Nice to see the great british public have the luxury of hindsight to make it easy to slag off the police, when those self same critics are no doubt the ones that "Walk on by" take the harry Stanley case, where there has been case after appeal after case after appeal utilising the countries best legal brains who after 8 years have failed to come to agreement on a decision the firearms officer had less than a second to make.Rather than winge offer some solutions you losers.
Nice to see the great british public have the luxury of hindsight to make it easy to slag off the police, when those self same critics are no doubt the ones that "Walk on by" take the harry Stanley case, where there has been case after appeal after case after appeal utilising the countries best brains who after 8 years have failed to come to agreement on a decision to firearms office had less than a second to make.Rather than winge offer some solutions you losers.
yes, it has been established that the police didn't follow the correct procedures, but frankly, given the atmosphere at the time and the intelligence passed down to the officers on the ground it's understandable.
Although regrettable and very sad, I'd rather he was shot and killed than the police risking him being a suicide bomber and trying arrest him; for the greater good.
@Tomst7 If the police did more bad than good it would be a terrorist organisation. The point is not only the killing here. The point is also the checks and balances of a procedure that was risky. It concluded the only way it would: by the killing of an innocent person. Accountability is very important. Somebody has to have a look into police procedures. They might be flawed. Incidentally, the real culprits were caught without a shot being fired.
@Tomst7 You say that, while it's not your family member that died...if they were worrying about him killing people, they could have stoped him while they've been folowing him, without his knowledge, but what they did was simply an execution...for some reason they were sure he was guilty, and were driven to kill him at all costs...and get a shinny medal for it
@lcg3092 you simply demonstrate a total lack of rational thought..........
they suspected him of being a suicide bomber, you can't approach them as though they're suspected of shoplifting. "excuse me sir do you mind if i check your bag?" not really going to work is it? in that situation the only sensible course of action is to completely eliminate any potential threat. no one's denying it was a tragedy but it's a hell of a lot less of one than if they'd been right and done nothing.
@elmski1987 Yes completly lack or rational thought...i mean they did tackle him to the ground, and then shot him (i guess there are other options than asking him if he is a terrorist)
They should only execute a person if they are sure it is a terrorist, if they suspect him they should stop him, stun him, imobilize him...i can't see how they could posibly be sure that Menezes was the terrorist
Just saying the other is stupid doesn't make you right, stick with the arguments and loose the insults
and you can't stun potential suicide bombers because spasming can cause them to detonate any device they may have. the entire point is to completely eliminate any chance of that happening. no matter what alternative you suggest it isn't possible in the case of suicide bombers for that exact reason. all they can do is totally destroy the nervous system, its cold, brutal and lays open the possibility of, as in this case, tragedy. but sadly that is an inescapable fact.
two important points to consider, why did they not stop him before getting on to the packed bus? surely if they thought he was a suicide bomber they could not take a chance with him going on a bus. Second how do you confuse a white men with a black, a 6 foot skinny black men with a 5 foot 6 inch stocky white guy. the descriptions couldn't be more different if you tried.
@Tomst7 The whole operation was botched. So we are safer (from the police botchig up procedures) a public enquiry was held in 2009 and the police was found guilty. In 2001 we invaded Afghanistan and in 2003 Iraq. The Menezes killing happend in 2005. Plenty of time for the police to get their terrorist operations up to scratch. In the end they reacted like amateurs..
its unfortunate but getting off the bus, then getting straight back on it (because of the station closure) sealed his fate - that is a standard way of losing people who are tailing you, the police took it to mean he knew they were following him and changed his target.
one of those little things that can have such a huge repercussion.
it is a failiure of intelligence services, not of the officers on the ground.
The fate of Menezes was sealed when some shadowy UK officials behind closed doors decided that the way to deal with a suspect was to pump 7 bullets into his head and ask questions later.
That's OK in China or Iran but not in the UK.
Here, we still ask questions before we shoot. The policy of 'kill first, ask later' has been discarded as anti-democratic.
