said by jvmorris :

And what does SO13 use for weapons?

said by jvmorris :

My query was related to the fact that, without discussing how SO13 is armed for these situations, it may be stretching a bit to assume that the presence of these particular weapons indicates an armed military response unit.

said by ukmitch :

She said: "If you search people of a particular race or description while letting others through, it doesn't take long for a terrorist group to learn ways of placing their lethal cargo with those who don't meet the profile."

Sorry Dave, but if you read her quote with care, the only logical conclusion to be drawn is that no-one be searched!

said by ukmitch :

The only logical conclusion from the quotation is that everyone should be searched. Not literally everyone, of course, because that's impractical - but a search pattern that shows no bias (and I mean that statistically, not 'liberally') that can be exploited. The ideal search pattern is one that is mathematically random, which gives no clue to how to avoid detection.

Yes, that's it! Ideal for utilising at Oxford Circus on a Friday evening.

said by roxsana:

He seems to have been killed on the basis of nothing more than an unsubstantiated police hunch.

said by roxsana:

Whether or not the guy was illegal seems irrelevant to me.

said by roxsana:

Also who killed him, the police or special forces.

said by roxsana:

What worries me much much more are the reports now emerging that a) he was not wearing a heavy jacket, b) he did not vault the turnstiles (pretty impossible in fact as he was quite a bulky guy and there are now suggestions it was his pursuers who did this) c) he was, at first anyway, running for his train, as many of us do in London and d) the police did not call out that they were police or warn him to stop because this is not part of the operational procedure when dealing with suicide bombers.

said by roxsana:

I noticed on the tv coverage of the capture of some of the 21/7 bombers, that some of the marksmen concerned only put their Met Police baseball caps on at the last minute. Maybe they weren't even wearing them when chasing JC.

said by roxsana:

And what is never properly explained is if he knew they were police, why not just blow himself up there and then? rather than give them a chance to catch him?

said by roxsana:

It seems therefore that Jean Charles was doing just what we have been told to do, going about his business normally and was killed because he lived in a block of flats being watched and was under 30 with an olive skin.

said by roxsana:

Is this intelligence led policing?
(At a press conference after the 7/7 bombings, an irish reporter asked the DAC in charge of anti terrorist operations to what extent "intelligence led" investigations would take place. The reply, "we of course expect to approach this investigation in an intelligent manner". )

I can, just, understand how the police might adopt a shoot to kill policy, where it is clear from the intelligence available that there are good grounds for believing the suspect is an suicide bomber, but what grounds did they have for thinking this about JC de M?

All the ones we were told at first: bulky coat, jumping turnstiles, behaving suspiciously, failing to stop, seem to have evaporated. We are left with the fact he was a male under 30 male with an olive skin living in a block of flats under surveillance. He seems to have been killed on the basis of nothing more than an unsubstantiated police hunch.

Sir Ian Blair bleats on about how brave his officers were. If this is the quality of the intelligence they are using, heaven help us all.

said by roxsana:

(BTW a television reporter on ITV news last week said the authorities had told her off the record that the CCTV footage of JC at Stockwell might not exist as the cameras were defective. .... at a station being watched 14 days after a previous bombing? You read it here first)

said by Dark Shoes :

Edit: I just finished reading some of the discrepancies. That's bad, really bad, if that's what actually took place.

Police shooting - the discrepancies
»news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4158832.stm

said by ukmitch :

Obviously, this was a tragic accident.

This innocent Brazilian was cut down in the prime of his life, without cause so it seems.

Apologies, useless really, have been made to his family, who apparently have plans in hand to sue the Met - which of course is the bereaved family's right.

The British government has been called to task by the Brazilian government, with much being said about the armed police who shot Mr de Menezes.

Demonstrations are reported in Brazil. The mayor of the victim's home town saying :"What happened to English justice and England, a place where police patrol unarmed?"

Before we go too far down the road about how we police our streets during a time of national emergency, it might be appropriate to look at a snapshot of life in Brazil - a distinctly risky place to live:

Brazil is the world leader in gun homicides, with about 40,000 yearly, or 88% of all murders committed. Of these, 12,000 are in São Paulo State, where 11,000 registered guns are stolen annually, equal to one-third of all arms sold yearly throughout Brazil.

As the weekend in Rio draws near, another sight begins to line the beaches. Every few hundred meters, armed polícia militar stand sternly at attention next to imposing motorcycles. Between them, the beach police stroll, hands on holsters belying the casualness of their shorts and polo shirt uniforms. Police motorcades drive up and down the avenue, and every 20 minutes or so, a black helicopter, also labeled polícia militar, flies noisily along the shoreline.