This isn’t in the best taste really. It appeared in a UK paper and is based around the perceived hyper-paranoia of armed UK police in London who wrongly shot dead a Brazilian on the London Underground earlier in the year.
At the time there was outrage at the fact that the wrongly suspected terrorist who was held down by two plain clothed police officers while another plain clothed police officer emptied his gun into the head on the 27 year old man at point blank range.
Only a tiny proportion of UK police officers carry firearms in reflection of the fact that firearm incidents are few and far between in Great Britain.
After the shooting people were said to be very nervous about carrying backpacks on the London Underground as Police had initially given this as one of the reason they shot Jean Charles de Menezes a total of eight times with hollow point or dum-dum bullets (seven times in the head at point blank range and once in the shoulder).
Police eventually blamed ‘bad intelligence’ for the killing and apologized to the mans family.
—
UK Police shoot man ‘execution style’
Wrote the following comment on Dec 7, 2005 at 8:58 am
Geesh.. That’s overkill even by American standards.
Wrote the following comment on Dec 7, 2005 at 9:16 am
Okay Lovegrove, I’m sorry my writing upset you. Though sometimes we need to be upset don’t we. I am personally staggered that you haven’t heard about this. I was in California when it happened and they even reported it there.
First from the BBC regarding the use of dum dum bullets:
“The Metropolitan Police would not say if the bullets were used. There is no ban on police using such ammunition.”Read the full story from BBC news
As for this shooting being a fable, I did post a link on the original post to the full BBC news story. I assure you this is no fable. Though the eye witnesses who claimed the man jumped over a ticket barrier and ran from Police mysteriously withdrew their accounts when CCTV footage showed that the metropolitan police’s claims the man jumped barriers to be utterly untrue… “bad inteligence” again maybe?
Bad intelligence gets in everywhere. Iraq’s WMD’s, America’s use of chemical weapons on Iraqi’s, and UK police shooting of an innocent man. In fact it must have been bad intelligence that allowed 9/11 to go undetected despite the signs and warnings. Bummer.I did also say that the incident took place on a train.
Wrote the following comment on Dec 7, 2005 at 3:50 pm
Okay, just to clarify something which i thought I had been clear about above.The man the police shot dead was entering an underground station. The police had followed him from his home that they had been observing for a few days because they wrongly suspected he, or someone in his house, was a terrorist.
For reasons only known to the police they waited until he had ALREADY ENTERED THER STATION paid for a ticket and gone through the turnstiles. The CCTV footage shows this, however the Police first said they stopped him as he was entering the station and he ran into it and jumped over the barriers. The Police also claimed he was wearing a padded jacket and a backpack. He wasn’t wearing a padded jacket and there are conflicting reports about the backpack. He was then chased onto a crowded train.
Reports, though yet to be confirmed by the independent investigation (not the police investigation), say that he was bought down by a single shot to the shoulder, then two plain clothed police officers held him down while another one, in full view of many many members of the public, shot him at absolute point blank range in the head. That much is undisputed. The officer emptied his gun, and later in emerged that the bullets were ‘dum dums’, though again that much hasn’t been confirmed officially as yet, but crucially it has not been denied.
ALL of the police officers involved were big guys and NONE of them were in uniform. The guy they shot didn’t speak good English and was very probably concerned for his safety when several big guys NOT in uniform start running after him – wouldn’t you be!?
It may be well and good to say “Well this was okay because what if he HAD been a terrorist.” But seriously, do you think that is reason enough? That is a chilling thought, shoot first questions later, if you survive 8 bullets in you, 7 of them in your head!My objection is not the fact that a suspect was shot, but the manner in which he was shot. He was HELD DOWN and a gun was unloaded at point blank range into the mans head. This cannot be excused or allowed and the officers involved should face a trial. PLUS full account should be given of their instructions and training.
While it’s fair to have a tough line on terrorism, something I remind you that the UK has had for a long long time, it is not ever all right to execute people without due and fair process. If he had been a terrorist carrying a bomb and he had been executed in this way I would still be asking if perhaps the 6 bullets that followed the one that ended his life might be considered a complete and shocking over reaction.
Strange enough as we talk about this air marshals in the United States have shot and killed a man. I doubt he was held down and shot seven times in the head.Lastly Lovegrouve, I would urge you to brush up on your understanding of the process involved in a police complaint. We have the CPS and the PCA, both independent and both able to investigate the Police. Also if a force has to be investigated the PCA assign a special team from another force to do elements of the investigation if need be.The independent report into this incident is yet to publish its findings.
My concern here is that the growing paranoia of terrorism and the need for us to claim a big victory over them seems to be getting out of hand. It now seems that things that might otherwise be viewed as completely unacceptable (chemical weapon use in Iraq, UK Police shooting someone dead and dead 6 more times, the erosion of civil rights and the introduction of dangerous government schemes like ID cards) due to this perceived and inflated suggestion that there is an Islamic terrorist on every corner who wants to kill you.
These ‘insurgents’ are there, however I think you’ll find they would much rather set up a business and take your money rather then your life.
Wrote the following comment on Dec 7, 2005 at 8:29 am
Seven dum-dums to the head? Man…That’s overkill.
Apologized to the man’s family? Man…That’s lame.
The comic? Man…That’s the world we’ve come to live in.
Wrote the following comment on Dec 7, 2005 at 8:47 am
“held down by two plain clothed police officers while another … emptied his gun into the head on the 27 year old man at point blank range.” and the “seven dum-dums”.
Both somewhat unnecessary overstatements as they detract from the already tragic and avoidable incident. My immediate thoughts were that it is not the wisest thing for two policemen to do to hold down (presumably on the ground) as a guns is emptied into a head not so far from their own. Presumably, they would have been trained to know all about the even worse damage richochets can do. Moreover, as far as I know, dum-dums were banned at the Geneva Converence, so I have my doubts that the London police would be issued with them for use in a busy London city street. I am just complaining about what maybe fables which if so, can only create later doubts concerning the actual incident. I have read nothing along those lines and so references would be welcome if available.
Wrote the following comment on Dec 7, 2005 at 10:45 am
You didn’t upset me and I know about the incident. I was not suggesting that the shooting was a fable as you seem to think I was. I just had not heard about the “holding down” bit and the dum-dums. That may have come later when I was out of circulation for a while. And I hesitate to say it, but I thought it happened as he was trying to enter a busy Underground station. What would we have thought if he had not been shot, managed to get on a crowed train and had a bag full of explosives? A difficult decision to make for the officer involved. Maybe I am just being picky. Never mind, all such incidents should be fully and independantly invesitgated. One proiblem is that I believe the British police investigate themselves. Not the best way to engender confidence.
Wrote the following comment on Dec 7, 2005 at 1:45 pm
please say that those men are gonna pay for what they did? that’s horrible!