It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Documents Released About Brazilian Mistakenly Shot On 22/7

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 06:32 AM
link   
To the guy who said these things happen all the time, maybe they do in American, but not in the UK. Also, about the police being picked because they're "the best" and can make split second decisions - the police are hardly the cream of the crop, they're mostly people who opted out of further education or have mickey mouse qualifications.

Several investigations also showed there to be large racist factions within the police force, not that that has anything to do with this, just trying to show that they're hardly the cream of the crop.

To me also it seems as if this person was silenced, however what could a Brazillian electrician possibly know?




posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 06:47 AM
link   
Nova, sorry but Police Violence is a lot more comman than you would expect. Even in the United Kingdom where I am from and I've been at the recieving end of being hit with a baton for wishing to protest (peacefully) and with other people who were protesting (peacefully).

I've seen the Police start several riots at protests. I have seen half a dozen cases in my work (I'm training to be a barrister) of Police violence. Both inside the cells and outside. Especailly by the Met.

It's amazingly hard to back up with evidence. Police officers hits someone and the investigation never comes to court or if it does come to court you find out certain key pieces of evidence do not exist. The media never make too much of a fuss about it. This is just the next level for the Police a nice murder. Although that has happened in 1998 before.

Here's an article: archives.cnn.com...
Funny how the Police miss out, officers went too the funeral and escalated the problem (by their presence.)

They also don't mention how the Police never told the boy to freeze, just shot him because they thought he had a gun. (A gun that was in fact about 2/3inches long.) But was in fact a cigarette lighter unaware that such a thing would happen to him by the people who should have been protexting him. (In fact, this has happend a lot in London. During a recent question time a member of the audience gave out very shocking statistics on it.)



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 07:23 AM
link   
No questions that they haven't been violent before, I just mean that to my knowledge they've never employed this amount of overkill before. I live in the UK too, I don't think I've ever seen a police man/woman with a gun.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nova
No questions that they haven't been violent before, I just mean that to my knowledge they've never employed this amount of overkill before. I live in the UK too, I don't think I've ever seen a police man/woman with a gun.


I grew up in wolverhampton, Birmingham, London and Coventry - now living just North of Oxford. I've seen so many Police with guns I'm used to it now. lol



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   
I'll count myself lucky then



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nova
I'll count myself lucky then


Not be too sure about that.

Town I live in now has had two armed robbiers, in the last 18months (banks) due to no armed Police.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Notice the Jacket (jpg)

Notice the jacket he is wearing is a thin denim jacket. Hardly the bulky, possibly bomb-concealing one described by police.

[edit on 17/8/05 by subz]



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Oh you mean he could have shot the Police doing their duty?

While I think we should be allowed CS Gas, Tasers, etc I hardly think this is a prime example to be using to further this cause - justifying the killing of police officers in the call of duty.

Anyway a civvy would hardly be a match for trained firearms officers and do you really think he would have survived if he had started shooting them anyway?


It is police duty to put 7 slugs in a man's head after he runs for a train? Not sure what coo-coo whack job backwoods country you live in, but in America that is not what the police's duty is.


Mod Edit: Cut down the multiple quotes to one.

[edit on 17-8-2005 by ZeddicusZulZorander]



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 01:31 PM
link   
He didn't run though.

You'll find he was grabbed, well standing still slammed to the ground and shot from behind.

Gun or not he could not have protected himself.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Unless they changed this, last night on the news they said he might have actually been sitting on the train when shot as evidenced by the blood on the seats.

As far as running he wasn't. He allegedly stopped to pick up a newspaper.


dh

posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 02:59 PM
link   
I hope that people wont let go of the possibility that this was a deliberate assassination of a targetted individual

After all, knowing that the IPCC were inevitably going to uncover the lies about this, why should the police right up to Ian Blair, perhaps that should be another Bliar, put their reputation on the line by promoting and continuing the falsehoods for such a long period, until the story gets 'leaked' to ITN. Of course, being leaked, it is far more believable than if it had been presented as an official report.

Was the intial cover story maintained so that the details of the secondary cover story, the monumental blunder theory could be constructed, and all the holes in that story filled in, before it was released to the press.

