Police May Face Charges

In the aftermath of the murder, a cascade of misinformation and lies from the very top down. From Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair to the trigger-happy plain-clothes shooters identified only as "carrying a long-barrelled weapon", the actions that day have been exposed as a cover-up of the events that resulted in the extra-judicial execution of an innocent man.

Police May Face Charges

Joined: 26 Nov 2005, 01:46

13 Jul 2006, 17:13 #1

Last Updated: Thursday, 13 July 2006, 16:57 GMT 17:57 UK

Menezes police may face charges

An inquiry into the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes has said prosecutors should consider charging three police officers with manslaughter.

Prosecutors have been asked to look at charging a Met commander and two firearms officers, the BBC has learned.

The Brazilian was shot by police at Stockwell station last July, after being mistaken for a suicide bomber.

The Crown Prosecution Service received the Independent Police Complaints Commission report in January.

It has been considering it since then and will announce what action is to be taken on Monday.

The three who could face charges includes Metropolitan Police Commander Cressida Dick, who was the senior designated officer in charge of the firearms operation the day Mr Menezes was shot.

The other two are the officers who shot Mr Menezes.

Former Deputy Assistant Commissioner Alan Given - in charge of the firearms unit at the time of the shooting - told the BBC's Home Affairs correspondent, Margaret Gilmore the two firearms officers should not be prosecuted.

Mr Given was not involved in the operation on 22 July, the day Mr Menezes was shot, but he said he had spoken to the two firearms officers afterwards.

"They felt that they had done exactly what had been required of them.

"They had gone into what they considered to be an enormously difficult situation; they'd acted in a very brave way. We're asking these people to do an enormously difficult, challenging thing.

"They thought, as a result of their actions, they had made London a safer place that day," he said.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission's report was a "damning indictment" of a catalogue of failures made on the day, added our correspondent.

But she said many senior police officers, and many lawyers, believed it was unlikely there would be enough evidence to meet the criteria and bring prosecutions.
BBC 13/07/06
�To those who are afraid of the truth, I wish to offer a few scary truths; and to those who are not afraid of the truth, I wish to offer proof that the terrorism of truth is the only one that can be of benefit to the proletariat.� -- On Terrorism and the State, Gianfranco Sanguinetti
Reply
Like

Joined: 26 Nov 2005, 01:46

15 Jul 2006, 10:19 #2

and now they won't ....
No officers to face charges over Menezes

CPS rules out prosecutions for murder or manslaughter in shooting case

Clare Dyer, legal editor
Saturday July 15, 2006
The Guardian

No individual police officers involved in the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes will face prosecution over his death, the Guardian has learned. The Crown Prosecution Service has ruled out murder or manslaughter charges after a review of the circumstances surrounding the killing of the innocent Brazilian who was mistaken for a suicide bomber in July last year.

But the CPS is expected to announce on Monday that the Metropolitan police as an organisation will be charged with breaching health and safety at work laws over the shooting, raising questions over the future of the Met commissioner Sir Ian Blair. If found guilty of breaches, the Met could be fined an unlimited sum.

The CPS decision is certain to anger the de Menezes family, who had pressed for charges to be brought against individual officers. Harriet Wistrich, solicitor for the family, said they were likely to be "very unhappy" if no officer was prosecuted. "They would like to see officers held to account on a personal level, for somebody to be charged with a homicide offence," she said.

Mr de Menezes, an electrician who was working in London, was shot eight times by two Scotland Yard marksmen on an underground train at Stockwell on July 22, the day after a failed attempt by suicide bombers to blow up three tube trains and a bus. Police and military surveillance officers who had tailed him for several miles mistook him for a suicide bomber.

The report on the incident by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), delivered to the CPS last January, raised the possibility of manslaughter charges against the two firearms officers and Scotland Yard Commander Cressida Dick, the senior designated officer in charge of the firearms operation on the day of the shooting. The IPCC investigated whether she had given a clear-cut order for officers to shoot to kill.

Though the independent inquiry found multiple errors from senior officers downwards, the CPS remit was to consider whether an actual criminal offence had taken place that could be ascribed to any officer involved in the killing.

Under its code, the CPS has to consider whether the evidence is sufficient, whether a prosecution would have a reasonable prospect of success and whether it would be in the public interest.

In taking the decision, crown prosecutors sought advice from an independent QC, Clare Montgomery, a highly-regarded criminal silk practising from Matrix, the former chambers of the director of public prosecutions, Ken Macdonald QC. Decisions not to prosecute can be judicially reviewed by the courts if the reasoning is flawed and have been quashed in the past.

But Ms Wistrich said yesterday she suspected the CPS decision in the Menezes case "will have been very carefully gone through by several senior people".

"Inayat Bunglawala, spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "The circumstances surrounding the de Menezes killing have raised many serious questions about the level of professionalism displayed by the senior officers involved in that incident and whether the killing could have possibly been avoided.

"If there was gross negligence involved, then those responsible officers should face appropriate charges."

