Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

Shooting on the tube

Page: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9(10)11 12

Regrettable Juvenilia

11:32 / 29.07.05

Don't assume that he wouldn't have been shot if he hadn't ran.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

11:47 / 29.07.05

Oh, I'm not assuming that at all... it's just that "he shouldn't have run" is another of the excuses an alarming number of people have been making in all the newspapers (across the board from Guardian to Mail) for the officers' actions.

Another is the use of the phrase "in the current climate". I mean, I can sometimes be fairly disgusted with people's complete lack of knowledge of current affairs, but I wouldn't think shooting them was a fair punishment.

I'm actually fairly shocked by the relative lack of outrage about this. If someone had said to me a couple of weeks ago "what would happen if the cops shot an innocent man eight times on a Tube platform, then held a gun to the head of the driver" I'd have guessed the country would be largely united in uproar. How wrong I was. Maybe the TERRORISTS HAVE WON (TM) already.

13:39 / 29.07.05

IPCC investigator condemns Home Office for its visa comments:

"It's entirely irrelevant information," Mr Hardwick said today. "I'm rather surprised the Home Office should issue it. We won't be releasing partial information until we've independently established the facts.

"I think a lot of people would do better to shut up for the moment until our independent investigation has established the facts. I won't speculate and I won't release partial information and it would be better if other people did the same."

15:50 / 30.07.05

Just when you thought Fox couldn't possibly get worse:
They claim that Al-Qaeda might be dressing South Americans up to make the police look bad when they kill them.

Holy cocking Christ. Could someone give Rupert Murdoch an oversized coat as a present, please?

16:27 / 30.07.05

I can see it now,

"Did you dress yourself this morning, sir?"
"No, I was running late so I had three arab guys do it for me"

Jaysis.

06:06 / 04.08.05

Brazilian's family claim police altered their story

07:13 / 17.08.05

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.

07:43 / 17.08.05

And news like that are the reason I´m more afraid of policemen than of terrorists.

Less searchable M0rd4nt

08:56 / 17.08.05

Let's just go over the story again.

You leave your house in the morning, you go to the tube station. You pick up a crappy free paper, you use your overpriced ticket to get through the ticket barrier, you get to the platform. There's already a train there, so you break into a run. You make the train in the nick of time, and you've just sat down when oops you're a bit dead.

What the fuck?

09:03 / 17.08.05

It also sounds like they never gave him full warning to surrender or stand down. Just grabbed and killed him. When the hell did we start using government execution squads?

This seems like a complete cock-up on all points. Almost ridiculously so. And what's worse is that Ian Blair downwards have all tried to spin this thing into Menezes fault. "He ran, he wore unusual clothing, he was acting suspicious" - no he wasn't!

Honestly, did they think they could lie their way out of killing some innocent bloke? How the fuck would that work? Have the MET never heard the word investigation?

09:11 / 17.08.05

Break into a run, Mordant? No need! Merely ‘quicken your pace’.

Honestly, did they think they could lie their way out of killing some innocent bloke? How the fuck would that work? Have the MET never heard the word investigation?

Well, possibly yes. Isn’t it also becoming clear that they attempted to disappear the CCTV footage at the tube station? Another factor might be: do we know for sure that this was a *police* officer?

Respect is due to whoever leaked these documents. So, what are our predictions? A murder trial?

09:15 / 17.08.05

Appalling, though interesting in that a lot of people may have to reassess their opinions, and maybe spot some unwise tendency to believe everything they’re told…

Interesting how all the ‘bomb belt’ and ‘big coat’ stuff came out very fast, and was widely circulated, but the retractions of this and genuine details have been more gradually leaked.

And I’d be fascinated by what’s currently going on in the minds of the so-called eyewitnesses whose versions of events were nothing short of very wrong indeed; these people who posted on the various newsites about how he was chased, had a big coat or belt with protruding wires, etc… if I was one of them, I’d have to seriously question the reliability of my memory, if not of my senses generally. Immediate false memory syndrome, to all intents and purposes.

09:19 / 17.08.05

This is where "I told you so" tastes like ashes in your mouth.

ONLY NICE THINGS

09:22 / 17.08.05

If anyone here is questioning the word of Mark Whitby, I will personally see them beaten.