I can think of no other reason for the likes of Blair and those under him jeopardising there careers promoting one set of lies, when they know they are bound to be found out. Unless the true story as it turns out is another distortion, though more closely in accord with the witnessed events.

I mean, when the 'blunder theory' starts off with the problem of the seconded military surveillence officer taking a leak, doesn't it just make you wonder?

I don't know what a young Brazilian electrician might have known. We don't know his recent work history, we don't know who might have employed him at any time to do what, or even if he might have had any covert tie-in to intelligence or police agencies
We do know that he was living in a flat at an address which has been linked to the 21/7 flour-bombers. Gould that be a connection giving him insider and dangerous knowledge.

Worth bearing in mind and looking out for clues, I would say



[edit on 17-8-2005 by dh]



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 04:10 PM
link   
im on the look out dh



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 04:25 PM
link   
It seems odd that if they were going to assasinate him they would do it so publicy and wait so long to do it. They had the oppurtunity when he left the flat with no CCTV and few witnesses. Looks like an andrenaline fuelled blunder, bad enough as it is but hardly a professional assasination.
Don't you think that when that sort of thing happens it's just slightly more discreet?


dh

posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
It seems odd that if they were going to assasinate him they would do it so publicy


Sure, but the event appears to have been put in the public arena with deliberation.
I'm not saying that my versions true, just that the leaked version appears, to my mind, as fabricated as the original lies

[edit on 17-8-2005 by dh]



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   
i think the most important issue here is, what we the public were told, by those we empower with trust. so much we have not been told about.

its all quite surreal from were i see it, especially with the 7 shots to the head [7/7] but 10 rounds in all?

isn't there some kind of method taught in firearms training about unloading all your ammo? how many rounds would there have been in the handgun?

mistaken identity? wrong place wrong time?

if anything this is a prime example of how not to cover up.

and i have to admit, i find it a little amusing how the law, have tried it on. ["well it [h]appened like this ya see"

and what will be the outcome? personally i think which ever way it goes it wont stop this from happening again somewhere, and it wont have any effect on that grand plan of theirs [you know, them], AND because were all doooomed.

them again maybe not.

whatever next? *shudders*


Originally posted by Nova
I'll count myself lucky then


yes, count yourself lucky.

some of us live were plain clothes police drive their cars fast through the narrow streets of london, and there's always law close by with guns because your only 15 mins away from where suspect terrorists live, day in, day out. lol.


dh

posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by kode

if anything this is a prime example of how not to cover up.



Except by sowing confusion, after you've already bred confusion



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 05:23 PM
link   
This is a disgrace for the London police department. While I'll still refrain from condemning any single officer, it's clear that the system broke down. At first, I was firmly supporting this action, but now it's clear that they lied about the facts of the case. This should be rigorously investigated and the people resposible for this I think should be vulnerable for possible murder or manslaughter charges.


dh

posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   
They wont dare do it djohn , or if they do, it'll be behind closed doors for reasons of security
How can they possibly justify shooting someone in the head 7 times when he is already immobilised?
Unless they're willing to sacrifice a couple of mind-control cops to the purpose. And that's the only reason I can see for shooting someone's head to pieces and making an awful mess
A single shot from twelve inches would be enough for most trained officers
Don't you see the ritualistic absurdity employed here?



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 07:05 PM
link   
www.theage.com.au... s/war-on-terror/police-version-of-tube-shooting-challenged/2005/08/17/1123958126875.html



HOW THE EVIDENCE IS STACKING UP

WHAT POLICE SAID v WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS

- Jean Charles de Menezes identified as suspect after leaving block of flats.
- Surveillance officer unable to make accurate identification because he had been relieving himself when de Menezes left.

- Wearing bulky jacket and/or belt.
- Wearing only a thin denim jacket.

- Acted suspiciously on way to Stockwell station.
- Nothing odd in his behaviour.

- Ran from police when challenged at station and refused to obey instructions.
- Challenged for first time while seated on train.

- Vaulted ticket barrier to escape.
- Did not vault. Ran only to catch train.

- Eight shots fired into him.
- Eleven shots fired, three missed (seven to head; one elsewhere).


dh

posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 07:09 PM
link   
Yep - and this is cover-up over cover-up
They wanted this guy dead and killed in the most horrible way for whatever reason



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join