PDA

View Full Version : Police face no charges over de Menezes



David Guyatt
02-13-2009, 04:32 PM
This should not come as a surprise, I think.

Charles De Menezes was shot eight times by two out of control panicky policeman who mistook him for a terrorist.

But hey, mistakes happen, right.

A few years earlier in 1999, two armed policemen and panicky shot and killed a man wielding a table leg which they mistook for a sawn-off shotgun (easy mistake eh).

Following indications that those two police officers wold be prosecuted, armed police officers across the nation threatened to refuse to carry weapons in the future - and the government caved. Neither policeman was prosecuted (see (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-5335208.html)).

Thereafter the ancient British law that you are innocent until proven guilty crumbled. If police think you are guilty they don't even have to arrest you. They can simply shoot you. And having shot an unarmed citizen dead they can argue that they were acting in self defence.

Madness rules apparently...

**

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090213/tuk-police-face-no-charges-over-de-menez-dba1618.html

Police face no charges over de Menezes
Friday, February 13 12:53 pm

No police officers will be prosecuted over the death of Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell Tube station. Skip related content

The announcement comes after a review of evidence heard at the inquest into his death which returned an open verdict last December.

The jury at the inquest concluded they did not accept accounts given by the two officers who shot Mr de Menezes, known as Charlie 2 and Charlie 12.

But they were not given the option of an unlawful killing verdict after Coroner Sir Michael Wright controversially ruled it out.

Stephen O'Doherty, reviewing lawyer for the Crown Prosecution Service, said that in making his decision he had considered whether the two officers had lied to the inquest.

But he added that "although there were some inconsistencies in what the officers said at the inquest, there were also inconsistencies in what passengers had said. I concluded that in the confusion of what occurred on the day, a jury could not be sure that any officer had deliberately given a false account of events.

He added: "I also considered the actions of the individual officers in the police management team on that day and considered whether there was sufficient evidence to charge any of them with gross negligence manslaughter.

"There was no fresh evidence from the inquest which caused me to change my original decision that there was insufficient evidence to do so.

"I have today written to the de Menezes family explaining my decision."

Peter Lemkin
02-13-2009, 07:57 PM
It comes as no surprise in this 1984, Brave New World we now live in - not only was he presumed guilty, he 'was' guilty and duely, legally, with impunity was tried and executed, not wasting the tax payers money for the arrest and trial. This should greatly speed-up 'Justice'. Glad to hear the UK is right [and I mean RIGHT] up there with the US in leading the charge toward a more humane world, full of law, justice, personal rights, presumption of innnocence and all those bits chucked-into the United Nations Declaration Of Human Rights. I'm very inclined to a bumpersticker with UK and USA out of Planet Earth NOW - PLEASE! [ Politicians, Bankers, MIC, MSM, Military, Intelligence and Police FIRST!]