Police: Fatal Subway Shooting Was Mistake

[vern_humphrey]

Adam S:

As a Brit who uses a lot of public transport in Manchester (probably number 2 target for terrorists in Britain), i hope the shoot to kill policy remains, and if they saw someone suspicous wandering about Manchester Picadilly station who had just come from a flat suspected of containing terrorists, then asked him to stop several times, and he ran onto a train full of people, i hope theyd shoot him.

What if that man is you?

This shooting was wrong, and has hurt the war effort, not helped it.

 

[Adam_S]

vern humphrey:

What if that man is you?

This shooting was wrong, and has hurt the war effort, not helped it.

Wouldnt happen to me, if an armed police officer points a gun at me and tells me to stop, i stop - i dont run away. Fact.

Im not saying it has helped the war effort either, but when police have reasonable belief that a bloke is a suicide bomber, and that hes about to detonate, then blow his head off - dont allow a bomber to detonate for the purposes of political correctness.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Adam S:

Wouldnt happen to me, if an armed police officer points a gun at me and tells me to stop, i stop - i dont run away. Fact.

How do you know it wouldn’t? THIS time the guy was wearing a coat and ran – and got a death sentence without trial.

Next time, it might be something else that triggers a fatal shooting.
Adam S:

Im not saying it has helped the war effort either, but when police have reasonable belief that a bloke is a suicide bomber, and that hes about to detonate, then blow his head off - dont allow a bomber to detonate for the purposes of political correctness.

And don’t allow hysteria to govern police actions. This sort of thing discredits the security forces and makes it harder for them to gain the trust of the very people who can best help root out terrorists.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

vern humphrey:

He had been tackled, and had two officers on top of him when the third shot him in the head at contact range. He was in custody.

Where did this information come from? All I could find was a witness who said that the suspect had stumbled and fallen to his knees but that he was still away from the police and trying to get away.

It also said that 3 offices fired 5 shots, one hitting him in the head.

I have not seen anything like what you say happened.

But I as they have had homicide bombers I can see if they did not have full control of the individual why they might shoot him. All it takes is pushing one button to blow up his bomb.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Adam S:

Wouldnt happen to me, if an armed police officer points a gun at me and tells me to stop, i stop - i dont run away. Fact.

Im not saying it has helped the war effort either, but when police have reasonable belief that a bloke is a suicide bomber, and that hes about to detonate, then blow his head off - dont allow a bomber to detonate for the purposes of political correctness.

In fairness, I don’t think Vern can be called politically correct. I think he likes the military (at least) and certainly any security forces to avoid being loose cannons and conduct themselves according to some sort of rational rules of engagement.

I understand his pov and agree with it.

I also understand your pov and agree with that.

The trouble about this case is that the officers were, I believe, plainsclothes officers. Some of them were anyway. Others, I believe were wearing flak jackets. If memory serves me, there was a group of about 20 officers who gave initial chase although only a few reached the suspect in the train and immobilized him.

In the heat of the moment, where some officers are plainsclothes officers, it is quite conceivable that the suspect ‘made’ them as street thugs – certainly not as officers. I know that the officers said “handsup.” I do not know if the officers said something equivalent to “stop, police!” I do not know if some of the officers held up badges or other forms of identification.

It is quite plausible that the suspect thought that the plainsclothes officers were chasing him with criminal intent and that the officers in flak jackets were in turn chasing the plainsclothes officers. Consider 20 or so burly sorts, all with guns drawn, coming after you at speed. Most of us do not have the training to make lifesaving choices in such situations. Once the bad decision had been made to enter the Tube station, the suspect then was in a confined space: this exascerbated his fear and inability to think clearly.

If citizens experience problems identifying as police people pointing guns at them and saying ‘handsup’, then that is a very bad situation and must be remedied.

Certainly, if uniformed police officers pointed a gun at me, I would stop immediately and put my hands straight up in the air. When they had calmed down sufficiently, I would ask them to show their badges. I only pray to God that a British police officer never points a gun at me. I was not overly impressed with the conduct of the British forces in Ulster. Loose cannons about sums it up for me there. And I am not arguing for or against the British presence. Nor will I, because that’s another thread.

I am good with following the course of the internal investigation. The authorities have asked witnesses to come forward.

