Jump to content

Police shootings - Jean-Claude de Menezes


Recommended Posts

I Know what your saying boyfriday, and dont get me wrong, i dont believe what happened was good, im just saying, maybe if he wasnt here working illegally then he wouldnt have got killed.

 

Well done for figuring this out Einstein. I did not know this.

 

Plus, lol @ Venoms post :hihi:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
What should they have done …………. “excuse me sir are you a terrorist” …….. I think its called the fog of war.

 

Well that is my opinion they had a split second decision to make, But open this thread to see everyones views as on the previuos thread there seems to be a lot of peaple thinking the police just go about shooting innocent people for no reason :loopy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, I started on the alibi link but thought I would comment on this too as I believe it is relevant.

 

If you have a split second to make a decision, your instincs and any drilled in training will be what your working from.

If the guy who was shot gave any indication that he was not just a regular guy then when it come to the crunch, the instincs of the officer will be he COULD be trouble and could leads to doubt and doubt leads to second guessing, second guessing in this case could have led to a hundred or so losing thier life.

 

So many people you see walking about try to make themselves look hard/mysterious/or just like trouble that it must be hard enough to differenciate between the bad guys and the wannabe bad boys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that is my opinion they had a split second decision to make, But open this thread to see everyones views as on the previuos thread there seems to be a lot of peaple thinking the police just go about shooting innocent people for no reason :loopy:

 

It was a lot more than that ……… they aren’t going to shoot someone on a hunch ……… the property was staked, he fitted the description, backpack, tube, ran when challenged ………. All the pieces where there to leave the officer on the spot with no alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, I started on the alibi link but thought I would comment on this too as I believe it is relevant.

 

If you have a split second to make a decision, your instincs and any drilled in training will be what your working from.

If the guy who was shot gave any indication that he was not just a regular guy then when it come to the crunch, the instincs of the officer will be he COULD be trouble and could leads to doubt and doubt leads to second guessing, second guessing in this case could have led to a hundred or so losing thier life.

 

So many people you see walking about try to make themselves look hard/mysterious/or just like trouble that it must be hard enough to differenciate between the bad guys and the wannabe bad boys.

 

Yes good point there are many People that do want to be 'bad boys' at the time and place this happend, this person may of just been in the wrong place at the wrong time acting in the wrong manner which left to his death. which is not good but the police made the write decision to shoot I believe.

 

As you see it all the time in society and there are complaints about it all the time when burglars rapists etc have got away and gone to commit further offences as the were not dealt with when police had first suspicion or 'leaks', eg I know this could take it of topic again but the baby p case if the police intervened then and the parents was found to be innocent they would probably receive no end of compensation. The police always seem to be in the wrong no matter what they do!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a lot more than that ……… they aren’t going to shoot someone on a hunch ……… the property was staked, he fitted the description, backpack, tube, ran when challenged ………. All the pieces where there to leave the officer on the spot with no alternative.

 

Er,. didn't the chap staking out the residence have a pee, and thus failed to identify the man in the slightest as he walked past?

 

A surveillance officer watching Mr de Menezes's flat was urinating in his van as the Brazilian walked by. "Frank" was unable to film the Brazilian as he left his flat because he only had one hand free.

 

He didn't run when challenged, he was allegedly challenged when he was sat reading his newspaper (that he bought before walking onto the platform)

Every commuter giving evidence said they did not hear officers shout "armed police" at Mr de Menezes - despite police claims to the contrary. Commuter Anna Dunwoodie even claimed officers were "out of control" before they opened fire. Rachel Wilson said she thought the men were "playing a game" with a friend until she saw her hands were spattered with blood.

 

.Ivor, an armed surveillance officer, was told to "wait" by seniors - despite being in a position to stop Mr de Menezes without armed challenge. The officer, who was carrying a Glock pistol, was within seconds of the Brazilian as he picked up a Metro newspaper.

 

He didn't fit the description, other than being male and non-white.

Mr de Menezes was identified as a suspect without anyone confirming a positive identification. A senior surveillance officer, known only as Pat, denied evidence given by Deputy Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick as he insisted he never said "they think it's him" before the Brazilian electrician's shooting.

 

That's just scratching the surface - the whole list of blunders becomes a tedious litany.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.