Did anyone see Channel 4 news re police killing of Brazillian man?

[mummycan]

Apparently surveillance officer didn't get a good look at him, he was busy relieving himself. He wasn't wearing a padded jacket - just a denim one. He didn't jump over the barier - even stopped to pick up a paper. All police officers were plain clothes - none of the witnesses heard a warning - that poor man didn't stand a chance.

I am not judging - in that climate i would not want to have to make the decision that the police officers had to - just sad at such a tragic waste of life - can't even begin to imagine what his family are going through now.

Plus - paving stone and bloody knee is a little different from death. My point before was that people use lawyers routinely for every day things let alone deaths.

I know perhaps the family are so shallow and greedy that when they heard they said "oh hooray now we can sue the British police" Or maybe not.

This comment from Caligula was spot on "I think it's best to ascribe the same motives to other families, as those you might have yourself in the same position. If you can imagine yourself in their position."

Have some compassion- they've lost a son- it matters to them even if it doesn't to you.

I am so shocked by this and looks like police tried to cover up. Poor man and his family. Some policeman who's watched too much Bruce Willis no doubt or perhaps too nervous to do his job?

According to the BBC news last night he didn't do anything at all that was suspicious, grabbing a newspaper and running to catch a train? he was sitting while he was stormed by police! I could have been shot a hundred times for doing that.... He is only mistake was to have a slight resemblance to one of the terrorists (which I honestly found insignificative: haircut and ears??? FGS)

But I think that the main problem here is not that the police have made a mistake, but that they have tried to cover themselves up even trying to lay some blame in a man who was acting as any other train user would do. If they have tried to cover this which was carefully reviewed with a magnifying glass by the government, press and public. What could we expect when they make "less important" mistakes?

I believe that many policemen join the force beacuse they really want to do something about protecting people but as in every single profession of the world there are good ones and stupid ones, it seems that having a person already in the floor with no weapon in sight would stop a reasonable policeman specially if he has a good number of other policemen with him,(even if it's only for interrogation purposes) but the one that shoot the gun probably was not exactly a reasonable one...

What really annoys me about this is that this leak is being so widely speculated on! The report will not be complete and therefore not concluded ! how are the police trying to cover up? They are admiting this to the ipcc!

I don't see what public service this serves? The poor family finding this information out from a press report not from the ipcc. I personnally thisnk it is hugely disrespectful to jeans charle de menez's family and his memory to be publishing images of his bloody dead body.

I do hope the speculation ends soon, as a media witch hunt will only serve to worsen police relations in sw london and indeed accross the country - as somebody already pointed out - that is something we could do without. I am and

It's not just one individual police officer who should be held to account, it's those up the chain of command in charge of setting policy. The police must be open and accountable, particularly on such a sensitive issue, for moral reasons and to ensure this tragedy is not repeated. The police forces have to accept the lessons from this and adjust training and orders accordingly.

Pinkmama's post was particularly worrying as it seemed to show the kind of kneejerk police 'canteen culture' response that has been heavily criticised in inquiry after inquiry. It's damaging that those in power - with the ultimate power of life and death, it turns out - somehow manage to see themselves as the victims here. As a persecuted minority who no-one understands. And that claimed lack of understanding means they can just reject all questioning. And carry on making terrible errors that kill people.

Ark, the police aren't volunteering to cooperate with the inquiry - it's legal mechanism they are obliged to follow.

As for a media witch hunt, one of the ways we the public find out what is being done on our behalf is via the media. Without media questioning the authorities would inevitably tend to play down their mistakes (and that's putting it mildly). The media hasn't killed anyone.

Ark, "how are the police trying to cover up?"

By changing their story so many times. They have released different information to the media at different times.

The effect of this is to a) mire the whole thing in confusion in the public mind and b) to those of us who are paying attention, to make us wonder why they keep changing their story.

I am not proposing that the media never report on this - however a lack of sensitivity - showing an image of the corpse how does that help fgs!

Of course we have a right and the police have a responsibility to question what occured however this is being done, and there is a right and proper time to view ALL of the evidence, not just bits of it.

I think it is unfair to suggest that the police would not co-operate if they were not obliged to - how do any of us know that - one way or another?

Yes you are right the media haven't gone out and shot anybody - however this kind of gossip mongering, getting tiny bits of info and then stringing them together, reporting opinions and conjecture as if it were fact is dangerous. What we need now is for peple to feel like they can trust the police, particularly in the light of the terrorist threat. It is grossly unfair on the police that they are unable to comment about the leak - as they wish to wait for the full conclusion of the report - this doesn't mean they are hiding things.

And all I ask is why can we not wait? If it were your dp or your db shot to pieces on a tube - I ask you would you want to see his body like that all over the papers and news, lets not forget this is a personal tragedy for some people.

But Ark, the police themselves have given info to the media. And then given different info. They themselves have contributed to the confusion that surrounds the whole thing.

