Blair to resign?

[Thracian]

Should Metropolitan Police chief resign?.

Whatever the outcome of any enquiry two things are clear. An innocent man was shot dead on the back of false information.

The circumstances of how it happened were accidentally or deliberately muddied or falsified but muddied they were.

Nothing pains me more but there is no question in my view that he should quit and quit now.

Chief's get paid to maintain the confidence of the people they represent and their customers (in this case the public).

That has been seriously compromised.

[Babylon]

Should Metropolitan Police chief resign?.

Whatever the outcome of any enquiry two things are clear. An innocent man was shot dead on the back of false information.

The circumstances of how it happened were accidentally or deliberately muddied or falsified but muddied they were.

Nothing pains me more but there is no question in my view that he should quit and quit now.

Chief's get paid to maintain the confidence of the people they represent and their customers (in this case the public).

That has been seriously compromised.

160857[/snapback]

Depends whether he actually lied or not. He can only work on the information he is given.

It wasn't the police who originally said he jumped barriers or was wearing a big coat. All of this came from so called witnesses who saw it all happen. Someone even said "he was wearing a bomb belt with wires coming out of it".

I'm sick or hearing about it to be perfectly honest. I can understand the family being hurt and deeply upset about what has gone on, but part of me feels like someone is really manipulating them to cause as much hassle as they can.

On the news you see the guys cousin going to the station with a giant brazil flag, 2 huge bunches of lillys the size of a tree and a 5 foot high photo the guy who got shot. That strikes me as not exactly the most normal thing in the world to do when a family member dies. It all seems stage managed if you know what I mean.

Obvisously something has to be done as it was a giant balls up, but considering what the country was going through at the time it's not suprising the cops went OTT. I'm not trying to justify what they did, but I can certainly understand why it could happen.

[breadandcheese]

Maybe not Sir Ian Blair, but certainly heads must roll, for the massive cock-up that took place.

I believe Sir Ian Blair acted on information passed onto him up the chain. Thus, he can only be expected to work with the information available to him (in the same way as those officers who actually shot de Meneses, were acting on information given to them - thus they are not guilty of any mishap).

The major questions that I would like answered are:

Firstly, Why did the police not make a statement after the press started putting out false news headlines (such as: he vaulted a barrier, he was wearing a large jacket)?

The cynic in me would suggest these were leaked to the press, as I do not believe a witness would come forward and say he saw de Meneses leap a barrier.

Secondly, How did the intelligence fail so spectacularly? I still do not believe the story about the officer going to the toilet and being unable to confirm the suspect's identity. For an identification role, there would be more than one officer.

Still too many questions, thus the need for independent enquiry. We need to know what went wrong so that come the need to use the shoot-to-kill policy, our police forces will be better prepared.

[Thracian]

Depends whether he actually lied or not. He can only work on the information he is given.

It wasn't the police who originally said he jumped barriers or was wearing a big coat. All of this came from so called witnesses who saw it all happen. Someone even said "he was wearing a bomb belt with wires coming out of it".

I'm sick or hearing about it to be perfectly honest. I can understand the family being hurt and deeply upset about what has gone on, but part of me feels like someone is really manipulating them to cause as much hassle as they can.

On the news you see the guys cousin going to the station with a giant brazil flag, 2 huge bunches of lillys the size of a tree and a 5 foot high photo the guy who got shot. That strikes me as not exactly the most normal thing in the world to do when a family member dies. It all seems stage managed if you know what I mean.

Obvisously something has to be done as it was a giant balls up, but considering what the country was going through at the time it's not suprising the cops went OTT. I'm not trying to justify what they did, but I can certainly understand why it could happen.

160862[/snapback]

Some good points Babylon.

Just find it hard to see how the Met with all their technology and at the most sensitive time, should make such a monumental error.

I suppose I also believe that the police of all people should not go OTT, especially without the right information, cos this is what happens and it damages the reputation of the nation a well as the Police Force.

Easy for me to say that, though, when I'm not fighting the battle.

[Katy]

It said on the news earlier that the police are saying that there was no cctv footage of the incident, whereas LT are disputing this. Whos telling the truth? The more revelations that come out the more it sounds like one big cover up. Somebody needs to made accountable for this and right hands need to know what the left is up to before this kind of thing happens again.

[Babylon]

It said on the news earlier that the police are saying that there was no cctv footage of the incident, whereas LT are disputing this. Whos telling the truth? The more revelations that come out the more it sounds like one big cover up. Somebody needs to made accountable for this and right hands need to know what the left is up to before this kind of thing happens again.

160876[/snapback]

I have seen a still picture from a CCTV camera on the train so there must be footage of something. Maybe there is footage but not of the whole scene as things played out.

Maybe that's where the conflicting stories comes from.

[Katy]

I have seen a still picture from a CCTV camera on the train so there must be footage of something. Maybe there is footage but not of the whole scene as things played out.

Maybe that's where the conflicting stories comes from.

160892[/snapback]

Possibly and also the media hamming things up

[lush]

Did the "police" kill that illegal immigrant?

[Teeno]

I would be disgusted if he was made to resign.

The bloke shouldn't of been here anyway let a long running away from police at a tube station days after a bombing at one. I wish his family would clear of out of the meida now, fair enough I feel for them losing a family member but it would never of happened if it weren't for his own stupidity.

