pretty much in terror of your life to jump a barricade and throw yourself on a subway train in the current atmosphere in London.

No one wants to see people killed, be they victims of terrorist bombins or victims of the security measures put in place to try and prevent those bombings.

At the same time, I don't think anyone in thier right mind advocates not taking some measures to try and prevent future bombings.

In World War II, the Kamikaze killed alot of men and damaged a lot of ships, but the terror they inspired among sailors was all out of proportion to the actual damage done. In the west, we generally hold that life has value and that death is something to be avoided. Whenever we are faced with people who don't hold life in the same reguard, we are, to some degree, at a psycological disadvantage.

The only way to stop a suicide bomber is to kill him before he detonates his bomb. Just like the only way to stop a Kamikaze was to shoot him down before he could crash into a ship.

This man died needlessly, but, his death is totally understandable. Had he been a suicide bomber, with 50 or so pounds of plastic explosives packed into his jacket, the only method of saving the people on that train would have been to kill him before he could activate the charge. He wasn't one, but his actions didn't leave the police a lot of reason to believe he wasn't and when you are talking about the possible death of a trainload of innocents, you have to act quickly and your decision has to be based on the preponderance of evidence. If you wait for proof positive, you aren't stopping it, you are digging theough the wreckage hoping to find survivors.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

Anybody who has ever had anything they once said repeated against them knows that one of the most important considerations, after accuracy, is the context of that quote. The same is true of this incident.

Had the biggest story in London been their celebrating the acquisition of the Olympic games, and the worst offense London police had to guard against were people jumping the turnstile in the tubes to avoid paying their rightful fare, I would agree that the police acted with unwarranted force.

However, the big story is more than fifty deaths by suicide bombers, and all Londoners urged to heighten their vigilence to be on the look out for suspicious persons, suspicious activities, and suspicious parcels.

In his interactions with the police, Jean Charles de Menezes seems to have hit the suspicion jackpot.

“[O]fficers saw the man emerge from a house that they had been staking out as part of the hunt for the bombers. They said suspicions were aroused because he was wearing an unseasonably bulky jacket and acting oddly, so they followed him and eventually chased him into the station.”

Perhaps, had Menezes chosen to run elsewhere than into a subway while an alert was under way due to a second subway bombing attempt, his story might have ended less tragically.

Be fair and consider the opposite possibility.

Had the police held their fire and allowed one of their suspects to board a crowded subway car and there set off a bomb unhindered, how many would have offered posthumous praise for the police’s unswerving dedication to due process?

 

[neonlyte]

Sorry to feel the need to return to this.

My problem with this shooting, and many of the serious commentators I've been listening to and been reading over the weekend, is that there was something inconsistent about the shooting and the police reports from the very outset.

Disregard the initial press 'eye witness accounts' they were largely speculation, and by the way, I hope the 'eye witness' who saw Menzes bomb belt with wires sticking out has been dealt with.

The problem stems from Stockwell Station being one stop down from the Oval Station where there was a failed bomb attempt the previous day (Thursday). There was already and armed uniformed police guard at Stockwell. This guy was followed from his house, approximately 1km away, to the station, he was allowed to board a BUS, a further piece of evidence that only emerged this morning. The question is not so much whether he was a tragic victim but how he became a tragic victim.

Why were the armed police at Stockwell not alerted that a suspected terrorist was heading there way?

Why was he allowed to board a bus if he were a suspected terrorist?

Why did no one in the station hear any calls for him to stop?

The district he lives in is rife with crime, one of the top five locations in the UK for gun crime. It is also one of the most politically sensitive areas in UK experiencing many race riots largely based of a 'stop and search' policy that victimised blacks. This is the worst possible location for this tragedy to have happened because of the potential race implications.

We all know how this guy contributed to what happened to him, that is not in dispute, how it was allowed to happen and the bizarre decision making taken on the ground by those in pursuit is the issue that concerns, particularly in regard of how this tragedy will bear on the ability of the police to deal with future incidents.

It is worth noting that the Police command issued a statement Saturday morning insisting that Menezes was linked to terrorism, this after the same command informed the Brazilian Foreign Minister on Friday evening that there had been a tragic accident involving one of his citizens unconnected with terrorism. The B Foreign Minister confirmed this on live television broadcast.