What they (and some sections of the media) are doing is a classic PR tactic of sending out so many different bits of info, that unless you are following it forensically, you can't make head nor tail of what's going on. The long term effect of this is to mire the whole event in urban myths which then pass into folklore and become "truth". In ten years time, people will still talk about the fact that this bloke jumped the barrier, was wearing a heavy winter coat and had wires coming out of his pocket. And newspapers will still be printing this disinformation when the topic comes up. That's how successful PR works.

I want to make it clear that I am waiting to hear the full report so won't be saying one side is right or not!

But C - I hear what your saying and looking back on it I have absolutely no idea what the police statement actually was. I was sat at home with a broken toe, half a mile from stockwell sation watching it unfold. I remember eye witnesses, saying he jumped the barrier, he was asian, he ran onto the train fell to the floor and was shot, he had wires comingt out of him - he was wearing a winter coat etc etc. Eye witnesses were being interviewed by the media literally minutes after the shooting. I don't know, I can't remember that the police ever coroborated this detail.

oh god.

sorry pinkmama and gdg, you are obviously of the same school of thought as george bush as regards these kinds of matters:

you're either with us, or with the terrorists.

basically, if we question that these good holy righteous life risking police may have made a series (not one, a series) of mistakes that has resulted in an innocent man's life being taken then we are just ungrateful scumbags and are preventing them from defending us against terrorists? is that it? that's what it sounds like to me.

orwell has never been more relevant.

caligula you're dead right re monumental f*ckups. But admitting to them, apologising and compensating the elderly parents that were being financially supported by their son (assumed name, i can't even bring myself to address you directly, are you really as nasty as you come across? oops just did it) don't half leach them of the poison inherent. cover-ups entrench the position of those that mistrust the police (they give them reason to) and they consolidate the position of bad apples in the police force (doesn't matter what you do, we protect our own).

at the moment we don't know if these so called leaks are accurate or not because a lot of the people involved can't say anything. If the reports now are accurate then the eye witness accounts were all wrong. Well I'm prepared to believe that, but I'm also prepared to believe the media didn't check these "leaks" out thoroughly or fell for good fakes. IF the information coming out now is correct its terrible and the person who fired the shots should face a manslaughter charge. Then we will finally know the truth.

I wish the media wouldn't publish such stories yet. If there are criminal charges how can anyone get a fair trial after this?

ahhh tatt - thank you - exactly my thoughts but so much more elegantly put!

I think as I mentioned earlier it all comes down to integrity.
Part of the reason the country voted Labour in 97 was because they were sick of 'sleaze'. Many of those same voters have slowly gone off TB because they see him as less than open at best, and at worst, dishonest.
We just don't have the stomach for spin and dishonesty, either from the government or the police.
We want the police to hold up their hands and say 'in our desperation to protect you we f*cked up here'. Just like we want Tony to say 'ok there was no WMD, I made a mistake but I genuinely believed the intelligence'.
Nobody expects perfection, just honesty and remorse.

yes eye witness accounts were wrong. not saying all... but some were.

ie the man who saw him leap over the barrier.
he ASSUMED (and has said this himself) that it was the suspect that leapt over.
he then revealed that the person he saw leaping over was wearing a white t-shirt... at which point it was realised that it was in fact one of the police officers.

It wouldn't be the first time 'eye witness' accounts have been wrong - and it certainly won't be the last!

also, even if the family are looking for monetry compensation. Who are we to criticise? They've lost their son and a valuable source of income. In these circumstances, compensation is fair and just.

havne't you ever done one of those observation test thingies (need to find one on internet), eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable....through no fault of their own, we just aren't that accurately observant and make all sorts of assumptions that change what we think we 'see'....remember when giving statements they'd also all just been through the trauma of seeing a man pinned down and shot in the head several times at close range....

exactly. we see what we think we should have seen

sophable - there used to be on the on the "policecouldyou" website - but doesn't seem to be there anymore.

here is one.

(and bear in mind that here you're actively watching to see what happens, in a RL crime the chances are you won't be watching so closely).

didn't mean to be critical of eyewitness - I can only imagine how traumatic it would have been - what i was really wondering was wether the police took up their accounhts and presented them as fact - I do not remember them doing so.

don't think they did - but they did say caterogorically (to start with) that the man shot was directly linked to the terroist attacks.

the police may not have endorsed them... but they didn't say anything to the contrary

they were more than happy for that version of events to be aired as fact

oh Q o Q I love that kind of thing! What a great work skive!

I would be interested to know how the police are responsible for individuals who talk to the media and allow their thoughts on something to be aired? Genuine question btw. I personnally felt that all the police have ever said since admiting they got the wrong guy was that they would wait for the result of the enquiry without making any comments about what happened.

I have to say that since the whole bombing thing stated I have ben strangely fixated with the bbc news website almost in a wierd way ( Iknow I am not alone) I have sat here at my desk craving additional informatiopn, wanting the nitty gritty - which quite frankly Police should not give until after a thorough investigation. And then a moment of realisation whilost watching them raid a suspects home live on tv is this right? Is this responsible? I just wondered what the rest of you thought on this? Has our obsession with 'needing' to know the news immediately actually affected what the media have reported and thus our opinion of the police in this incident?