 

[vern_humphrey]

ByzCath:

Where did this information come from? All I could find was a witness who said that the suspect had stumbled and fallen to his knees but that he was still away from the police and trying to get away.

It comes from multiple sources, including the Associated Press, CNN and Fox News. I read stories where the police admitted tackling him and pinning him before he was shot.

ByzCath:

It also said that 3 offices fired 5 shots, one hitting him in the head.

Every version I’ve seen or read indicates all five shots were fired by one officer while the other two held him down.

ByzCath:

But I as they have had homicide bombers I can see if they did not have full control of the individual why they might shoot him. All it takes is pushing one button to blow up his bomb.

The FIRST thing you do when you grab a suspect – whether he’s a shoplifter or a terrorist – is control his hands. Grab, hold on, and snap the cuffs on.

Now it is possible these two officers did not have control of the victim’s hands, but that is the critical question. Did they have control of his hands when he was shot?

 

[Cockney_Clive]

Plainsclothes or not the Officers are supposed to go through a formula of words - "Stop! Armed Police Officers! If the suspect heeds these words the next set are along the lines of: "Hands on the back of the Neck! Get down on the floor! Do not move! Plains clothes Officers must have their badge and warrant card displayed prominently (usualkly pinned on) but obviously, if this was a hot pursuit, may not have happened.

This guy might have mistaken the police for local thugs but even in south London I don’t know of many villains, even drug dealers who would run around with body armour on, plus the body armour has the words ‘POLICE’ printed on it back and front

According to friends and family this guy had excellent English; had worked in London as an Electrician for at least three years so misunderstanding what was shouted at him cannot be the reason. But he ran and he didn’t just run anywhere. According to an interview I read, the Police were concerned about his actions because he ran into the station. He didn’t run randomly. To the officers this was confirmation that what they had here was a suicide bomber. A Police Officer in that situation has a second to assess, decide, and act. No more. With 20/20 Hindsight we can all see the mistakes but not when you are right in it.

I guess that the issue of control is going to be one of the issues looked at in the investigation. In what ways, if any, were the officers really in control of the situation overall. Did they make a proper assessment; did they scrupiously follow the procedures; why did they make the decisions they made. Control at the point of contact will be the biggy.On the face of it, these officers were not in control of the suspect at the critical point when he was down on the floor of the subway car. And if not, why not will be the big question.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Thanks, Cockney, for this additional information.
Cockney Clive:

Plainsclothes or not the Officers are supposed to go through a formula of words - "Stop! Armed Police Officers!

Is this official policy? I know we here in Canada are used to watching Law and Order and our expectations are formed by that.
Cockney Clive:

If the suspect heeds these words the next set are along the lines of: "Hands on the back of the Neck! Get down on the floor! Do not move!

Again, it makes sense to me and it is certainly what I have seen on CSI. Is it official policy? I am going to do a bit of Googling to find out. Can you as well, Cockney?
Cockney Clive:

Plains clothes Officers must have their badge and warrant card displayed prominently (usualkly pinned on)

Would that not negate the purpose of being in plain clothes?
Cockney Clive:

but obviously, if this was a hot pursuit, may not have happened.

Yes, the ‘heat of the moment’ seems to be a big factor in this.
Cockney Clive:

This guy might have mistaken the police for local thugs but even in south London I don’t know of many villains, even drug dealers who would run around with body armour on, plus the body armour has the words ‘POLICE’ printed on it back and front

The plain clothes officers would not have had body armour (except for a bulletproof vest underneath clothes) and certainly not have had ‘POLICE’ on anything.
Cockney Clive:

According to friends and family this guy had excellent English; had worked in London as an Electrician for at least three years so misunderstanding what was shouted at him cannot be the reason.

This is useful information.
Cockney Clive:

But he ran and he didn’t just run anywhere.

Yes. Very disturbing. It was either a very unwise (perhaps even irrational) last-minute decision or it implied criminal intent.
Cockney Clive:

According to an interview I read, the Police were concerned about his actions because he ran into the station. He didn’t run randomly. To the officers this was confirmation that what they had here was a suicide bomber. A Police Officer in that situation has a second to assess, decide, and act. No more.

I gather too, that there were leadership instructions to take a head shot. I heard this on tv and I am pretty sure it was either Iain Blair or one of the other heads of security. But let me do a Google and verify.
Cockney Clive:

With 20/20 Hindsight we can all see the mistakes but not when you are right in it.

