i don't see why a cop can't sacrifice his career when he makes a horrible mistake
As for higherups, if the cops were clearly told to shoot to kill under all circumstances involving transit and suspicious characters, then they need to rethink that policy.
I do ride the subway and bus every single day, and the fact that our transit system hasn't been attacked yet--and it most certainly will be--in no way mitigates the mistake these cops made.
The victim apparently discovered that he was being chased
It seems he was innocent of everything accept the minor offence of evading the police.
the 'shoot any suspicious man near public transit' policy
“If you want to understand police shootings, you have to understand how human beings make decisions under tight time constraints,” Klinger says. “What’s happening is guys are focusing on a very narrow slice of a visual field (in this case, the hands) and deciding what is dangerous and what is not.”
The address in Tulse Hill was identified from materials found inside the bombers' unexploded rucksacks on Thursday and was immediately put under surveillance. When Menezes, dressed in baseball cap, blue fleece and baggy trousers, emerged from it at around 10am on Friday, he was followed. When he headed for the nearby tube station, officers decided to arrest him. An armed unit took over, ordering him to stop. He did not. His unseasonally thick jacket apparently prompted concern that he had explosives strapped beneath.
Guidance to officers on the deployment of firearms was last updated by the Association of Chief Police Officers in February. Officers do not have to identify themselves before firing but it "should be considered". The advice concludes that an officer should not open fire unless "that officer is satisfied that nothing short of opening fire could protect the officer or another person from imminent danger to life or serious injury" .
Questions will be asked why the suspect was allowed to reach the underground platforms at Stockwell before he was apprehended.
Confidence has not been raised by the contradictory accounts of the incident from the police. In the immediate aftermath, the Met said the man had come under police observation after he "had emerged from a house that was itself under observation". His "clothing and his behaviour at the station" fuelled police suspicions and he was killed after fleeing the plainclothes officers when they challenged him.
But yesterday's statement said only that the man had "emerged from a block of flats under surveillance", suggesting that he may have been entirely innocent. Later the Met again amended their account, saying the man had emerged from a house in Tulse Hill.
The Met is also expected to face a claim for compensation and damages from the dead man’s family, which could amount to hundreds of thousands of pounds. Stephen Waldorf was awarded £120,000 after he was shot and beaten in 1983 when officers mistook him for a dangerous armed robber.
It may be months before the results of the investigation are known. ...
Key questions for the enquiry
At what point did police decide that the suspect was a potential suicide bomber?
Should they have arrested him before he boarded a bus on which he could have set off a device?
Police say that his clothing and behaviour at the station added to their suspicions. What did he do?
Armed uniformed officers often carry out this type of arrest. Why were they not available for what must have been a large operation?
Were the police clearly identifiable when they went to stop Mr Menezes?
Sir Ian Blair said that he understood the officers challenged the suspect. What did they say and when?
Was the force they used proportionate to the threat that Mr Menezes, who had fallen to the ground, seemed to pose?
"It took 26 minutes for Jean Charles de Menezes to get from his flat in Tulse Hill to the entrance of Stockwell Tube station. In that time, the 27-year-old electrician did not appear to realise that a team of 30 Scotland Yard officers was following his every move.
Police were staking out the red-brick block of flats in Scotia Road, London....There are eight separate flats in the block. When Mr de Menezes emerged from the communal front door just after 9.30am, the police must have realised from the photographs they carried that he was not one of the four bombers.
Even so, they decided that he was 'a likely candidate' to follow because of his demeanour and colour, so one group set off on foot after him.
As he waited at a nearby bus stop, the reconnaissance team sought urgent instructions on whether to challenge him or let him board a bus. They were worried about the bulky, padded jacket he had zipped up on such a warm morning.
The decision was taken to let him go, in the hope he might lead his shadows to the bombers. Mr de Menezes was heading to Willesden Green to fix an alarm system.
....By far the most controversial claim is from several witnesses who cast doubt on police statements that they shouted a warning or identified themselves before firing.
Lee Ruston, 32, who was on the platform, said he did not hear any of the three shout 'police' or anything like it. Mr Ruston, a company director, said he saw two officers put on blue baseball caps marked 'police' but that the frightened electrician could not have seen that because he had his back to the officers and was running with his head down."
Both Mr Straw and Mr Amorim said they believed he was living in the UK legally - though there are reports that his precise immigration status is still being checked.
"I haven't got any precise information on his immigration status, my understanding is he was here lawfully," Mr Straw said.
Nick Hardwick, head of the IPCC, said the commission needs to find out the truth of what happened "to ensure it can never happen again".
He said that "if people haven't acted in accordance with the law and their training" they would be held accountable.
« Older Calculator Haiku... | Yahoo provided "evidence" to p... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt