poons: Absolutely outrageous

unsubscribe from human rights abuse in the war on terror

02 December, 2008

As Jailhouse Lawyer points out, the jury have been told that an un-lawfull killing verdict at the Jean Charles de Menezes inquest is not possible. Total and utter bullshit.

From the Guardian piece :

The final questions ask the jury to select from nine possible factors that contributed to the shooting. These are: pressure on police following the July 7 suicide attacks; failure to provide police with better photographs of Osman; the failure to stop De Menezes before he reached the station; more general difficulties with correct identification; De Menezes' own behaviour on the day; poor communication of surveillance officers' views to command and firearms teams; the fact commanders did not know the precise location of firearms teams; shortcomings in communications systems between police teams on the ground; and a failure to get surveillance officers to stop De Menezes at the station.

If that is fact - then there should be a case for corporate manslaughter. John was a man who was slaughtered.

¶ Tuesday, December 02, 2008

Comments:

If a jury is going to be told that they cannot find in a particular way as in "unlawfull killing," then what is the point of having a jury? This has all the hallmarks of government interference. The Coroner has been told what the outcome is, and it is up to him to make it happen. Sack the coroner and get someone that is truly impartial. (Like that would ever happen.) Another coverup that has been seen by many as exactly that. 7 bullets in the back of the head, to a prone person who is being held down sounds very much like an execution. The only reason the copper had tears in his eyes is probably because he had been found out, and maybe because he had some rounds left in his gun. This whole thing stinks of stitch-up.

# posted by

Anonymous : 05/12/2008, 18:35

getting a bit more serious

Blogroll

Other Sites