This is an interesting one, isn't it? Short of having the guy stopping on the way into te station to give CPR to an ailing priest, I don't see how much worse this can get for the Police. Are they really going to be able to get away with it on the grounds that "the rules have changed" (tm)?

09:29 / 17.08.05

What I like about Mark Whitby, now that the facts are emerging, is that he bucks the tendency for eyewitnesses to exaggerate the drama of events. While others describe a veritable steeple chase down the escalators, an asian man in a huge padded coat trailing wires etc, Mark confidently halved the number of shots fired. He’s my hero.

09:33 / 17.08.05

Interesting how all the ‘bomb belt’ and ‘big coat’ stuff came out very fast, and was widely circulated, but the retractions of this and genuine details have been more gradually leaked.

isnt that pretty standard PR game stuff?
get the lies out fast and loud and in full colour and then retract it all in small print on page 94.
first impressions and all that.

This is where "I told you so" tastes like ashes in your mouth.

claiming to feel bad about unrealised potential for 'i told you so' is the new 'i told you so', it seems.
you could just not say it at all, hey.

Regrettable Juvenilia

09:34 / 17.08.05

When the hell did we start using government execution squads?

March 2002, apparently.

interesting in that a lot of people may have to reassess their opinions, and maybe spot some unwise tendency to believe everything they’re told...

Unfortunately, some people already have the mentality in place for dealing with this. It was a tragic accident, but you musn't call it murder, we must go on supporting the vital job the police are doing, etc...

09:37 / 17.08.05

The other thing to be in the news today was Charles Clarke coming out and stating that the two sets of bombing were linked, not by "judicial evidence" but that he knew they were linked anyway. They're just making this all up as they go along.

09:41 / 17.08.05

it's not the 'support the old bill no matter what' attitude that's annoying, it's the, 'well if a copper needs to take a piss and a man dies for it, that's just what'll happen' bit.

the current investigation's parameters are seeming all too narrow at the moment. as soon as this one is over there obviously needs to be another to see where all these lies emerged from in the first place. that probably won't even start for another six months, by which time the friendly blair twins will be confident a spot of patented public enquiry -branded whitewash will more than cover their sins.

finally, the law lord's verdict will no doubt boil down to
'everyone goes a bit silly in the summer...'

10:08 / 17.08.05

my own thought on the copper taking a piss thing and there being no tape....

what if he wasn't taking a piss- but just not very observant- read relieving himself as- reading 'The Sun' or there is a tape and it clearly shows him leaving the 'wrong' flat but that would make the police look like a bunch of dicks- so the tape is lost/ wiped and were told it never exsxted cos the copper was taking a wee (he's only human- right?).

On the days following the bombings especially on Thursdays when the police were monitoring the tube stations they invariabley looked bored shitless- I saw two armed police back to the entrance of the tube nattering over cinamon lattes and a danish as i got on the tube- yes they were there at the tube but they looked like they were stewarding a football match- its a shitty tough job, but questions most certainly need to be asked about how police go about these operations and training how surveillance should work.

Personally I feel sorry for the additional pressure that the police have been put under- however there seems to be gaping holes in the training and the reality of how well they were prepaired - despite media spin of how great they've been a massive, massive fuck up has been made.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

10:15 / 17.08.05

It's interesting comparing attitudes on this. The very same tabloids have been (predictably) up in arms about the Liverpool fan who MAY OR MAY NOT have hit that guy with a paving slab and got fifteen years in, was it Bulgaria? as have been saying we should just live with it when our police actually EXECUTE someone who even they have admitted was completely innocent.

Put it this way- if the Brazilian cops had gunned down an innocent Brit, I'm sure there'd be outrage.

10:46 / 17.08.05

This is where "I told you so" tastes like ashes in your mouth.
...
claiming to feel bad about unrealised potential for 'i told you so' is the new 'i told you so', it seems.
you could just not say it at all, hey.

I didn't say it - that was my first post on this thread (I think). All I meant to say was that there is no conceivable upside, as I strongly doubt that there will be any prosecution of the police involved due to using the 'what they thought reasonable force at the time' get-out-of-jail-free-pass-Go-and-collect-free-holiday' card.

Our Lady Has Left the Building

10:54 / 17.08.05

Now come on, if you all continue to insist that the armed response unit are a bunch of trigger-happy thugs that shot someone with absolutely no reason to do so they'll get upset, they might even go on strike again as they did when it was suggested the two that shot the Irish grandad with the tableleg should be prosecuted. If cops with guns aren't allowed to get away with killing anyone they like it's a slippery slope to political correctness gone Maaaaaaaaaad etc etc...

