Jean Charles de Menezes - Coroner's summing up.

[David Morton]

Guys here in the UK - please consider my plea.

In his summing up in the Jean Charles de Menezes inquest, the coroner rules the jury cannot consider unlawful killing.
The only other verdicts tha can be considered are Lawful Killing or an Open Verdict.
I am totally incensed by this coroner who I feel has ignored much of the evidence from members of the public who were in the tube train at the time. We are increasingly being 'controlled' from on high by stupid ignorant hoodlums who seemingly cannot string two words together masquerading as armed police. Total lack of control by the policewomen in charge BBC NEWS | UK | Profile: Commander Cressida Dick is also evident IMHO. It smacks of total negligence and dereliction of duty on her part.

I last felt this way when Thatcher's Northwood 'commanders' let one of HM Submarines HMS Conqueror shoot a torpedoe at the Argentine warship Belgrano. Why, - because it was a total lack of control in terms of Rules of Engagement by those in charge and we, as a country, paid a very dear price.
If you feel as angry as I do about this coroners direction to the Jury, write to the Lord Chief Justice , Lord Judge WriteToThem - Now write your message to Lord Judge, House of Lords and tell him what you think.

Please write. Travesties of justice like this cannot go unchecked.

 

[Price Walton]

Dave,

I don't know enough about de Menezes' case to make a comment on him. Can you confirm - this was the guy shot carrying a backpack full of dirty washing?



On the subject of the Belgrano, it was one of the scenarios studied as part of my training.

The sinking of the Belgrano was within the bounds of international law. Notice had been provided to the Argentine government of the British Government's attitude to Argentine aircraft and vessels and a strategic decision was taken.

The Belgrano was travelling away from the islands at the time. The Belgrano's captain has since been stated that the 3 vessels in the group were positioning for a coordinated movement soon afterwards. As the course of the ship could be reversed in about 1 minutes (a rate one turn for the aviators) the direction of travel (the tactical element) is insignificant against the position and capability of the vessel (the strategic element).

The only circumstances under which a decision may have been taken not to proceed at a tactical level (on board the submarine) would be if the vessel showed indications of distress or was proceeding to the aid of a vessel in distress.


The principle and process is identical to the Exocet strikes on the British fleet, so no Dave, a state of war existed and the sinking of the Belgrano was a lawful action.

 

[David Morton]

Quite a few case studies were used in training in the R.A.F., and quite a few were discredited subsequently. Please read the latest from Sir Lawrence Freedman.

Key decision makers unaware that the ship was sailing away from the Falklands when order was given

According to the British historian Sir Lawrence Freedman, in a new book written in 2005, neither Margaret Thatcher nor the Cabinet was aware of the Belgrano's change of course before the cruiser was attacked, as information from HMS Conqueror was not passed on to the MoD or Rear Admiral Sandy Woodward (commander of the RN task force)

IMHO - I think that the rules were changed - possibly retrospectively - to protect the RN's position.

Anyway, the point I am trying to bring home about this young Brazilian guy
is he was wrongly identified and executed in public and I contend this was unlawful. The police, from the Gold Commander Cressida Dick in command in the the control room during the operation to the guys that shot and killed Menezes all had falsely identified him as a suicide bomber.

 

[David Morton]

p.s. - she was subsequently promoted to Deputy Assistant Commissioner of Police as well. What goes round will come round.
p.p.s I wasn't aware that females could join the Freemasons - because that is how the upper ranks of the Police and just about every other large operation is run in this country.

 

[Terry Oxandale]

Jeez, and I thought (my opinion only) we had problems over here with abuse of authority. They can do no wrong as long as they "feel" there is a theat.

 

[Ron Earp]

Story certainly seems different than the one that was widely circulated at the time.

Jean Charles de Menezes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[David Morton]

Ron,
Thank you for high lighting that. That so many incompetent people were in the chain of command, so many people lied, some were absent from their post at the critical moment ( in the toilet.....) and even to the point of
people changing vital evidence subsequent to the event means only a verdict of UNLAWFUL KILLING could be correct. If I was on the Jury, I would have walked out at that point when the coroner made that statement and even attempt to coerse others to do the same.
This stinks of a directive from on high, making sure the Police and the Special Forces walk free.
Dave M

 

[Price Walton]

p.s. - she was subsequently promoted to Deputy Assistant Commissioner of Police as well. What goes round will come round.
p.p.s I wasn't aware that females could join the Freemasons - because that is how the upper ranks of the Police and just about every other large operation is run in this country.

