Jury in Inquest of de Menezes told what verdict to deliver!

[tim west]

Anyone who came out of that building that day was to be followed and stopped for questioning...

Did they get what they needed out of him? ie did they even stop to ask first?

 

[blondini]

Did they get what they needed out of him? ie did they even stop to ask first?

They wanted to stop and question anyone that came out well away from the building in order to avoid alerting any bad guys. The police claim that they warned him but the passengers in the carriage all say that they didn't.

 

[tim west]

They wanted to stop and question anyone that came out well away from the building in order to avoid alerting any bad guys. The police claim that they warned him but the passengers in the carriage all say that they didn't.

There's so many questions that this inquiry has brought up and i doubt if the answers will ever be found. The whole thing has left a feeling of a whitewash.

 

[esra_ptrap]

Based on what the officers were told about the suspect they acted 100% correctly.

Focus should now be on why they were given duff information as that is the reason he's dead.

Don't blame the plod on the ground as they need to react as they did.

 

[tim west]

But the question arises as to whether the inquest showed that procedures for arresting a suspect were adhered to properly. ie warnings that apparently wern't given.

 

[esra_ptrap]

If they were to believe the information they were given warnings would have simply given the guy the chance he needed to detonate the bomb.

The priority was to kill him in such a way that he couldn't do so.

Tragic with hindsight given the crap info but the correct course of action if he'd been for real.

 

[Norcon]

If they were to believe the information they were given warnings would have simply given the guy the chance he needed to detonate the bomb.

The priority was to kill him in such a way that he couldn't do so.

Tragic with hindsight given the rubbish info but the correct course of action if he'd been for real.

If the priorty was just to go in and kill him then why did the officers say they shouted a warning?
And yet those who witnessed events in the train say no warning was given and that De Menezes gave no significant reaction to the police's arrival.
It sounds like the correct procedure for the officers to follow was to give a warning but they didn't and just shot the guy.
When I was apprehended by armed police they were in uniform so I knew right away what was coming. My shotgun was in between the seats, unloaded and my hands on the steering wheel as a gun was held to my head.
If these guys had been in plain clothes and didn't make it clear that they were police then I may have reacted a lot differently.

 

[mattylad]

WHatever the argument for & against killing him, if Iwere on that jury and told that I could not decide myself what I thought then I would simply stand up & explain that as I believed that I was being forced into a decision I did not agree with I would have to leave the jury.

Might get done for contempt but that would stuff them!

 

[Softus]

My shotgun was in between the seats

Why?

If these guys had been in plain clothes and didn't make it clear that they were police then I may have reacted a lot differently.

How?

 

[Norcon]

I don't know how Softus. How would you react if strangers ran up to you and shoved a gun in your head?
I had a kalishnakov shoved into my face once by an IRA man and that left me a shivering wreck.
And why was my gun between the seats?.
Well just because that's why.

 

[Softus]

How would you react if strangers ran up to you and shoved a gun in your head?

I suspect I'd cack myself, but I really have no idea, that's why I'm asking you.

So, once again, what would your "different" reaction have been?

I had a kalishnakov shoved into my face once by an IRA man and that left me a shivering wreck.

Well then you're a wimp - that happens to me all the time.

And why was my gun between the seats?

That's what I asked you.

Well just because that's why.

OK, so you're not prepared to say.

In that case, why did you mention it?

 

[Blasphemous]

WHatever the argument for & against killing him, if Iwere on that jury and told that I could not decide myself what I thought then I would simply stand up & explain that as I believed that I was being forced into a decision I did not agree with I would have to leave the jury.

Might get done for contempt but that would stuff them!

Yes, I'm with you on that one Matty mate. Too many 'sheep' in this country.

 

[Trazor]

The correct course of action was patently not taken.

Why would they allow a suspected suicide bomber to actually get on the train?
Why was he not stopped well before?
Who in their right mind would tackle a suicide bomber face to face?

It just doesn't add up.

 

[Norcon]

Softus wrote

So, once again, what would your "different" reaction have been?

Not really sure tbh.
The choices seem to be................
A- Load the 12 guage when I spot them in the mirror.
B- Leave the 12 guage unloaded and do a mooner thorugh the side window.
C-Cack myself.

 

[blondini]

Who in their right mind would tackle a suicide bomber face to face?

It just doesn't add up.

Too right it doesn't add up.

According to the evidence given one of the surveillance team, (who was armed BTW), did just that. He grabbed him in a bear hug when he stood up, as he was verbally pointed out, and forced him back into his seat.
According to the firearms team, they concealed their weapons as they entered the carriage...