So true. But it may also lead to bad instructions. If that is the case, then the investigation will uncover it and hopefully it will be remedied.
Cockney Clive:

I guess that the issue of control is going to be one of the issues looked at in the investigation. In what ways, if any, were the officers really in control of the situation overall. Did they make a proper assessment; did they scrupiously follow the procedures; why did they make the decisions they made. Control at the point of contact will be the biggy.On the face of it, these officers were not in control of the suspect at the critical point when he was down on the floor of the subway car. And if not, why not will be the big question.

Also, what exactly were the procedures? Vern says the general rule is to grab the hands and cuff em. Were there other directives? Let me see what I turn up Chez Google.

Also Cockney, which are the British news sources to stay away from?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

OK. Here is what I got from the London Times Online:

Shoot to kill policy = headshot: “The Met issued new guidance to firearms officers after 9/11, directing them to shoot a suspected suicide bomber in the head to prevent him detonating any explosive.”

Suspect wore quilted jacket in summer heat: “The officers are thought to have feared that Menezes, who was wearing a quilted jacket on a summer’s day, might have been concealing a bomb.”

Officers had already followed suspect 3 miles before he entered Tube: “Originally, police had said the man walked from a property in Stockwell to the local Tube station. But later the statement was changed to say he had been under surveillance during a three-mile bus journey from his home to the station.”

Suspect understood officer’s requests to stop: “He had good English, better than mine,” said Avila. “The police stopped him sometimes, because he used the Underground every day, and asked him some things, and every time they would tell him ‘thank you’, and ‘sorry for stopping you’.”

Suspect was legal Brazilian immigrant electrician: “He was named as Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old electrician from Brazil who had been working legally in Britain for three years. It is believed he lived with relatives in Brixton, south London.”

 

[Ani_Ibi]

**The Daily Mirror **goes into more detail about the “double tap” procedure:

“Scotland Yard sent a message to the Met’s elite SO19 firearms unit on Thursday minutes after the four bombs exploded on the underground and the No 30 bus.”

“They were instructed to launch Operation Kratos - codename for secret guidelines on handling suicide killers.”

"The marksmen were briefed by officers who had met their counterparts in Israel and picked up tips gleaned from the dealing with Hamas bombers."

“Armed with Glock pistols, Heckler and Koch MP5 semi-automatic machine-guns, the unit also carry G3 short-barrelled rifles which can be concealed in shoulder holsters.”

"The Met team normally aim at the chest - but they were ordered to fire at the head as a blow to the torso risks setting off explosives strapped to the body and is less likely to cause instant death."

"Marksmen were also told to use the “double tap” procedure - two shots in rapid succession which ensure the suspect is instantly brought down."

 

[Ani_Ibi]

The Daily Record reiterates much of what the Mirror says, but adds this from the Police Manual:

In the police manual of guidance on the use of firearms, officers are told the right to life is sanctified in law except to protect a person from unlawful violence, to make an arrest or prevent an escape and to quell riots.

The manual adds: 'You may open fire against a person only when absolutely necessary after traditional methods have tried and failed, or must, by the very nature of the circumstances, be unlikely to succeed if tried.

‘To sum up, a police officer should not decide to 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.’

But the manual specifically advises officers they are allowed to shoot in circumstances such as those the plainclothes officers found themselves in at Stockwell yesterday.

It says: ‘An example of circumstances where directed fire may be necessary would be in siege or terrorist incidents, e.g. suicide bombers.’

London Mayor Ken Livingstone: “If you are dealing with someone who might be a suicide bomber if they remain conscious they could trigger explosives or whatever device is on them. Therefore overwhelmingly in these circumstances it has to be a shoot-to-kill policy.” Livingstone said this at one of his televised press conferences.

 

[grotto]

I blame terrorists for the man’s death. He either was one or he appeared to act like one due to any number of factors and was subsequently killed. The police will need to evaluate their skilled actions but they cannot be held to an unreal expectation during those circumstances of kill or be killed. That only happens in the movies - in real life its a consequence of war. War is what we are involved in, not a criminal case, riot, or violent demonstration. People die and will continue to die due to terrorist attacks on random innocents. They have no care for harmless people - only their sick ideology and perverted sense of being “special” matters to them.
Their specialness has been willingly claimed by each one that they shall KILL other people - plain and simple - the more the merrier! Most have gone to “schools” to learn how to do this and their efforts have been amply funded by extremely rich from oil profits, drugs and other avenues of corruption.
All the things we have learned about them, and we don’t want to pay attention. The media would rather jump on the killing of a person in the fog of war and turn it into some kind of negligence; like the police involved just insisted on killing him. Get real media!
Who is to blame? Only one answer - terrorists!