Is that why you're not Snr Management at BA?oke:


BTW - I remember being told there has long been a female element associated with the Masons. I have no idea of it's name though.




Steering back to the Belgrano for a moment,

The course I did was titled, according to rough memory, "Impacts of strategic goals on tactical decisions". Now I'm not attempting to present myself as a :scholar: here, but the information available (we were encouraged to search for our own sources - the internet was only a few years old at the time) supported the position that the strategic decision made at cabinet level was valid, despite the tactical manoeuverings of the assets involved. Would a Sea Harrier not have been attacked simply because it was returning to it's ship - ie flying away from the Islands?

Incidentally, among the information we had to hand was a statement from the Belgrano's captain and another from the Argentine government accepting that the sinking of the Belgrano was lawful and detailing the basis for their conclusion (basically the relevant international law).

It is certainly true that tactical information was not conveyed to the highest government levels - tactical information virtually never is. Would you have expected the cabinet to be told you were positioning for a quartering rear attack on a Bear near the North Sea oil fields? That's why you have field commanders, such as submarine captains.

Dave, you're convinced that something :shifty: transpired in both these events, I vigorously disagree on the topic of the Belgrano, though I can't comment on de Menezes other than agreeing that it was a terribly sad outcome.

I don't know if I'd have made any other decision, but I do know that in high pressure scenarios involving the use of lethal force I've made the right decision sometimes and the wrong decision other times. I'm grateful for having done so in an era when support was given on return from deployment, rather than being given a train ticket and a kick in the @rse like the poor nashos.


Dave, I don't expect you to change your mind, just consider that there is other information - and opinion - around, and that there may be more info to come.

 

[David Morton]

Agree to differ.
Wait until 30 year point and then we'll see if it's declassified.
I'm 62 next summer and I retired from BA in 2002 at 55, the retirement age.
See private message.

 

[Al Jones]

David - In wartime the combatant's position doesn't exempt him from being a foe/target unless he signals he is no longer one.That would go down to the individual level as well. A Viet Cong guerilla who just unloaded a clip from an AK47 at your position is STILL a valid target even though he turns to run for cover.I realize there are other factors here but not overiding ones.Just my opinion.The other issue seems to have had key information swept under the rug, but being a complete outsider,I am unable to comment,except that your country doesn't have a lock on this type of situation. Also retired at 55, 62 by the time the sun shines in your window.
Freewheel - the Order of the Eastern Star

 

[WEGENER Engineering]

In Israel it is a known fact that the only way to neutralize a suicide bomber is a shot in the head. The british agents risked their lives doing this while trying to protect the lives of many. When there is not much time you have to act on the behalf of many instead of the behalf of the individual. Hindsight is always 20/20 and yes it is a tragedy for the dead young man and his family but I feel better knowing that this mossad technique is used in Britain and here in America.
BTW David - I read the dossier we have on you down here at the Lodge and the Brethren are not happy with you stirring the pot. Say did you ever watch "The Prisoner"? - just kidding of course.........

 

[Terry Oxandale]

I don't feel this is a case of inappropriate action considering the circumstances. It appears the anger may be in the way it is being handled after-the-fact.

 

[Frank Catt]

A couple of years ago Sussex police shot dead a wanted man after raiding his girlfriends flat in the early hours of the morning. As the police forced into the bedroom they found the completly naked pair in bed, the guy woke and stood up, and was shot dead immediatley without warning, Police stated he " pointed a loaded weapon at them " although no firearm was found in the flat. This time the officer involved was taken to criminal court proceedings, and the chief of police lost his job.

 

[David Morton]

Quite a lot of Americans have a similar attitude to those above.
You Americans obviously have a lot more death by shooting on your streets. In fact the last time I saw/heard guns being in use in public was on Michigan Avenue in Chicago. I wonder if it's the right to carry guns which in Europe seems not to be the case. Anyway , my plea (above) was for any Brits who felt the same revulsion as me to the conduct of the UK Police in the shooting of this young man Menezes to write or email to the top legal position in this country, the Lord Chief Justice and lodge your objection. To be honest, I don't give a jot (diddly squat, fig) about what anybody else outside of Britain thinks about this case, even in the former colonies, as they don't really have any rights in this matter.