The IPCC report will remain under wraps until any prosecutions are concluded, but it is understood to be highly critical of the Met's surveillance and communications.

Surveillance officers were watching the block of flats where Mr Menezes lived, believing it to be the address of a suspected suicide bomber. In a case of mistaken identity, he was followed as he left the block, boarded a bus, alighted at the tube station and got on the train. It was there that he was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder.

Commander Dick, who was in charge of the operation, is said to have told firearms officers to stop the suspect at all costs.

Under the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act, employers must ensure, as far as reasonably practicable, that not only employees but the wider public who might be affected by their operations "are not thereby exposed to risks to their health or safety".
Guardian 15/07/06
�To those who are afraid of the truth, I wish to offer a few scary truths; and to those who are not afraid of the truth, I wish to offer proof that the terrorism of truth is the only one that can be of benefit to the proletariat.� -- On Terrorism and the State, Gianfranco Sanguinetti
Reply
Like

Joined: 14 Jul 2006, 09:00

17 Jul 2006, 11:50 #3

Everyone gets away scott-free and the cold blooded murder of an innocent man is deemed a Health and Safety matter.

I hate this country sometimes.
Reply
Like

Joined: 19 Jun 2006, 13:58

17 Jul 2006, 12:22 #4

Stephen O'Doherty, senior lawyer from the CPS Special Crime Division, made this statement:
I wish first to take this opportunity to express my condolences to the family and friends of Jean Charles de Menezes, and my gratitude to them for the patience and understanding they have shown whilst I have considered the evidence in this tragic case.

I have now completed my review into the circumstances surrounding the death of Jean Charles de Menezes.

Following the investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, their report and supporting evidence was sent to me.

I asked them to carry out some additional enquiries, which they have done, and I am now satisfied that I have sufficient evidence to reach a decision in this matter.

The offences I considered included murder, manslaughter, forgery, and breaches of health and safety legislation.

All cases are considered in accordance with the principles in the Code for Crown Prosecutors, which states that before a prosecution can commence, there must be a realistic prospect of conviction.

If there is not sufficient evidence then a case cannot proceed, no matter how important or serious it may be.

After the most careful consideration I have concluded that there is insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against any individual police officer.

But I am satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to prosecute the Office of Commissioner of Police for an offence under sections 3 and 33 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 of failing to provide for the health, safety and welfare of Jean Charles de Menezes on 22 July 2005.

The two officers who fired the fatal shots did so because they thought that Mr de Menezes had been identified to them as a suicide bomber and that if they did not shoot him, he would blow up the train, killing many people.

In order to prosecute those officers, we would have to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that they did not honestly and genuinely hold those beliefs.

In fact, the evidence supports their claim that they genuinely believed that Mr de Menezes was a suicide bomber and therefore, as we cannot disprove that claim, we cannot prosecute them for murder or any other related offence.

Mr de Menezes was not a suicide bomber. I therefore considered the actions of all those involved in the operation to see how it was that an innocent man came to be mistaken for a suicide bomber.

I concluded that while a number of individuals had made errors in planning and communication, and the cumulative result was the tragic death of Mr de Menezes, no individual had been culpable to the degree necessary for a criminal offence.

A log book of events was submitted for forensic examination to see if it had been altered and, if so, by whom.

Two experts examined the relevant passage but they could not agree to the required standard whether there had been an alteration or, if there had been one, who may have done it.

This meant there could be no prosecution of any individual in relation to the log book.

However I have concluded that the operational errors indicate that there had been a breach of the duties owed to non-employees under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, by the Office of Commissioner of Police and I have authorised a prosecution under that act.

I must stress that this is not a prosecution of Sir Ian Blair in his personal capacity, but will be a prosecution of the Office of Commissioner, as the deemed employer of the Metropolitan Police officers involved in the death of Mr de Menezes.

I have today provided a detailed explanation to those representing the de Menezes family and I have offered to meet with them to answer their questions.
All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them - Galileo Galilei
Reply
Like

Joined: 26 Nov 2005, 01:46

17 Jul 2006, 12:34 #5

Harriet Wistrich the family's solicitor has just said at a press conference that Jean Charles' Inquest must go ahead now and not be delayed by the H & S case.

She demands the release of the evidence into the public domain.

