Brazilian shooting new facts

[stevie_c2it]

Has the revelation that the Police (and the  news media at the time) misled the public over the circumstances surrounding the Brazilian underground passengers shooting shaken your belief in the integrity of our press and security services?

 Particularly in light of  peoples early opinions being based on the belief that he brought it on himself by 'acting suspiciously, wearing a bulky jacket and running from the police' (none of which was true).

Most people I heard talking about it previously were saying 'A tragedy but...'  Do you still think it was an honest mistake, or a **** up?

[jno]

well, the truth started to leak out quite early (it was 'only' a day or two before the police admitted they might have got the wrong man). But I agree the overall picture seems to be that the police deliberately misled the public in order to cover their a*ses, and did it by blackening the name of someone who was, in a word, innocent. I don't think there's any useful distinction between an honest mistake and a c*ckup - obviously they didn't know he was innocent, so it was a mistake - but the cover-up afterwards shows extreme bad faith on their part.

And somehow some of the bullets missed, even after he was being held down?

[bernardo]

You ask if it was an honest mistake "or" a ----up, as if they are alternative options.  But a ----up would have been an honest mistake.

It seems that what happened was neither - the police have blatantly lied about what happened, and engaged in a massive cover-up.

They need to explain why we were initially told that Mr de Menezes was running away?  That he jumped over the ticket barrier?  That he was wearing a heavy coat?  That he was challenged, but refused to co-operate?  We now know that none of these things is true, and that he was totally unaware of being followed until the very moment when he was killed.  Why was he - a pale-skinned Brazilian -  wrongly, and on flimsy evidence, identified as one of the bombing suspects - a black Ethiopian?  Why was he allowed to get on the bus unchallenged, if he was considered a suspect?  Who authorised the propagation of this blatant cover-up of lies and misinformation?  It would have been obvious to the officers who killed him that he was not a black Ethiopian, even if the distinction was somehow not clear to the more remote surveillance people.  And if the police are to be so cavalier about being trigger-happy, killing people and then lying about it, why should we normal law-abiding people be willing to co-operate with the police when they need our help?

[Oneeyedvic]

Whilst I dislike the news media, I am unsure as to whether they can be held responsible in this matter. Investigatice journalism seems to have completely died out now. They will interview a few eye witnesses and report the police 'facts'.

 

They certainly did bring things like the jacket to the forefront of the news - it was picked up on a previous thread - but even then other ABers did not want to believe it - there was mention that this only came from his family and probably wasn't true!

 

Personally, I have little faith in either the police or security services, but am afraid I can't offer an alternative so I am sure I will be shot down in flames!

[stevie_c2it]

Agreed. The question I should have posed was not whether it was a **** up (it clearly was), instead I'm interested to discover if people now belive that the misinformation they were initially fed (by the police via the media) was put into the public domain mistakenly, or deliberately to cloud and confuse.

As its several weeks on, and only now through a leaked report is the truth emerging, If it was a genuine mistake why did no one attempt to set the record straight at the time? Instead as the BBC 'Have your say website' has demonstrated more than 80% of contributors have given there full support to the police action. What has dismayed me most, was witnessing how easy its been for both the police and media to manipulate public opinion (deliberate or not), and how gullibile much of our population is, swallowing whatever comes out of a news readers mouth without questioning it.       

[Oneeyedvic]

And I totally agree with you. The media in this country are out of control. The majority of people read the Sun and beleive it. It is the papers that  control who we have in power - The Sun famously getting behind Blair in 97.

 

Most people don't have an educated opinion on things like the Euro - they will just go along with whatever the paper they read says.

And mud sticks in this country. I was talking to a friend about Craig someone - who played Lister in Red Dwarf - oh yeah she said - the rapist!. (it was found that the woman alledging the rape was lying).

 

And what about headlines that they write - The Sun has the heasline 1 down 3 to go or similar when Mendez was shot!. And when they arrested the next set of people, the Sun again implied their guilt. How are they going to get a fair trial?

 

This new Labour governement have made a mastery of spinning their stories to the media - it seems that othe rpublic sectors are now doing the same. And sadly 5th May 2005 proved that people believe the lies.

[Gevs1966]

Whilst I agree that the press and sometimes the police in this country have a lot to answer for I also remember that all the reports of the man running, jumping the barrier, wearing a heavy coat etc came from "eye witnesses" and not through any official channels especially in the early time after the shooting.

If you wrote for a newspaper and ten people told you something had happened you would report it as they said it too.

[jno]

the new revelations have of course also come via the news media. They can only report what they can find out at any given time. (I'm talking here about ITV and others like them, not the Sun, whose headline about One down, three to go is still repulsive).

