The truth is Jean Charles de Menezes didn’t run from the police — and he is still dead

Via the Sideshow, more news on Jean Charles de Menezes. I had come across this elsewhere yesterday as well but was working on something and forgot to blog about it.

Past posts of mine about de Menezes are here and here. The posts lead into some distressing comment areas.

I was horrified by what had happened to de Menezes. Nothing about it sounded right. I didn’t trust it from the beginning. I won’t repeat what I said in my posts, but many comments were vigorous in their approval of what the authorities had done, a vigorous approval which really rested entirely on the implicit belief in what the authorities said at the beginning, then afterwards refused to modify that scenario with the revelations that what the authorities were saying wasn’t true. First it was learned that Menezes wasn’t Asian (Asian encompasses a lot of people by the way, and I would hate to be targeted because I was “Asian”). Then it was revealed taht Menezes wasn’t wearing a heavy and unusual jacket etc. Thoughtful people pointed out that Menezes had already been caught when shot, he was down on the ground when 8 bullets were pumped into him, 7 into his head. Still, this had no impact on those protesting that Menezes was suspicious, he had run. People latched onto the authorities saying “Suspicious” and didn’t let it go, not matter what the news was after. Even when it was disclosed that Menezes had used a pass to get into the tube station. The authorities had fed out the scenario that Menezes was suspicious, had run, and many people said that because he had run he deserved to be killed. They accepted the picture of Menezes, suspicious, running, and refused to change that thought video in their head. And it was all right to them that Menezes was slain. Better him than them, even if he wasn’t a suicide bomber. After all, the police had said he could have been. That’s all they needed to know. The other guy could have been a suicide bomber. And they themselves would never act in a suspicious manner, they would never run. Even after it was revealed that Menezes did not jump the turnstile, people still accepted the scenario that he was a suspect running from the authorities and that this was a reason to kill. Nothing about him needed to be known in order to justify his being killed. The fact he was said to be running was enough.

There even remains a webpage on the internet (posted by someone in one of the comment areas) aimed at Menezes, that taunts, that ridicules, that is only on the internet to proclaim that if you don’t want to be shot then don’t run.

Well, here is more news on Menezes, and I emphasize certain points in bold lettering.

New claims emerge over Menezes death

· Brazilian was held before being shot
· Police failed to identify him
· He made no attempt to run away

Rosie Cowan, Duncan Campbell and Vikram Dodd
Wednesday August 17, 2005

The Guardian

The young Brazilian shot dead by police on a London tube train in mistake for a suicide bomber had already been overpowered by a surveillance officer before he was killed, according to secret documents revealed last night.

It also emerged in the leaked documents that early allegations that he was running away from police at the time of the shooting were untrue and that he appeared unaware that he was being followed.

Relatives and the dead man’s legal team expressed shock and outrage at the revelations. Scotland Yard has continued to justify a shoot-to-kill policy.

Jean Charles de Menezes died after being shot on a tube train at Stockwell station in south London on July 22, the morning after the failed bomb attacks in London.

But the evidence given to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) by police officers and eyewitnesses and leaked to ITV News shows that far from leaping a ticket barrier and fleeing from police, as was initially reported, he was filmed on CCTV calmly entering the station and picking up a free newspaper before boarding the train.

It has now emerged that Mr de Menezes:

· was never properly identified because a police officer was relieving himself at the very moment he was leaving his home

· was unaware he was being followed;

· was not wearing a heavy padded jacket or belt as reports at the time suggested;

· never ran from the police;

· and did not jump the ticket barrier.

But the revelation that will prove most uncomfortable for Scotland Yard was that the 27-year-old electrician had already been restrained by a surveillance officer before being shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder.

The documents reveal that a member of the surveillance team, who sat nearby, grabbed Mr de Menezes before he was shot: “I heard shouting which included the word ‘police’ and turned to face the male in the denim jacket.

“He immediately stood up and advanced towards me and the CO19 [firearms squad] officers … I grabbed the male in the denim jacket by wrapping both my arms around his torso, pinning his arms to his side. I then pushed him back on to the seat where he had been previously sitting … I then heard a gun shot very close to my left ear and was dragged away on to the floor of the carriage.”

