whos the police shot?

and yeah, im sure there is a few nice reg hollises in there too, but in my opinion there in the wrong job then

 

You have me at a disadvantage Matthew...I haven't a clue what you're on about.

Are you saying communities didn't kick shit out of the Peelers when ever they appeared?

 

Riiiiiight... of course. How fun it is to hang out with hormonal teenagers!

 

Well this is a blinder! You made about as much sense as Matthew!

 

I was expecting something at least half-rational, but that kind of crap is so clearly just look-at-me-I'm-alternative posturing that there was no point in replying to the content...

I do wonder what makes you think it's cool to say those sorts of things though. Does it come from a political position? Do you perceive yourself as some kind of outlaw, perhaps?

 

Oh well. The intelligent discussion was nice while it lasted. Back to the normal slanging match then.

 

Oh really....yes I am 'just-look-at-me I'm alternative posturing'.

Sorry mate but I'm like this in real life.

And if there was no point in replying why did you reply? Have a psychological need to be heard perhaps?

But tell me, are you in some kind of denial about the history of the British Police?

 

Apologies Doc. I take issue with people being labelled insane for having a very healthy, in my opinion, disrespect for the police.

 

"healthy disrespect for the police" - sorry, which country do you live in again? o_0

 

Has anyone noticed that the trolls hardly ever have any personal details on their profiles?

 

Only coz they know evil people like you will comb through them for every last detail you can use against them

 

You really should try stringing your sentences togethor better...

What the fuck does it matter what country I live in to hold a "healthy disrespect for the police" ? And I've actually lived in several, the cops uniforms are different but the type of people are pretty much the same...

Whats the matter, Daddy a copper or something? Or are you just your average 'little Englander'?

Have you actually got anything to say on the points I've brought up about the Police here having a bloody, corrupt and stinking history? Or are you simply going to whitewash the countless sordid events by giving a comparitive between them and oh, say...the Brazilian police?

 

well the recient stuff thats happened is they found another bomb in a car at luton - it wasnt exploded yet or anything which is good and they raided a house in north london and found stuff to make bombs with. i think they have one of the bombers as well - like he is gonna say anything? but at least they have stopped gunning down innocent people - at the moment anyway

 

It's about time they earned their money. In Norfolk they're busy targetting ravers..

http://new.edp24.co.uk/search/story.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=News&itemid=NOED25%20Jul%202005%2018:27:50:793&tBrand=EDPOnline&tCategory=search

“Three arrests were made and a substantial amount of property seized including one van which bought the equipment to the site.

“We will continue to take firm action against people who organise and attend these illegal gatherings.”

 

Interesting piece in the Guardian today...

Brazilian did not wear bulky jacket

Relatives say Met admits that, contrary to reports, electrician did not leap tube station barrier

Mark Honigsbaum
Thursday July 28, 2005
The Guardian

Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian shot dead in the head, was not wearing a heavy jacket that might have concealed a bomb, and did not jump the ticket barrier when challenged by armed plainclothes police, his cousin said yesterday.



Speaking at a press conference after a meeting with the Metropolitan police, Vivien Figueiredo, 22, said that the first reports of how her 27-year-old cousin had come to be killed in mistake for a suicide bomber on Friday at Stockwell tube station were wrong.

"He used a travel card," she said. "He had no bulky jacket, he was wearing a jeans jacket. But even if he was wearing a bulky jacket that wouldn't be an excuse to kill him."



Flanked by the de Menezes family's solicitor, Gareth Peirce, and by Bianca Jagger, the anti-Iraq war campaigner, she condemned the shoot-to-kill policy which had led to her cousin's death and vowed that what she called the "crime" would not go unpunished.

"My cousin was an honest and hard working person," said Ms Figueiredo who shared a flat with him in Tulse Hill, south London. "Although we are living in circumstances similar to a war, we should not be exterminating people unjustly."

Another cousin, Patricia da Silva Armani, 21, said he was in Britain legally to work and study, giving him no reason to fear the police. "An innocent man has been killed as though he was a terrorist," she said. "An incredibly grave error was committed by the British police."

Mr de Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder at 10am last Friday after being followed from Tulse Hill. Scotland Yard initially claimed he wore a bulky jacket and jumped the barrier when police identified themselves and ordered him to stop. The same day the Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said the shooting was "directly linked" to the unprecedented anti-terror operation on London's streets.

The following day Sir Ian apologised when detectives established that the Brazilian electrician, on his way to a job in north-west London, was not connected to attempts to blow up three underground trains and a bus in the capital.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission has began an inquiry which is expected to take several months. Yesterday it emerged one armed officer involved has been given leave, and two have been moved to non-firearm duties. Ms Figuerdo condemned Sir Ian's decision to authorise the leave, saying she wanted to see the man who shot her cousin, and he should be in jail.

The body of Mr de Menezes is being flown to Brazil tonight for a funeral tomorrow. Simultaneously, a memorial service will be held at Westminster Cathedral, with TV coverage beamed live to Brazil.

Ms Peirce condemned Sir Ian's statements on the case, saying there had been a "regrettable rush to judgment".

She was astonished that the phrase "shoot to kill" was being used as if it was a legitimate legal term; the family would demand "transparency" both as to the facts of what had happened and on the policy. She added that the family were ready to cooperate with the complaints body, and she saw no reason for delay: "They know what their questions are and we see no reasons why they should not be answered.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1537457,00.html

Meanwhile the officers involved have been given a holiday abroad......classic.

 

Wait.... for.... the.... facts. Just because his mother says something, doesn't make it so. Any more than the police saying something making it so.

 

Cousin.

Understood, but a statement, flanked by one's solicitor, would I feel imply a relitive of truth in certain instances?

After all them there ticket barriers have cctv.

Unless of course the old bill have replaced the footage with that of a clip from Scooby Doo!!

 

I'm at work and skim reading

You could say exactly the same about the police. Not too smart coming out and making statements on national TV if they're gonna be shown up by CCTV. But again, until the officers have been up in front of the enquiry explaining why they felt the need to shoot to kill, it's all just pointless speculation.

 

Well if it's anything like the Harry Stanley case we'll be in for a long wait...and a lot of lies....

We shall see.

 

I'm waiting until I have more information until I make a judgement, as should anyone. But you can't really expect newspapers not to report and people not to speculate. In fact in many cases this process of a drip-drip of details, claims and counter-claims often exerts pressure on those in power who have the ability to control information to be full and frank in their eventual publication of the facts rather than brushing things under the carpet. A good example of this is the Hutton inquiry ... the story of the inquiry and inquest ending in publication of a dry and tedious report would have been forgotten much more quickly had there not been a massive amount of media interest and speculation.

Something like this has captured the public interest because it's such an important issue which has highlighted a huge change of policy ("Kratos") enacted in secret. I therefore welcome the ongoing speculation.