[brachiopod]

In the heat of the moment, when news interrupts the schedules to go 'live to our reporter at the scene', and in the efforts to gather news and fill air time, the media will pick up on eye-witness statements (hardly 100% reliable) and hearsay. They will also keep an ear on the news wires too.
Unfortunately, as the reports and snippets are repeated and recycled, a piece of speculation by one news agency will be reported as fact by another, eventually becoming indisputable truth as each news gatherer picks up and culls their information from others.
One giant game of media Chinese Whispers if you like.

[Oneeyedvic]

just wanted to know if chompu would enter this debate:

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question128057.html

"jno, do me a favour. Do you think the police would lie about these two important issues, barrier and coat, when there were numerous eye witnesses around"

 

hmmm

 

Amazing how chinese whispers become facts

 

incidentally - funny how the sun haven't got anything on today's front page about the revelations isn't it!

[MargeB]

Well, I don't think its public eyewitness/press versus police statement any more. The police statement at the time said that he was asked to stop and refused. Look at the facts coming out now (as given by police witnesses present at the time!) from the IPCC report. He was thrown to his seat by an officer, then shots were fired! This is looking very very bad indeed. Iain Blair MUST go over this. It's not just a badly handled heated situation on the tube, the whole system in place was asking for trouble. They were allowed to engage even without a true confirmation of identity? Were strict rules of engagement on suicide bombers in place?

PS You have to question everything they say now. A police officer was 'relieving himself' so unable to properly monitor the suspect/take pictures. Yeah....

[MargeB]

Here is the story so far in black and white (good article):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4158832.stm

[Grunty]

Yes it does look as if someone made a colossal error, and lied afterwards.  Not the first time it has happened.  Neither is it the first time that someone has been tried in advance of the enquiry report by the news media, on the basis of a percentage of the evidence.  I think I am going to look forward to the final report.

[jno]

Oneeyedvic I am trying not to say anything resembling 'I told you so'. In fact I was hoping the police would at least come up with some halfway convincing explanation of how they made such a lethal mess of it. Regrettably, they have done just the opposite: lies, obfuscation, cover-up; and appalling incompetence.

Plus of course their assurance that more innocent people may be killed in the war against terrorism. We should be worried. This could have happened to anybody.

[MargeB]

Well, jno, let's just think about that. Although numbers are bandied about in a way that makes ONE individual life look insignificant, let us not forget, as you suggest, that a completely innocent individual has had his life taken from him by the security services.

Bad enough that the actions of the police should give such grounds for concern, but then they're found to be covering it up? Not good...

[Zen]

Never believe anyone with the surname Blair.

[Dom Tuk]

We in the Uk have begun to believe in the basic honesty and integrity of our politicians and people in high places. They will do no wrong and it is unpatriotic to even suggest they will. Our newspapaers with their unquestioning support of our armies in wars will propogate that belief. Wake up. Our politicians are the same as other despots around the world. They will do anything to keep their jobs and do as they wish. The PM lied about the war and he did not resign. The police commissioner lied on TV about the brazilian shooting. He knew what happened, the moment it happened. He knew that the man was innocent but came on TV to say it was part of the operation (carefully chosen words). If he wanted words why did he not say the truth. WE support our army but wont accept that soem of them are capable of cruelty that other armies are also capable of. Example...the photographs in Iraq, the rapes in kenya. Bet you this Blair will cling on to his job like his namesake. Bloody liars.

[stevie_c2it]

Many thanks to all those AB'ers who've taken the time and trouble to post there views and comments.

You've restored my faith in the fact that not all of my countrymen have accepted the slide into the 'dumbed down' culture that our government and news media seem keen to advance. (Dumb people don't ask questions, and believe what they're told!)

I was beginning to think that those people with enquiring minds and capable of independent thought were a dying breed. As one AB'er has already pointed out 'it's the duty of the citizens of a country to question its leaders'. 

I support the Police, but unless they can admit to themselves (and us) that operational mistakes were made, how can they take steps to prevent a repetition?

Now, how do we get Tony (and Ian) Blair to do the same?  

[scotty]

I am in favour of the Police, I think they do a very tough job.However , if the Captain of the ship makes such a huge C**k up, he must be fully accountable for his error and his mens; in my mind there is no doubt that Ian Blair must walk on this one,he's guilty as sin of attempting a huge coverup. Is it just me, or does anyone else think there is no honesty or morals in the people than run our lives?? Politicians especially spout how we should all be accountable for our actions but they seldom are accountable for theirs.

[kdrlly]

Even though it is a shame that he's dead if he went back to Brazil when his visa expired he would not of been shot, he has brought it upon himself by the nature of being here illigally!!  Sad but true!

[stevie_c2it]

Thanks Kdrlly for your input. Are you saying killing all illegal migrants in this country is justified? Why do you say its a shame he's dead, when clearly you think 'he brought it upon himself'' ? I can't decide if your biggoted or just dumb. Perhaps both.Feel free to enlighten me, I'd love to understand how you arive at your conclusions.