I'm trying to find a press release from Gareth Pierce.
�To those who are afraid of the truth, I wish to offer a few scary truths; and to those who are not afraid of the truth, I wish to offer proof that the terrorism of truth is the only one that can be of benefit to the proletariat.� -- On Terrorism and the State, Gianfranco Sanguinetti
Reply
Like

Joined: 26 Nov 2005, 01:46

17 Jul 2006, 12:51 #6

Justice4JeanFamily Campaign
Jean Charles de Menezes 7.1.1978 - 22.7.2005

16.06.06
09:00

URGENT: MENEZES FAMILY ATTENDS INQUEST, POLICE DELAY 'STOCKWELL 2' INVESTIGATION
The Inquest into the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes resumes today at Southwark Coroners Court, I Tennis St, Southwark at 11am.  The family of Jean Charles in London will be attending the Inquest with their lawyers.
The family will be expressing their frustration that the Inquest proceedings cannot commence further as a result of continuing delays by the CPS in reaching a conclusion to their decision into possible prosecutions for those officers involved in the shooting.
The family is increasingly angry at the ever slowing pace of the CPS in coming to a decision and expects to ask the Coroner to put pressure on the CPS for a speedy conclusion.
POLICE DELAY 'STOCKWELL 2'
This comes as further news regarding the progress of the IPCC report 'Stockwell 2' is revealed.  The family have now been informed by the IPCC that their final report into the alleged cover up and mishandling of the case after Jean's killing could now be delayed until the autumn as the solicitors' for the two remaining senior officers have indicated they would not be available for interview for the investigation until late July and into August.
A spokesperson for the family campaign said
"The family has already been let down by the police, now it is being let down by the CPS & IPCC.  It is an outrage that neither agency have finished their investigations and the CPS have not indicated to the family the timescale.  This adds further insult to injury to the family as they approach the 1 year anniversary of Jean's murder
"We believe it is a disgraceful situation where the head of the metropolitan police who is being investigated for the cover of the killing of an innocent man almost a year ago, cannot find time for almost 2 months to report to the IPCC.  The IPCC need to exert their authority now in order to have any further credibility"
ENDS

For more information contact 0776570632
From their new website
Justice4Jean
�To those who are afraid of the truth, I wish to offer a few scary truths; and to those who are not afraid of the truth, I wish to offer proof that the terrorism of truth is the only one that can be of benefit to the proletariat.� -- On Terrorism and the State, Gianfranco Sanguinetti
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Dec 2005, 15:21

17 Jul 2006, 14:15 #7

Mother of Jean Charles de Menezes demands police be charged
By SHARON CHURCHER,
The Mail on Sunday

22:00pm 15th July 2006

The grieving mother of Jean Charles de Menezes last night demanded that the two police marksmen who shot her son dead on a London tube train and the senior woman officer who led the disastrous operation should be charged with manslaughter - at the very least.

Responding to authoritative reports that no one is going to face charges in connection with the 27-year-old electrician's death, his mother Maria said she feared a cover-up and that those responsible would escape criminal charges.
Mrs de Menezes, 60, who suffers from a serious heart condition, said: "My family will not accept that decision. It is a total cover-up, which is what we had suspected was going to happen ever since we met your Independent Police Complaints Commission last September. They may think that because they are the First World and we live thousands of miles away in Gonzaga - the Third World - that we are poor, stupid people. We are poor but we are not stupid.

"The senseless murder of Jean has deeply affected our lives. My health is failing. My blood pressure is high. My husband and I have nightmares constantly when we see the body of Jean, his head blown away. We cannot sleep at night. But that just makes us more angry and more determined to get justice for our son. Jean was not a terrorist. He was a victim of police terror."

She blamed the two police marksmen and Commander Cressida Dick, the senior Scotland Yard officer in charge of the operation, for his death, saying: "We intend to keep fighting until the woman who commanded this operation and the shooters do long prison terms."

Mrs de Menezes and her husband Matozinhos, 66, were reacting as reports reached the Brazilian media that Britain's Crown Prosecution Service is poised to rule out the possibility of bringing charges over the killing of their son in the wake of the 7/7 attacks on London. The CPS decision is expected to be formally announced tomorrow.

Mrs de Menezes said: "The CPS is another organ of your government, and we think that all that your government has been doing during this so-called independent investigation is creating level after level of false stories to cover up what really happened - which is that he was exterminated by trigger-happy policemen."

The dead man's brother Giovani, 34, said he was shocked to learn that as many as a third of the IPCC's investigators were former police officers. He said: "This was a case of the police being investigated by retired police. How independent can that be?'*

Giovani said that during the family's two meetings last September with the IPCC, they became convinced that key evidence was being 'faked and doctored'.

Jean's mother also angrily disputes a section of the IPCC report leaked to the Press suggesting her son was acting peculiarly because he was high on cocaine that morning. "My son did not do drugs. Maybe British people do drugs before they go to work. But not my son,' she said.

Last year The Mail on Sunday revealed how Scotland Yard initially offered the heartbroken family just £15,000 compensation for the killing. Giovani said: "That money paid for us to bring Jean home and bury him. Since then, we have not had any other communications from them.

"But we will talk about money later. What we want first is not compensation. It is justice."

Mail on Sunday
* I never knew that!
"We are not democrats for, among other reasons, democracy sooner or later leads to war and dictatorship. Just as we are not supporters of dictatorships, among other things, because dictatorship arouses a desire for democracy, provokes a return to democracy, and thus tends to perpetuate a vicious circle in which human society oscillates between open and brutal tyranny and a lying freedom." - Errico Malatesta, Democracy and Anarchy 1924
Reply
Like