 

[vern_humphrey]

The killing of an apparently innocent man will be a serious setback in what is already a difficult inquiry.

This is a key point to keep in mind. Remember the story of the Duc D’Engien? He was the heir apparent to the French throne. Napoleon had him kidnapped from the Netherlands where he was inoffensively growning roses, and had him executed when he arrived in Paris.

That provided a lot of propaganda ammuntion for Napoleon’s foes. At one point, something Tallyrand said hit Napoleon the wrong way.

“So, M’sieu Tallyrand! You too say it was a crime!”

“Your Majesty, it was worse than a crime. It was a blunder.:”

 

[Ani_Ibi]

vern humphrey:

This is a key point to keep in mind. Remember the story of the Duc D’Engien? He was the heir apparent to the French throne. Napoleon had him kidnapped from the Netherlands where he was inoffensively growning roses, and had him executed when he arrived in Paris.

That provided a lot of propaganda ammuntion for Napoleon’s foes. At one point, something Tallyrand said hit Napoleon the wrong way.

“So, M’sieu Tallyrand! You too say it was a crime!”

“Your Majesty, it was worse than a crime. It was a blunder.:”

I have no problem agreeing that the shooting has been a setback – or ‘blunder’ selon le bon M’sieu Tallyrand.

It seems now the fault has narrowed with the assessment on the part of the officers that the suspect was indeed a possible armed terrorist or with leadership whose directives were not specific enough in terms of exceptions or both.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Ani Ibi:

I have no problem agreeing that the shooting has been a setback – or ‘blunder’ selon le bon M’sieu Tallyrand.

It seems now the fault has narrowed with the assessment on the part of the officers that the suspect was indeed a possible armed terrorist or with leadership whose directives were not specific enough in terms of exceptions or both.

I agree. And that ought to be the point of departure.

If the British authorities are wise, they will recognize that the outcome was unacceptable, and develop a strategy to prevent it from happening again. If they are not wise, they will retreat into defensiveness and fail to correct the problem.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

vern humphrey:

I agree. And that ought to be the point of departure.

If the British authorities are wise, they will recognize that the outcome was unacceptable, and develop a strategy to prevent it from happening again. If they are not wise, they will retreat into defensiveness and fail to correct the problem.

There is also the possibility where could handcuff their officers to such a point that they will stop a homicide bomber but due to fear they will not stop him and many more will die than should have.

 

[Cockney_Clive]

It has just been announced that the victim of this shooting was an illegal immigrant to UK.

He had entered country 4 years ago on a student Visa (12 months, no employment rights) but had reamined behind after his studies and gained employment.

This may be the reason he ran away from Police as he was fearful he would be deported.

His family have announced they are to sue Metropilitan Police Service.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

I gather that there has been a demonstration against police action in this case, Cockney? The government of Brazil is displeased? And that a third suspect has been arrested?

 

[MikeWM]

If they were so concerned he was a suicide bomber, I don’t quite see why they let him do a 3 mile bus journey first (after all buses have been targets too).

I also don’t see how they hadn’t surrounded him properly if they were going to stop him at the tube station.

Why let him get as far as the tube?

It seems to me that the whole operation was going wrong, and the officers started to panic and over-react.

As to the actions of the guy, I’m not convinced I know what I’d do if the current attacks had got to me, I was in a tube station and a lot of plain-clothes guys started shouting and waving guns around
I might well consider running too - fight or flight, it’s a natural response.

Not very reassuringly, the head of the Metropolitan Police has said ‘someone else could be shot’ while they track down the terrorists. So now Londoners have to look out for terrorists and the Police!

Mike

 

[Ani_Ibi]

MikeWM:

So now Londoners have to look out for terrorists and the Police! Mike

Quite. Is there anyone from London here who has heard from the authorities about what they should do if stopped by police verbally, or at gunpoint? What have you been told about how to identify a police officer if he/she is plainsclothes? For petes sake, what are the rules?