On a related note, SO19 - the armed response unit of the police force, is comprised of police officers who volunteer for the duty. It is dangerous and unrewarding work even when successful. These guys operate under extreme stress. SO19 is in serious discussions with the government over standing orders and rules of engagement, so serious that the unit effectively shut down temporarily in November last year. SO19 wants wider rules of engagement to operate effectively, it is suggested but unconfirmed that officers require immunity from prosecution when unfortunate accidents occur. Two SO19 officers were arrested last week for the killing of a man in 1999 who they thought had turned a gun on them, it turned out to be a chair leg, but there were other very extenuating circumstances linked to that case, the man they shot was not the person they thought they were following, just happened to be with the other guys girlfriend. Last weeks tragedy and the arrest of the two officers last week may have very serious repercusions for recruitment to SO19 just at the time when we need.

 

[BlackShanglan]

This was a terrible loss and tragic event, and I agree with Neonlyte that I hope thorough investigation takes place. However, I also think that there are cases when, in the time given and with the information known at the moment, it may be impossible to make a decision that will later feel like the right thing. If you've just seen the man flee police and race into a subway and onto a car, and he's walked out of house where the last person who did something like that blew up the subway train, it's just damned difficult in the two or three seconds you've got while struggling with him to know if you can trust him far enough to let him try to move around when you are screaming at him not to.

What's scary to me is the thought of being that in that position - not necessarily that specific one, but any time when police need one to act swiftly. I would know that I hadn't done anything wrong, and probably mynatural instinct is to try to explain and to tell the police to let him up. Because I know that I aminnocent, that makes perfect sense to me. That's what we generally do when someone makes a mistake. But from the police point of view, I'm a criminal and possibly a dangerous one, and the only way I can show them that I'm not a threat is to follow their orders immediately. I worry about whether I would grasp their orders in the confusion of the moment fast enough to act through my surprise and shock, and whether something that to me (knowing that I am innocent) is quite innocuous might look like a threat to them.

Then there's the SO, who is hearing impaired. SO's chief worry is hearing the orders in the first place. SO is a very fair person at heart, and stated that the police really wouldn't be to blame if they didn't know the situation. Still, terrifying to think of being caught up in it.

Shanglan

 

[TheEarl]

I feel so terribly sorry for the man's parents. Mr de Menezes spoke English as a second language and it is more than feasible that he could have panicked on seeing plain-clothes policemen with guns approaching him and the part of his brain which translates English shut down. I can understand why he ran.

However, I cannot understand why people are coming down on the police for shooting him. As VB said - if he had been a terrorist and had blown himself and the policemen up, then we would now be yelling about the police being right there and not doing their job.

It takes a split second to detonate a bomb. You, as a policeman, have a split second to decide whether the man in front of you, who has acted suspiciously is about to kill you and everyone around you unless you kill him first. I may have some questions about the procedure leading up to the incident, but the shooting itself I am fully behind.

The Earl

 

[Liar]

During an organge, red, pink, indigo or mauve terrorism alert in the US (can't remember which is which), I have been lead to believe that any aircraft entering secured no-fly zones will be shot down.

Any speculation about what or what not the policemen there did wrong is at this point jus thtat, speculation through the filter of a jumpy media spin. So I'm not putting any blame on them. But maybe it should had been said louder from the beginning from the London police, that any person acting in a drastic manner runs the risk of being seen as a threat and dealt with accordingly.

 

[Brinnie]

Ok, I've made my decision, Japan, here I come!

 

[NoJo]

Ok, I've made my decision, Japan, here I come!

Don't forget to pack your gas mask.

 

[Tylow]

But maybe it should had been said louder from the beginning from the London police, that any person acting in a drastic manner runs the risk of being seen as a threat and dealt with accordingly.

In light of the last few days would it really be that difficult to understand that if your asked to stop by armed police in an area recently the victim of a series of bombings and alerts,that the last thing you should do is run.


just a thought

 

[SnoopDog]

In light of the last few days would it really be that difficult to understand that if your asked to stop by armed police in an area recently the victim of a series of bombings and alerts,that the last thing you should do is run.


just a thought

Of course, but do the police really have to pop a few rounds into his head just because he did?

Snoopy

 

[Tylow]

Of course, but do the police really have to pop a few rounds into his head just because he did?

Snoopy

No next time they'll just let him run off and drop his cargo............are you serious?

 

[SeaCat]

I hope and I pray that the people in this forum as well as many others have the ability and the chance to make these choices from the comfort of a chair in front of a computer, and not from the point in hell behind the receiver of a firearm in the heat of the moment. You can study theory all you want and for as long as you want but until you have been there you can't speak from experience, and that's what is important here.

Again my condolences to the family of the dead man, but also my sincerest condolences to the officers involved. They have to live with this for the rest of their lives.

Cat