 

[Rafael]

Honestly, i'll be surprised if justice is served, anything else is just the expected.

 

[Chris Duncan]

David - In wartime the combatant's position doesn't exempt him from being a foe/target unless he signals he is no longer one.That would go down to the individual level as well. A Viet Cong guerilla who just unloaded a clip from an AK47 at your position is STILL a valid target even though he turns to run for cover.I realize there are other factors here but not overiding ones.

Read the Wikipedia article. The victim was not a combatant. He was mis-identified by the INCOMPETENT police as a combatant and killed after he was immobilized on the ground. And then the police tried to cover up their incompetence and lied about what happened. And now the courts have given them a complete pass, no accountability.

I think David's point is when you allow incompetence and you don't hold incompetent people accountable for their mistakes it's only going to happen again and again.

Lots of these guys are hot-headed gung-ho cowboys who have figured out that the only way to operate above the law is to join the law.

 

[roaldin]

Whether you give a jot or not, this colonial is with you on this David.

Tim.

 

[Jack]

Just my two cents...
I'm with Tim on this one. From another failed colonial experiment! (tongue in cheek).
Jack..

 

[Al Jones]

Kalun - Please re-read my post.Sorry for any ambiguity.I was referring to the Argentine ship as the combatant(this thread deals with both situations) in the first case,and agree with David in reference to the young man's untimely and unnecessary demise, if all the facts are in order.The only thing I don't quite understand is the criticism of Cressida Dick as it appears she advised her officers to let him go as she did not consider him a threat to the public.It would have been the independant actions of the officers or 'secret service' agents that then accounted for the fatal actions.Maybe I don't see the whole picture,only that she IS ultimately responsible for the actions of those in her command.I'm not privy to all the details so it is not proper for me to make a 'call' here,only to say that we,as Americans, do care what happens to people in other parts of the world.Thousands of us have died as proof of that. I know this opinion doesn't matter to Dave but I support his viewpoint in this situation.

 

[Price Walton]

Read the Wikipedia article. The victim was not a combatant. He was mis-identified by the INCOMPETENT police as a combatant and killed after he was immobilized on the ground.quote]



While Dave and I have taken our own argument outside, there are a number of points about this type of action that are relevant;

• It is frequently exceptionally difficult to identify whether a person presents a threat until it is exercised. Intelligence is the principal method of advance notice, but can be flawed.
• There is always a point at which the situation can be defused, however;
• The method of defusing the situation varies. There are occasions where applying lethal force is the only way, however they are relatively few.
• The training and command of personnel, particularly at the tactical level, must be inclusive of alternatives to a maximal approach.

There's a couple of things to remember about human behaviour - we are essentially dual purpose responders to threats, we can either fight or flee.

In a scenario where judgements are being made about a person's future behaviour, either option needs to be accounted for. Actions can be rated on a scale of 1 to 10. My own preference, backed by the SOP's, was to start at 1 and ramp it up to 10 as required, bearing in mind that it is much, much easier to go up the scale than down. Sometimes it worked out, sometimes it didn't. Nobody needs to convince me of the strength and impact resistance of Kevlar helmets.....

A couple of things I have learned about sources;

• Wikipedia can and has been used by vested interests to make their particular points.
• No two eye witnesses saw or heard or remember the same thing.

A couple of observations, bearing in mind that a policing action conducted by military units differs in significant respects from action by policing units (basically the source and structure of the mandate);

• As responsive mammals with large brains, humans tend to adopt the lessons of experience. Mis-identification does not automatically signal incompetence. The shortcomings may be in command, in procedures or in training.
• If the person was contained and attempted to escape at the time of his death, there is a failing of the techniques for restraint. Somebody with more experience of the law under which the acts took place can advise.
• If the person was contained and not attempting to escape, there is a serious failure of the application of the SOP's and criminal proceedings should result. If so, the question here is where to draw the line.

Finally - Dave's absolutely right - the death of Mr de Menezes took place in Britain, involving the use of force by Police Officers in the service of the British Government. It's refreshing to note the techniques used in other parts of the world, but it is under the British law that the events must be considered.