I wasn't there or anything but from what I've read and seen on Tv the police acted in a way that they thought was in the best interest of the general public and thier own safety.

[breadandcheese]

I would be disgusted if he was made to resign.

The bloke shouldn't of been here anyway let a long running away from police at a tube station days after a bombing at one. I wish his family would clear of out of the meida now, fair enough I feel for them losing a family member but it would never of happened if it weren't for his own stupidity.

I wasn't there or anything but from what I've read and seen on Tv the police acted in a way that they thought was in the best interest of the general public and thier own safety.

161019[/snapback]

I'm guessing you haven't seen the news or read the newspapers recently judging by your comments.

New facts have emerged and not the scenario painted when he was first shot. I would be interested to know your reaction based on these new facts:

1) The police have admitted that the policeman who was watching and recording the flat was apparently visiting the toilet and so had his camera turned off when de Meneses left the flat. As a consequence, he could only partially identify him.

2) De Meneses was not wearing a big heavy coat or carrying a bag.

3) De Meneses walked into the tube station, using his ticket to get through the barriers. He did not leap them and was not challenged by police in the station lobby. The only time De Meneses ran was after the ticket gates when he heard a train pulling into the station and ran after it to catch it (something that many Londoners do everyday). He did not run away from police at anytime.

4) De Meneses sat in the carriage of the train, with a plain clothes police officer two seats away. This officer got up, blocked the doors of the tube train and informed the armed officers of De Meneses by shouting "There he is" (Again, not identifying they were police). De Meneses stood up and was thrown to the ground by a police officer, who pinned him whilst the armed officers preceeded to fire a number of shots into his head.

This is of course against the information announced at the time that he had taken a bus (i.e. public transport) to the tube station in the first place. If he was a danger, he should not be allowed to take a bus for fear that it may be a potential target.

In my mind, two points spring to mind.

1) I don't believe the story about the officer taking a whizz and turning his camera off. There is always 2 officers in an identification role.

2) Why did the police allow de Menese to travel so far, such that he became an immediate danger to those who deemed him a terrorist. Who made the decision to allow him to travel to an underground station so that they could not assess the situation?

[Babylon]

I'm guessing you haven't seen the news or read the newspapers recently judging by your comments.

New facts have emerged and not the scenario painted when he was first shot.  I would be interested to know your reaction based on these new facts:

1) The police have admitted that the policeman who was watching and recording the flat was apparently visiting the toilet and so had his camera turned off when de Meneses left the flat.  As a consequence, he could only partially identify him.

2) De Meneses was not wearing a big heavy coat or carrying a bag.

3) De Meneses walked into the tube station, using his ticket to get through the barriers.  He did not leap them and was not challenged by police in the station lobby.  The only time De Meneses ran was after the ticket gates when he heard a train pulling into the station and ran after it to catch it (something that many Londoners do everyday). He did not run away from police at anytime.

4) De Meneses sat in the carriage of the train, with a plain clothes police officer two seats away.  This officer got up, blocked the doors of the tube train and informed the armed officers of De Meneses by shouting "There he is" (Again, not identifying they were police).  De Meneses stood up and was thrown to the ground by a police officer, who pinned him whilst the armed officers preceeded to fire a number of shots into his head.

This is of course against the information announced at the time that he had taken a bus (i.e. public transport) to the tube station in the first place.  If he was a danger, he should not be allowed to take a bus for fear that it may be a potential target.

In my mind, two points spring to mind.

1) I don't believe the story about the officer taking a whizz and turning his camera off.  There is always 2 officers in an identification role.

2) Why did the police allow de Menese to travel so far, such that he became an immediate danger to those who deemed him a terrorist.  Who made the decision to allow him to travel to an underground station so that they could not assess the situation?

161029[/snapback]

1) I'm not sure if there has to be one or two so i can't answer that.

2) I believe they would have wanted to follow him in the hope that he would lead them to either a) the other suspets or b) ring leaders of the operation. They would only have known he was going onto the tube the second he went into the station.

Something at that time must have either raised their suspicions that he wasn't getting on the train just to travel, or basicly the gun cop freaked and popped the guy in the heat of the moment.

People are screaming cover up but put yourself in their position. The person who made the mistake could have 20 years perfect service in the police force, the best cop there has ever been. They make a terrible mistake while trying their best to protect their country in a time of war. Would you hang them out to dry?

The chances are there is no one person to blame. A chain of unfortunate mistakes by a group of people culminated in the shooting.

[Teeno]

1) I'm not sure if there has to be one or two so i can't answer that.

2) I believe they would have wanted to follow him in the hope that he would lead them to either a) the other suspets or b) ring leaders of the operation. They would only have known he was going onto the tube the second he went into the station.

Something at that time must have either raised their suspicions that he wasn't getting on the train just to travel, or basicly the gun cop freaked and popped the guy in the heat of the moment.

People are screaming cover up but put yourself in their position. The person who made the mistake could have 20 years perfect service in the police force, the best cop there has ever been. They make a terrible mistake while trying their best to protect their country in a time of war. Would you hang them out to dry?

The chances are there is no one person to blame. A chain of unfortunate mistakes by a group of people culminated in the shooting.

161049[/snapback]