10:57 / 17.08.05

I didn't say it

not in so many words, no.
you pointed out that you were not saying it in such a way that made it clear that you could have said it, and suggesting that not only were you clever enough to have called the situation early, but clever enough to have restrained yourself from bragging.
i feel that that is tantamount to saying it anyway, and has become the acceptable face of 'i told you so' among folk who have noticed that it isnt polite to say.

but heck.
its only my opinion.

11:03 / 17.08.05

I didn't think that h1ppychick was saying anything other than 'oh god how awful that my suspicions have been proved correct', really... and given that a lot of people (me included) were prepared at first to see this incident as likely to have been 'necessary' action by the police acting in difficult circs, I don't think it's unwarranted for people who were more critical to point out the need for such sceptical thinking.

I suppose everyone feels pretty rubbish about this whether their initial take on the matter was right or wrong.

11:08 / 17.08.05

Re Charles Clarke's comments about 'linkage' (what's wrong with the word 'link', Charlie?), I submit the following for contrast and comparison:

NEIL FOX :
Genetically, paedophiles have more genes in common with crabs than they do with you and me.
Now that is scientific fact.
There's no real "evidence" for it but it is scientific fact.
- Brasseye Special, 2001

CHARLES CLARKE:
I think it would be very, very surprising if [the two bombings] weren't linked in some way, but evidence is an issue...
There is not a direct linkage formally established, to be able to make that assertion directly.
- Speaking on Today Programme, 16th Aug 2005

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

11:17 / 17.08.05

the Irish grandad with the tableleg

I think Stanley was a Scotsman, wasn't he? Police were reacting to a call that said he was an Irishman with a gun- the similarities with that case (wrong nationality, non-existence of weapon) are fairly big.

ONLY NICE THINGS

11:33 / 17.08.05

toksik, you know that thing where you subject the writings of others to deep textual analysis in order to unveil their secret textual beard?

How's that working for you? How, shall we say, important is it in the conduct of everyday life?

11:45 / 17.08.05

Wasn't the Irish man with a chair leg drunk and had the leg in a plastic bag, brandishing it shouting 'I've got a gun and I'll shoot'? Or was that more spin? I've just woken up so haven't seen or heard any of this stuff, very interesting though...

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

11:57 / 17.08.05

More spin, I think... Tango-Mango'd probably be the guy to ask.

I think the cops claimed he was "brandishing" it- don't think anyone said he actually shouted, though.

12:00 / 17.08.05

I read somewhere (deary me - will try and find report - it may have been in Private Eye) that the policeman said that the poor chap had turned towards the policeguys in the street and threatened them, but that the inquest revealed that he had been shot from behind and had probably just been walking away...

ONLY NICE THINGS

12:02 / 17.08.05

Harry Stanley was indeed Scottish. What the Police are aiming to do here is probably about what happened in the first Stanley inquiry; with a friendly coroner, get an open verdict on the grounds that there is no concrete evidence and eyewitness reports are unreliable - take a bow, Mark Whitby. Mind you, that didn't actually work in the longer run with Fagan and Sharman...

12:34 / 17.08.05

toksik, you know that thing where you subject the writings of others to deep textual analysis in order to unveil their secret textual beard?

How's that working for you? How, shall we say, important is it in the conduct of everyday life?

not very well, apparently.
what point are you trying to make?

ONLY NICE THINGS

12:53 / 17.08.05

K-CC: the armed policeman claimed that, when challenged, he turned in "a single smooth movement" and raised what they believed to be a sawn-off shotgun. However, Stanley had recently left hospital after treatment for colon cancer, and would apparently have struggle to turn swiftly or raise his arms. Even before being shot in the head.

The first inquest was farcical, with the coroner prohibiting the jury from a number of possible verdicts and attempting to raise Stanley's previous criminal record despite its utter irrelevance. Dr. Stephen Chan, come on down.

07:43 / 18.08.05

A number of reports over the past 24 hours suggest that the head of the Met wrote to the Home Office asking for the investigation into the shooting to be delayed, or de-prioritised, or the like. Hmmm.

Page: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9(10)11 12