But, after the G20 demos, we know the police was out of control anway.
that is the policy of pretty much every western nation when it comes to dealing with suicide bombers - how are you supposed to challenge them? the moment you do they will detonate whatever (if any) device they are carrying. one must assume they are carrying a bomb with intent to set it off. the security forces have to eliminate the possibility of an intentional detonation or a reflex one - the only way to do this is to completely obliterate any vestige of life in the target
whats the problem about the Police not alerting de Menezes to their presence? surely thatd be the last thing you'd want a suspected suicide bomber to know?
If we choose to live in a democratic state the police should first make sure the suspect is carrying a bomb. Now, it didn't seem possible for him to carry a bomb. And he couldn've been challenged well before he reached a busy place, as the film shows. In the end the police know that you can be killed in the service of the law. Firefighters also know that they could be killed in a fire. That doesn't stop the going to a fire and dealing with it.
no it doesnt stop firefighters going into a fire - they are also equipped with the means to extinguish the fire............as were the police officers in Stockwell station....
do people think its outrageous for firefighters to USE their hoses, etc? of course not
so whats the difference? both are given the means to make themselves and the public safe yet only one of them (it seems) are allowed to use them
@elmski1987 Ok, lets do this, i'll get a gun, you'll get a fire hose, i'll shoot you seven times in the head while you try to "shoot" at a fire, then we'll figure out the difference
The recent public enquiry with a jury and a coroner concluded that in all probability the officers who shot him DID NOT shout a warning and that he did not move instants before he was shot.
This enquiry gave the most clear indication that the whole operation was an out of control shambles.
Unfortunately Mr De Menezes paid that shambles with his life. For not fault of his own.
Yes, well, it was an over-reaction to say the least, but consider the scenario of the latest bombings back then. It's insane how this could happen, I know... But you have to consider both parts. An unforgivable misstake still.
The public enquiry was designed to find out what happened. Not only to do justice to Mr De Menezes but to find out if the Met Police was as professional as we thought in these kinds of situations.
They were not, according to the enquiry findings. The Met Police had to re-organise and re-train otherwise it could happen again.
It seems things have got out of hand. Now not even the UK Parliament is sacrosanct and police can walk in and arrest an MP without a warrant. Thank God they didn't shoot him.
What in God's name were these police men thinking? Is this what this country is coming to, murder, terrorism, execution...all on the strength of a photo? Is this all our intelligence can come up with?
God help all those involved because this man did NOT deserve to meet his death this day, and not in this way either.
My heart goes to his family and friends, I cant imagine what torment they are going through. I dont care that they aren't british they are still human being with human rights.
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice to see the great british public have the luxury of hindsight to make it easy to slag off the police, when those self same critics are no doubt the ones that "Walk on by" take the harry Stanley case, where there has been case after appeal after case after appeal utilising the countries best legal brains who after 8 years have failed to come to agreement on a decision the firearms officer had less than a second to make.Rather than winge offer some solutions you losers.
CheekyPetes1979 7 months ago
Nice to see the great british public have the luxury of hindsight to make it easy to slag off the police, when those self same critics are no doubt the ones that "Walk on by" take the harry Stanley case, where there has been case after appeal after case after appeal utilising the countries best brains who after 8 years have failed to come to agreement on a decision to firearms office had less than a second to make.Rather than winge offer some solutions you losers.
CheekyPetes1979 7 months ago
You take out the theart and thats what they did !
3690dorr 1 year ago
yes, it has been established that the police didn't follow the correct procedures, but frankly, given the atmosphere at the time and the intelligence passed down to the officers on the ground it's understandable.
elmski1987 1 year ago
Although regrettable and very sad, I'd rather he was shot and killed than the police risking him being a suicide bomber and trying arrest him; for the greater good.
Tomst7 2 years ago
@Tomst7: Please send us your address. We'll see what we can do.
documentaryunit 2 years ago
@documentaryunit Hilarious.
The police do a lot more good than bad. Granted it was a mistake, but I stand by my original pov.
