The Death Of An Electrician

The Sunday London Times is carrying a story on the shooting of Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes that raises a number of questions about the police work that led to the shooting.  My initial impression, based on the early reports, was that his behavior, as suspicious as it seemed, justified the shooting.  A suicide bomber needs to be stopped, and stopped cold, before he can kill his intended civilian targets.  And jumping a turnstile, running from police and wearing a heavy overcoat in the summer can certainly be construed as suspicious behavior.  Unfortunately, if the Times reporting is correct, that may not have been how it went down.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission is studying CCTV footage that caught de Menezes’s last moments. What is already clear is that the initial accounts of his death on July 22 were wrong.

When the shooting at Stockwell Underground station was first confirmed, a senior police source told reporters, off the record, that they had killed one of the would-be suicide bombers who was on the run after the failed July 21 bombings. Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan police commissioner, said that the shooting was “directly linked” to the terrorist operation.

The man, according to the police, was suspect because of his “clothing and behaviour”. He had been followed from a house that had been under surveillance. When he was challenged at Stockwell, he ignored instructions and ran. He had vaulted over the ticket barrier and was wearing a dark bulky jacket that could disguise a bomb.

That's the account that everyone read and heard immediately after the shooting.  Ignoring instructions.  Running from police.  Starting from a suspicious house.  Vaulting the ticket barrier.  Wearing a heavy jacket in summer.

The Times has found that some, perhaps all, of these details are questionable.

The truth is more mundane. De Menezes, an electrician, was travelling to north London to fix a fire alarm.

He was not wearing what witnesses called a “black bomber jacket”, but a denim jacket. It was about 17C and his clothing would not have been out of the ordinary.

He did not vault a ticket barrier, as claimed. He used a travelcard to pass through the station in the normal way. His family believes that he may have started to run simply because he heard the train pulling in — something Londoners do every day. Indeed, a train was at the platform when he got there...

There are questions about the actions of the police as well.  At least one witness questions whether adequate warning and instruction were given.

Lee Ruston, 32, was at the bottom of the escalator that de Menezes ran down. He believes that he heard every word said by officers.

According to him, officers did not say the word “police” or offer de Menezes the prospect of arrest. “I heard a voice shouting ‘get on the floor, just get on the floor’. Another voice said the same, ‘get on the floor’. I then heard the crack of gunshots,” he said.

Of course, the actions of the police were not ill-intentioned, despite the tragic outcome.  In the words of an officer:

“They thought they were acting in the best interests of everybody and on the information they were given. It’s a very sad thing, isn’t it.”

The questions surrounding this situation are very difficult, and very sad.  Obviously the Police are on edge, with two multi-pronged suicide/bombing attacks in two weeks.  The police rightly are doing everything they can to protect innocent individuals riding the Tube.  The police in London do not have any experience in dealing with this type of thing, experience that in, for instance, Israel, makes this type of work almost second nature.

So, why wasn't he stopped earlier, when boarding the bus?  Did the police actually tell him, specifically, to stop?  Did he vault the barrier or pass through normally?  How did the report about the heavy jacket get out?  Were there wires on his person, or was that report completely wrong as well?

Mr. de Menezes is clearly a tragic victim of a jumpy London police force that made a mistake  They were trying to implement a new policy designed to stop suicide bombers, and one which, while it needs to be applied very judiciously, cannot and should not be entirely scrapped.  But he is also a victim of the terrorists, for the police would have no reason to be this jumpy without their actions on July 7 and July 21.  This is yet another reason to continue to fight and decimate the ranks of the terrorists.

And why do I think that the policy should not be scrapped?  This is why.

UPDATE: Wizbang's Carnival of the Trackbacks XXII

Comments

[Andrew Milner]

So now all the police lies have come unravelled, what exactly did Mr. de Menezes do wrong, besides running for a train? Look where "shoot first and ask questions later" gets you. Bogged down in Iraq for at least the next 10 years.
Word on the street is that the US will get nuked this month. I was expecting 6 August, the anniversary of Hiroshima. But I’m not too proud to admit I got the date wrong. So when the big firework comes, guess you good old boys will be up for some major league retaliation against Iran or North Korea, or indeed anywhere. Might be smart to do a little checking first and then have a quiet word with “Dangerous Dick”. But why let logic get in the way of good old lash out retaliation. That must be why you can't admit 9/11 was a false flag. Then you'd have to admit you attacked the wrong guy. Nice neutral, Buddhist country anyone?