posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 08:48 AM
The family regards this is a gross miscarriage of justice.
In London England, the jury in the inquest into the shooting of innocent subway passenger Jean Charles De Menezes - a Brazilian living in London - by
crack armed police units during the ensuing chaos after attempted terror attacks on the London subway system a week after the 7th July bombings.
The police lied about the circumstances surrounding the shooting saying initially and openly in the media that Jean Charles had jumped ticket barriers
and ran at speed down to the platform area.
Subsequently leaked CCTV footage showed this not to be true - Jean Charles was not acting suspiciously at all - he HAD bought a ticket and walked with
other passengers down to the platform.
After the inquest we now have other details.
The police said that his suspicious behaviour had led to them identifying him as a terrorist. This suspicious behaviour it turns out was Jean
'looking around frequently' when he was speaking on his mobile phone.
Also, the officer meant to be tailing the REAL terrorist suspect - who was watching the apartment building under surveillance left his post to answer
a call of nature.
On returning a man had exited the building - not having seen where he came from as he was away - the officer took a leap of faith and identified him
as the terrorist suspect. This man was Jean Charles.
The killing itself was brutal - Jean Charles was shot over 10 times in the head at point blank range, in front of other passengers - some of whom were
sat directly next to him on the train. Many of the bullets, rather disturbingly, didn't actually hit target.
I have never fired a hand gun - is it hard to miss at that range?
Either way - these facts are not in dispute.
No criminal charges were brought against anyone for this situation. I believe it right no one is charged for murder - after all, the men who pulled
the trigger were doing their jobs.
But for the lying, to justify a killing which happened through incompetence - many jobs should have been lost and perhaps criminal charges made.
To add insult to injury, the government itself refused to launch an official enquiry into what happened that day - again, removing almost any
possibility of anyone having to face any consequences for their actions.
The only investigation was a coroners inquest. Standard in the UK for any death under unclear circumstances.
One week ago, the coronor instructed the jury that they were NOT able to return a verdict of 'unlawful killing' - the only verdict that would put
the blame at the door of the police.
This is an outrage. In any kind of trial or inquest, civil or otherwise - the JURY have the LEGAL RIGHT to decided. It is not for a judge or coroner
to intervene in this way. The jury were also blocked from releasing their own narrative of events based on the evidence brought to light in the
inquest.
This is whitewash - cover-up and another sick example of blue protecting blue at the expense of the safety and right to justice of the public.
It is clear today that the jury would clearly have returned a verdict of unlawful killing had they been 'allowed'. Based on the evidence this was an
unlawful killing - police chiefs should be held responsible.
The family are now calling on the IPCC and Crown Prosecution Service to re-examine the case in order to consider criminal or internal investigations.
How many of you think this will happen?
Indeed - the UK's 'shoot to kill' policy - in which armed police are sanctioned to 'shoot to kill' without discrimination or authorisation from
senior officers on a case by case basis when they feel there is a significant terrorist threat - hasn't even been suspended..
The idea of junior police officers walking around with heavy weapons - with the authorisation to use them resting only on their own discretion - AND -
by parliamentary authority - the knowledge that there will be no open investigation into their actions - is terrifying.