Shooting Brazillian man was a "mistake" (1 Viewer)

[katie_tully]

In light of the circumstances, why wouldn't he have ran? Secondly, how do you justify emptying 5 bullets into the head of somebody after you had already subdued them?
I understand shoot to kill, but excessively?

Either way, the police officer will have to live with this forever and I doubt it rests easy on ones mind knowing you shot an innocent person, however at the time it probably seemed like the better option.

 

[RedskyV]

If a terrorist saw police wouldnt he blow himself up immediately so he could kill the police as well?
For the police to be able to shoot him in the head 5 times, they have to be pretty close. More than enough to get hit by the explosives that a terrorist could carry.

The situation was nothing like "either kill an innocent man or potentially kill hundreds of innocent commuters because of inaction by police". Here was a man scared and cornered. Thus negating your fear of him running into a large group of people and setting off the explosvies. If he was a terrorist he could have blown you up earlier. You know your wearing plain clothes and the person your after might not understand english. You still shoot him in the head 5 times because you can. (Shoot to kill policy means you can kill on the slightest suspicion)

So many of you feel for the police officer, and believe his actions were reasonable in the killing an innocent man. "Oh what a tough decision that must have been" Not true, its his job to make those decisions and he would adequate training so that his reaction would be close to automatic. The police officer would have no regret for the innocent mans death.
If he did, maybe he would have stopped at 2 bullets to the head.

There was also a witness report saying that the police had him on the ground before the bullets were unloaded into his head. "They pushed him onto the floor and unloaded five shots into him. His dead" Marck Whitby told the BBC. (SMH 23/7/05)
There must be some inquiry into the events and thorough evaluation of this shoot to kill policy. So far it has been largely ineffective as it has not stopped any terrorism, but resulted in the summary execution of an innocent man. There is litttle to suggest that this situation is going to be any different in the future.

 

[Vinled]

I am inclined to think as narrow-mindedly as many of you have:

Jesus taught us to do onto others as you would yourself.
The police officer made a mistake, he should suffer the consequences of that mistake. That is, to kill himself. Since he is obviously too much of a coward someone else should shoot him five times in the head. On the suspicion that he is a murderer. (remind you of the shoot to kill policy?)

sure you can say the police officer was doing his job. This doesnt make it any more right. I could use this argument for the nazis who killed and raped millions of jews. It was their job.

 

[heybraham]

AND A GOOD FRIDAY WAS HAD BY ALL by bruce dawe


You man there keep those women back
and God Almighty he laid down
on the crossed timber and old Silenus
my offsider looked at me as if to say
nice work for soldiers, your mind's not your own
once you sign that dotted line Ave Caesar
and all that malarkey Imperator Rex

well this Nazarene
didn't make it any easier
really - not like the ones
who kick up a fuss so you can
do your block and take it out on them
Silenus
held the spike steady and I let fly
with the sledge-hammer, not looking
on the downswing trying hard not to hear
over the women's wailing the bones give way
the iron shocking the dumb wood.

Orders is orders, I said after it was over
nothing personal you understand - we had a
drill-sergeant once thought he was God but he wasn't
a patch on you

then we hauled on the ropes
and he rose in the hot air
like a diver just leaving the springboard, arms spread
so it seemed
over the whole damned creation
over the big men who must have had it in for him
and the curious ones who'll anything if it's free
with only the usual women caring anywhere
and a blind man in tears.

Does 'fighting terrorism' justify government complacency and violence? fuck off.

 

[RedskyV]

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller on his guilt of not speaking up earlier about the nazis.

 

[heybraham]

so that's the writer of that poem, awesome, i've always been wondering who wrote that

 

[RedskyV]

Here is a more accurate version:

First they came for the communists,
I did not speak out
because I was not a communist.

When they came for the social democrats,
I did not speak out
because I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists
I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews
I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew;

And when they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Pastor Martin Niemöller - describing the phenomenon of social chaos that often begins with specific and targeted fear and hatred, which soon escalates out of control. A warning about the consequences not opposing tyranny at the first instances of its rising.

 

[tattoodguy]

frankly im disturbed that we have so many fuck wits in the commmunity who justify the police killling someone.

Pigs want all the fucking glory etc, but they dont want to take responsibility for their actions.

The police alledgedly had ample time to approach him and ask him about his jacket, where they could have potentially defused the situation.

A killling of this nature can not be mended with an apology - words are completely worthlesss. A crime of this nature deserves blooood.

Ven? whatever who wanted the cop dead - im right behind you.

I hope this act, further makes muslims hate the english etc and they are emboldened and killll alot more people.

If the english government can kill people so barbaricly and in cold blood etc then i dont seeee it as wrong what the terrorists are doing.

Complete negligence and incompetence leading to a death, is not that different to voluntarily killing someone.

If police can kill innocent people i think we all have a right too. And if we make up an excuse we should get let offf, just like police do.

The courts and police dont accept peoples excuses for when they fuck up. So why should the police be given mercy.

most police justify and make excuses for this trigger happpy pig. That proves police dont take accountability, they are hypocrites who deserve no respect.

If the police responsible did kill himself - id be very impressed.

If he is let offf? doesnt that give people the right to riot and murder police?. If the police want to killl civilians with immunity it should work both ways - atleast from a moral point of view.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

I like the shoot first ask questions later policy. It should be implemented here in Australia.

 

[Vinled]

Yeah, then i could join the police force and shoot you dead.

 

[braindrainedAsh]

He ran from plain clothed officers... I would probably run too if someone was brandishing a gun at me, unless they clearly identified themselves as police and showed their badges. Geeze he could have even just been running late for his train, oblivious to whatever was going on behind him.