Tomst7 1 year ago
@Tomst7 If the police did more bad than good it would be a terrorist organisation. The point is not only the killing here. The point is also the checks and balances of a procedure that was risky. It concluded the only way it would: by the killing of an innocent person. Accountability is very important. Somebody has to have a look into police procedures. They might be flawed. Incidentally, the real culprits were caught without a shot being fired.
newsreeldemocracy 1 year ago
@Tomst7 You say that, while it's not your family member that died...if they were worrying about him killing people, they could have stoped him while they've been folowing him, without his knowledge, but what they did was simply an execution...for some reason they were sure he was guilty, and were driven to kill him at all costs...and get a shinny medal for it
lcg3092 1 year ago
@lcg3092 you simply demonstrate a total lack of rational thought..........
they suspected him of being a suicide bomber, you can't approach them as though they're suspected of shoplifting. "excuse me sir do you mind if i check your bag?" not really going to work is it? in that situation the only sensible course of action is to completely eliminate any potential threat. no one's denying it was a tragedy but it's a hell of a lot less of one than if they'd been right and done nothing.
elmski1987 1 year ago
@elmski1987 Yes completly lack or rational thought...i mean they did tackle him to the ground, and then shot him (i guess there are other options than asking him if he is a terrorist)
They should only execute a person if they are sure it is a terrorist, if they suspect him they should stop him, stun him, imobilize him...i can't see how they could posibly be sure that Menezes was the terrorist
Just saying the other is stupid doesn't make you right, stick with the arguments and loose the insults
lcg3092 1 year ago
@lcg3092 insults? ok?!?
and you can't stun potential suicide bombers because spasming can cause them to detonate any device they may have. the entire point is to completely eliminate any chance of that happening. no matter what alternative you suggest it isn't possible in the case of suicide bombers for that exact reason. all they can do is totally destroy the nervous system, its cold, brutal and lays open the possibility of, as in this case, tragedy. but sadly that is an inescapable fact.
elmski1987 1 year ago
*-+@lcg3092
two important points to consider, why did they not stop him before getting on to the packed bus? surely if they thought he was a suicide bomber they could not take a chance with him going on a bus. Second how do you confuse a white men with a black, a 6 foot skinny black men with a 5 foot 6 inch stocky white guy. the descriptions couldn't be more different if you tried.
TheRevert2islam 10 months ago
@Tomst7 The whole operation was botched. So we are safer (from the police botchig up procedures) a public enquiry was held in 2009 and the police was found guilty. In 2001 we invaded Afghanistan and in 2003 Iraq. The Menezes killing happend in 2005. Plenty of time for the police to get their terrorist operations up to scratch. In the end they reacted like amateurs..
newsreeldemocracy 1 year ago
Boring!
02dartda 2 years ago
its unfortunate but getting off the bus, then getting straight back on it (because of the station closure) sealed his fate - that is a standard way of losing people who are tailing you, the police took it to mean he knew they were following him and changed his target.
one of those little things that can have such a huge repercussion.
it is a failiure of intelligence services, not of the officers on the ground.
elmski1987 2 years ago
The fate of Menezes was sealed when some shadowy UK officials behind closed doors decided that the way to deal with a suspect was to pump 7 bullets into his head and ask questions later.
That's OK in China or Iran but not in the UK.
Here, we still ask questions before we shoot. The policy of 'kill first, ask later' has been discarded as anti-democratic.
But, after the G20 demos, we know the police was out of control anway.
Next time, get the suspect in a quiet road.
newsreeldemocracy 2 years ago
that is the policy of pretty much every western nation when it comes to dealing with suicide bombers - how are you supposed to challenge them? the moment you do they will detonate whatever (if any) device they are carrying. one must assume they are carrying a bomb with intent to set it off. the security forces have to eliminate the possibility of an intentional detonation or a reflex one - the only way to do this is to completely obliterate any vestige of life in the target
elmski1987 2 years ago 5
@elmski1987 I do that all the time. I'm a lucky person. I could've ended up with seven bullets in my brain.
newsreeldemocracy 1 year ago
whats the problem about the Police not alerting de Menezes to their presence? surely thatd be the last thing you'd want a suspected suicide bomber to know?
