![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
piranharemember jean charles de menezes, the brasilian electrician who was shot in london on july 22nd, because he was mistaken for a terrorist? i wasn't terribly comfortable with the idea of cops going around shooting suspects, but some of the arguments i read were pretty persuasive (especially those by ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
karentraviss), and i thought that yeah, in the heat of the moment, when you have just a few seconds time to decide, and if you don't shoot, many people might die in another explosion, that it was a justifiable mistake. still, my personal opinion remained that i am deeply uncomfortable with "shoot to kill" policies; i would really rather get blown up by a terrorist than have cops shoot innocent people -- to my mind the responsibility here doesn't get blurred at all; the terrorist is at fault, not the cops. i don't like the climate such a policy creates, but i realise that lots of people disagree with me about rather wanting to be blown up than see other innocents killed, and that they'd happily blame the cops if they didn't shoot an actual terrorist. i empathise with those who have to make the decisions in the field.
i'm curious what karen has to say now. as it turns out, not a whole lot was true about what we were told at the time. mr menezes was not
- identified as one of the bombers by somebody on his surveillance team
- running from the police after being told to stop
- jumping over a turnstile to escape from the cops into the subway
- dressed in a suspiciously thick, padded (inappropriate for the weather) jacket
- dangling wires from underneath said jacket
documents from the investigation have been leaked to ITV. mr menezes wasn't running away from the police. he did in fact not know that he had been followed. he entered the station properly, through the ticket barrier. he picked up a newspaper. he broke out in a run after that, yes, but not in response to police orders, no, to catch the incoming train. and he was quietly seated on that train when the cops yelled at him. he wasn't alone; members of the surveillance team were on that train with him. and what's more, he was immediately restrained by a member of his surveillance team when the cops burst on the scene. then the 8 shots were fired.
that's ... no. that's no longer justifiable at all. i don't want the police to protect me in this manner.
karentraviss), and i thought that yeah, in the heat of the moment, when you have just a few seconds time to decide, and if you don't shoot, many people might die in another explosion, that it was a justifiable mistake. still, my personal opinion remained that i am deeply uncomfortable with "shoot to kill" policies; i would really rather get blown up by a terrorist than have cops shoot innocent people -- to my mind the responsibility here doesn't get blurred at all; the terrorist is at fault, not the cops. i don't like the climate such a policy creates, but i realise that lots of people disagree with me about rather wanting to be blown up than see other innocents killed, and that they'd happily blame the cops if they didn't shoot an actual terrorist. i empathise with those who have to make the decisions in the field.i'm curious what karen has to say now. as it turns out, not a whole lot was true about what we were told at the time. mr menezes was not
- identified as one of the bombers by somebody on his surveillance team
- running from the police after being told to stop
- jumping over a turnstile to escape from the cops into the subway
- dressed in a suspiciously thick, padded (inappropriate for the weather) jacket
- dangling wires from underneath said jacket
documents from the investigation have been leaked to ITV. mr menezes wasn't running away from the police. he did in fact not know that he had been followed. he entered the station properly, through the ticket barrier. he picked up a newspaper. he broke out in a run after that, yes, but not in response to police orders, no, to catch the incoming train. and he was quietly seated on that train when the cops yelled at him. he wasn't alone; members of the surveillance team were on that train with him. and what's more, he was immediately restrained by a member of his surveillance team when the cops burst on the scene. then the 8 shots were fired.
that's ... no. that's no longer justifiable at all. i don't want the police to protect me in this manner.
no subject
on 2005-08-18 08:16 (UTC)I'm awaiting the full report before passing final judgement, but it would take a plot twist in the Fight Club league to make the police come out of this looking good at this stage.
Tipf for not getting shot by the London police the day after a terrorist incident:
1) Pause for a few minutes when you leave the house. This will give the police surveillance team time to stop pissing about (literally) and video you. There's then a fighting chance that 'it might be one of them' won't become 'we've got a positive ID; it's Osman Hussain' by the time you've got to the tube. Don't count on it, though.
2) When you get to the tube, don't pick up a copy of The Metro, as the action of stopping and picking up a free newspaper can look remarkably like the action of vaulting over the ticket barriers, when viewed from a certain angle. Apparently.
3) Don't run for the tube. No one ever does that, so you're just marking yourself out as a suspect. (Actually, this is the one piece of advice I'd give seriously; running for the tube isn't usually a good idea; there will always be another one along soon, and it increases the chance that you'll trip and put yourself or other people in danger.)
4) If someone shouts 'Police!' at you, on no account stand up and start to walk over to them. This is very threatening behaviour, and scares them. It's far better to run off in the other direction - that's what most of the eye witnesses will claim you were doing anyway.
5) Go naked. That way they won't assume you've got a bomb under whatever light summer clothes you're wearing.
I still, for the record, think that by and large the London police did and continue to do a great job after the attacks. This, however, was not an example of it.