I thought the police were now allowed to use non-lethal weapons to disable possibly dangerous persons? Surely with their "Shoot to kill" policy, they were going to shoot him whether he stopped or not, so he didn't stand a chance really. edit: I totally agree with what you're saying cpemma. I don't see why they had to be plain clothed. Anyone waving a gun in plain clothes at me would provoke me to run, particularly as anyone could say they were police just to catch you!
i highly doubt they'd just randomly shout at him. They would have at least shouted.. "STOP!! POLICE!!" or something like that.. and it would have been pretty obvious to him who they were shouting at if he was the ONLY one running over the barriers etc.. he knew they were chasing him. They were plain clothed because the house he was in at the time was under surveilence.
It will of been very unlikely they didn't say POLICE at some point. If your comming to the UK, even for a holiday, you should have a bit of insite into the laws of the land. Ie what the name for police, ambulance, fire are. More over you should also know that some drugs are illegal here. Its something you must know. If 2 guys pull a gun, single you out, you would have to be pretty damn stupid to run onto a train. Knowing whats happened lately thats just plain stupid. Its not as if that tube station would of been empty, there would of been staff, security staff, and all the rest. Yes he might of been used to an oppressive police. But god damnit, he jumped a ticket barrier and didn't say stop. Some guy with a gun tells you to 'stop' and ur in range of him you damn well stop or you get shot, even if there not police you get shot.
do you people not read newspapers? FACT: he was being watched by mi5 FACT: he went to the tube station and was followed by plain clothed police FACT: when asked to stop he didnt, he than ran into the underground jumping the barriers FACT: this man wearing a baggy coat then got onto a train FACT: they told him they where police and to stop FACT: all other people at the station where sensible enough to stop and get down FACT: they shot him now if i was one of those police men chasing someone you know is being watched by mi5 for possible connections to the bombings, then he goes down the underground and doesnt stop, he also has a baggy jacket on, then he gets on a train and still doesnt stop. I would shoot him, no problem. So would any other police officer. As it follows the rules on engagement for them. edit: he was brizillian but has been working in the UK for some time now, so he knows exactly what is going on, he also has links to one of the bombers, which may or may not have been innocent
If so many people weren't moaning as much as they are, then they wouldn't be apologising as much...of course they're going to apologise, its the least they can do, they shot an innocent man dead. Whether or not it was the right course of action for them to take, they'd still apologise...the police don't actually like shooting criminals, let alone terrorists who are far more useful when taken alive due to their potential intelligence value.
A few more "facts", some of which may even be accurate. Met Police's deputy assistant commissioner Brian Paddick said "This person was seen leaving premises we had under observation..." The 'premises' are a block of flats, he personally wasn't under suspicion. "Mr Menezes, who lived in Tulse Hill, was completely unconnected to Thursday's attempted bombings, Scotland Yard has confirmed." Witness A: "I saw this guy who appeared to have a bomb belt and wires coming out and people were panicking and I heard two shots being fired." His imagination's better than his counting. Mark Whitby said: "I was sitting on the train... I heard a load of noise, people saying, 'Get out, get down'. I saw an Asian guy. He ran on to the train, he was hotly pursued by three plain clothes officers, one of them was wielding a black handgun. He half tripped... they pushed him to the floor and basically unloaded five shots into him," he told BBC News 24. No mention of "Police" being shouted. Witness B: "I could hear shouting, 'get down' and people going 'run, run'. I thought there was just someone shooting randomly." Still no mention of the word "Police" from a witness. Witness C: "When we pulled into Stockwell there was just a lot of panic on the platform...Everyone who was on the platform was just running from one end of the platform down to the exit as quickly as possible." 'all other people at the station where sensible enough to stop and get down'? "Met Police Chief Sir Ian Blair said the "shoot to kill" policy for dealing with suspected suicide bombers would remain in force." Moral is, don't go out in a hoody, and don't go for your ID if a policeman accosts you. Also learn decent English, it's 'were', not 'where'.
What is pointless is for us here to do a post-mortem on this tragedy, with with insufficient information at that. It is often easier to blame the victim, or the police (depending on your a priory beliefs/prejudices) than to come to terms with the fact that we live in a world where innocent people can tragically die at the business end of a gun through a stupid misunderstanding. It was a tragedy, and the pointless death of an innocent. Such is life. Being a smartass about how right or wrong it was does not make it better for him, his family or the policeman who now may have to live with killing an innocent man.
hence i listed what was written across 2 newspapers today, not what i had heard from a blokes dog down the pub
ok you read again. i posted because i wanted to post the facts. end of. rather than the "post mortem"
Actually, you were the one listing "facts" that seem nothing more than hearsay, as opposed to the seven direct quotes from news sources, witnesses, and the police that cpemma provided Nexxo, I don't want to have to "come to terms" with these sorts of things, being understanding where situations like this are involved isn't going to do anything but encourage the police to carry on. I don't think the police should carry firearms anyway, and I certainly don't think they should be continuing with this "shoot to kill to protect" policy - it's from individuals being given permission to fire in public places on their own judgment that these kinds of tragedies happen.
yeh thats understandable, but dont you expect anyone to moan when the cops shoot some random guy dead? and the police dont like shooting criminals? its not the same people that do the shooting that are involved intelligence. every time i heard a cop speak on the matter its only been about how they love nothing more than some actual action.
oh yeh and dom and cpemma, i wouldnt really worry about the accuracy of your different facts, cos when the cops themselves keep changing the story every 5 minutes, u got no chance of really having the truth, no matter what the source...
That was Saturday afternoon's information, see the online sites or watch TV for the latest round of "facts". People at the top are retracting earlier statements faster than a politician. Times Online
The police are heroes, they personally put their lives at risk in order to ensure the safety of those travelling on the underground
Except for this guy who got five bullets in him. I don't know what the correct solution is for terrorism, I just know shooting 'suspects', and I use the term loosely, on site isn't.
Damn, with all these 'news' reports of more incidents, it sounds like chaos over there.. :\ Wouldn't it be better to end his life than to let him go and have him end 40 others'?