I think it was extreme and unwarranted. If they had shot his leg or something, but to shoot him in the head FIVE TIMES? And I think it is a victory for the terrorists that we live in such fear that to prevent terrorism we are killing innocent civillians. Isn't that what terrorism is, killing civillians? So basically our own fear has made this form of terrorism permissible, because it is among "us" and not "them"....it is terrorism for so called protection, but if I were in London now I would be equally as concerned about being mistaken for a terrorist (particularly if I met a certain racial profile) as for being on a train where someone had a bomb.

I wonder what evidence they had that he may have a bomb besides the way he looked and what he was wearing? In my opinion you can't fight terror with terror, and gunning down innocent people because they look a bit dodgy will only create further resentment amongst marginalized communities. Random bag searches, yeah fine, but random chase and kill? Not so good.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

He ran from plain clothed officers... I would probably run too if someone was brandishing a gun at me, unless they clearly identified themselves as police and showed their badges. Geeze he could have even just been running late for his train, oblivious to whatever was going on behind him.

I think it was extreme and unwarranted. If they had shot his leg or something, but to shoot him in the head FIVE TIMES? And I think it is a victory for the terrorists that we live in such fear that to prevent terrorism we are killing innocent civillians. Isn't that what terrorism is, killing civillians? So basically our own fear has made this form of terrorism permissible, because it is among "us" and not "them"....it is terrorism for so called protection, but if I were in London now I would be equally as concerned about being mistaken for a terrorist (particularly if I met a certain racial profile) as for being on a train where someone had a bomb.

I wonder what evidence they had that he may have a bomb besides the way he looked and what he was wearing? In my opinion you can't fight terror with terror, and gunning down innocent people because they look a bit dodgy will only create further resentment amongst marginalized communities. Random bag searches, yeah fine, but random chase and kill? Not so good.

He ran from plain clothed officers... I would probably run too if someone was brandishing a gun at me, unless they clearly identified themselves as police and showed their badges. Geeze he could have even just been running late for his train, oblivious to whatever was going on behind him."

That's making alot of fairly unlikely assumptions, I think it's likely that the police identified themselves clearly and I doubt he wouldn't have noticed them.

I think it was extreme and unwarranted. If they had shot his leg or something, but to shoot him in the head FIVE TIMES?

I think they honestly thought (due to seeing wires sticking out of his back or something) that he was carrying a bomb, when he went running (After they we'll assume, clearly identified themselves) I think the best decision to stop what you believe is a suicide bomber is to shoot them in the head. 5 shots is a bit excessive, but I imagine that there was possibly more than 1 police officer doing the shooting.

Of course they've had a victory when this sort of thing happens, but I think you're really looking at this with way too much hindsight.

random chase and kill

It wasn't like that at all,you have no reason to suspect that despite your deep and unwarrented cynicism. You'll be a great journalist.

 

[nick1048]

At any rate he's been made an example of now... shit terrorism is going crazy! Thanks U.S.

 

[transcendent]

At least he's death wasn't in vain. He's now a martyr for civil society.

 

[braindrainedAsh]

NTB, I understand that we have the benefit of heinsight now, knowing he was innocent, but I held fairly similar opinions to this before the news of his innocence came out, and when it came out it validated my earlier opinion more so.

"Random chase and kill"... yes it may be a bit over the top, but if we don't react to the first signs of tyranny and allow our fear of terrorism to prevail over common sense and humanity's notion that killing innocent people is wrong in any instance then who knows what could come?

And apparently he was shot EIGHT times now.... now THAT surely is more than a bit excessive.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1536022,00.html

Also the bit about him possibly running because his student visa had expired is interesting. There are many reasons why one might run when plain clothed police charge at them. It is a victory for terrorists when fear gets in the way of people making reasonable judgements. Also I think people may have got the wires coming out of clothes bit confused. That was the man that was running around University College hospital just after the second attacks, not the man gunned down by police. Police simply pinned the maan with wires to the wall and searched him. All sources I have read have said that the reason why police suspected De Menezes to have a bomb was because he was wearing a thick jacket during the warmer time of year in London.

Here is another story, this one discounts the expired visa theory.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1708378,00.html


Oh here is a good article that explains a lot about the situation, you should all read this one.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1707480,00.html

 

[mr EaZy]

with regards to the electrician... its sad to see the police officers make the wrong "connection"

and yeah! 8 shots is crazy. surely terrorists are not cyborgs!

 

[tempco]

Oh here is a good article that explains a lot about the situation, you should all read this one.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1707480,00.html

thanks for that article.

what doesn't make sense is this so called "suicide bombing training" certain british police officers had in israel. i'm sure pinning down the subject and shooting them in the head was not part of the training.

 

[Cyan_phoeniX]

Does it matter how many times they shot him? They either kill him or they don't. They could have risked shooting him once in the leg and hope he doesnt manage to trigger the bomb which they thought he had, or kill him. They chose the latter and they wanted to do it right. I'm sure they didn't enjoy it, but once they decided to kill him and not risk him triggering anything then its done, no point assessing how harsh it is by the number of bullets. Nobody won here, he was innocent, but i don't blame the policemen for shooting him given the situation. What i would like to know is that if he was under suspicion and watched, how come he was allowed to get as far into the station as he did? And why the hell did he run?

 

[transcendent]

yeah cause i mean if it were me i'd put a cap in all of those pigs arses or detonated the bomb i was carrying and sent them all to hell.

 

[braindrainedAsh]

The eight times thing to me does matter.... it says something about the mentality of the person who shot him.... either they are twisted/not right in the head or were driven by extreme fear and/or hatred. You can shoot to kill without pulling the trigger eight times.