…The IPCC investigation report states that the firearms unit had been told that “unusual tactics” might be required and if they “were deployed to intercept a subject and there was an opportunity to challenge, but if the subject was non-compliant, a critical shot may be taken”.

But it now appears, that contrary to earlier claims, Mr de Menezes was oblivious to the stakeout operation. On the morning of July 22, police officers were in Scotia Road, Tulse Hill, watching a property they believed contained one or more of the would-be bombers who had tried to detonate four bombs on London transport less than 24 hours before.

One firearms officer is quoted as saying: “The current strategy around the address was as follows: no subject coming out of the address would be allowed to run and that an interception should take place as soon as possible away from the address trying not to compromise it.”

But the report shows that there was a failure in the surveillance operation and officers wrongly believed Mr de Menezes could have been one of two suspects.

The leaked papers state: “De Menezes was observed walking to a bus stop and then boarded a bus, travelling to Stockwell tube station.

“During the course of this, his description and demeanour was assessed and it was believed he matched the identity of one of the suspected wanted for terrorist offences … the information was passed through the operations centre and gold command made the decision and gave appropriate instructions that de Menezes was to be prevented from entering the tube system. At this stage the operation moved to code red tactic, responsibility was handed over to CO19.”

CCTV footage shows Mr de Menezes was not wearing a padded jacket, as originally claimed, and that he walked calmly through the barriers at Stockwell station, collecting a free newspaper before going down the escalator. Only then did he run to catch the train.

A man sitting opposite him is quoted as saying: “Within a few seconds I saw a man coming into the double doors to my left. He was pointing a small black handgun towards a person sitting opposite me. He pointed the gun at the right hand side of the man’s head. The gun was within 12 inches of the man’s head when the first shot was fired.”

A senior police source last night told the Guardian that the leaked documents and statements gave an accurate picture of what was known so far about the shooting. But the IPCC refused to confirm the documents were genuine adding: “Our priority is to disclose any findings direct to the family, who will clearly be distressed that they have received information on television concerning his death.”

The home secretary, Charles Clarke, said: “It is critically important for the integrity of the independent police investigating process that no pressure is put upon the IPCC before their full report is published and that no comment is made until that time.”

Harriet Wistrich, lawyer for the family, said: “There is incompetence on the part of those watching the suspect and a serious breakdown of communication.”

Asad Rehman, spokesman for the family’s campaign, called for a public inquiry. “This was not an accident,” he said. “It was serious neglect. Clearly, there was a failure both in police intelligence and on an operational level.”

Y’know, one thing you’re not going to hear when you’re dead is, “We had a serious breakdown in communication.” By then it’s a moot point.

I imagine that many people, despite the most recent revelations, will continue to approve of what the authorities did. Because, for them, Menezes must remain suspicous. Just as Bush and the amazing vanishing WMDs makes no difference. It is a peculiar way of determining where your rights end and the other person’s rights begin. All someone has to do is tell them that there was potential danger to their being and that seems to lock in a program from which there is no exit. There can be shown to be no WMDs, and a videotape of Menezes not running can be screened on the clouds in the sky, and it won’t make a damn bit of difference. These are people who must defend the most questionable actions of authority, even when authority is proven to have lied and that the scenario fed out did not take place. The reaction will be, “Well, the authorities believed…” and for them it will not matter that Menezes didn’t run. He was said to have run, that’s all that they need to know. Truth may as well not exist for them.

What happened to Menezes should be a lesson to the right-wingers and other individuals who defended the killing of de Menezes by authorities, that, see, look Dick and Jane, the blatant taped truth conflicts wildly with what the authorities were saying. Guess what, the authorities lie. They do. What you were told is nothing like what actually happened.

They should learn something from this.

But there are individuals who won’t learn from this. Despite the truth, they will defend the actions of the authorities and continue to insist that Menezes had to die. The real world has no meaning for them. The elimination of anything and anyone identified even erroneously and briefly as a potential threat to their world is all that they are concerned about.

Truth simply has no meaning for them.