elmski1987 2 years ago
If we choose to live in a democratic state the police should first make sure the suspect is carrying a bomb. Now, it didn't seem possible for him to carry a bomb. And he couldn've been challenged well before he reached a busy place, as the film shows. In the end the police know that you can be killed in the service of the law. Firefighters also know that they could be killed in a fire. That doesn't stop the going to a fire and dealing with it.
newsreeldemocracy 2 years ago
no it doesnt stop firefighters going into a fire - they are also equipped with the means to extinguish the fire............as were the police officers in Stockwell station....
do people think its outrageous for firefighters to USE their hoses, etc? of course not
so whats the difference? both are given the means to make themselves and the public safe yet only one of them (it seems) are allowed to use them
elmski1987 2 years ago
@elmski1987 Ok, lets do this, i'll get a gun, you'll get a fire hose, i'll shoot you seven times in the head while you try to "shoot" at a fire, then we'll figure out the difference
lcg3092 1 year ago
@elmski1987 You said it right "a suicide bomber". That's an important clue.
newsreeldemocracy 1 year ago
@elmski1987 Ok, so if they didn't warned him, they shouldn't have stated that they gave several warnings...simple as that
lcg3092 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
he did have warnings shouted at him before he got on the train and decided to run.
mistanewmarch 2 years ago
The recent public enquiry with a jury and a coroner concluded that in all probability the officers who shot him DID NOT shout a warning and that he did not move instants before he was shot.
This enquiry gave the most clear indication that the whole operation was an out of control shambles.
Unfortunately Mr De Menezes paid that shambles with his life. For not fault of his own.
newsreeldemocracy 2 years ago 8
ok then but this sort of stuff like innocents being shot by co19 doesnt happen every day. someone would get shot some day.
mistanewmarch 2 years ago
9/11 didn't happen everyday but one event scared a shit load of people
Search for terrorstorm
SeanRenn123 2 years ago
It's human to err. It's inhuman to continue erring.
newsreeldemocracy 2 years ago
We always think that bad things only happen to other people until we get shot ourselves. So we better stop it now.
newsreeldemocracy 2 years ago
what, shooting people? some people need to be shot.
scottishlad1987 1 year ago
@scottishlad1987 Yeah. Like you?
newsreeldemocracy 1 year ago
@mistanewmarch Are you offering yourself as a volunteer?
newsreeldemocracy 1 year ago
Yes, well, it was an over-reaction to say the least, but consider the scenario of the latest bombings back then. It's insane how this could happen, I know... But you have to consider both parts. An unforgivable misstake still.
apemant 3 years ago 2
Thanks for your comments. The purpose of this case was to identify if the police had the right procedures in place to deal with the eventuality.
Because we live in a democratic society we have identified the fact that the police DID NOT have the right procedures in place.
If we had not done that, then probably more innocent people wouldn've died as a result.
Interestingly, the real culprits were caught without a single shot being fired. The whole thing of 'Kratos' was total nonsense.
documentaryunit 3 years ago
The public enquiry was designed to find out what happened. Not only to do justice to Mr De Menezes but to find out if the Met Police was as professional as we thought in these kinds of situations.
They were not, according to the enquiry findings. The Met Police had to re-organise and re-train otherwise it could happen again.
newsreeldemocracy 2 years ago
It seems things have got out of hand. Now not even the UK Parliament is sacrosanct and police can walk in and arrest an MP without a warrant. Thank God they didn't shoot him.
documentaryunit 3 years ago
What in God's name were these police men thinking? Is this what this country is coming to, murder, terrorism, execution...all on the strength of a photo? Is this all our intelligence can come up with?
God help all those involved because this man did NOT deserve to meet his death this day, and not in this way either.
My heart goes to his family and friends, I cant imagine what torment they are going through. I dont care that they aren't british they are still human being with human rights.
jskc07 3 years ago 9
I'ts interesting that nobody conducted an official TV reconstruction of this event.
BBCViewers 3 years ago 2