/** Tools */

17 August 2005

Jean Charles de Menezes - Murder, Lies & A Massive Cover-up

Update April 2006: Did Ian Blair know an innocent man had been killed? See Ian Blair 'clear' (aka 'Liar'). See also, "de Menezes Murder: IPCC report leaks more evidence of a cover up" and "de Menezes Murder: IPCC Investigation Number 2".

Jean Charles de Menezes - Murder, Lies & A Massive Cover-up

A cascade of blatant lies from the very top down -- from Metropolitan Police Commissioner Ian Blair to the trigger-happy plain-clothes CO19/SO19 officers -- have now been exposed as a cover-up of an horrific catalogue of failures that led to the police-murder of an innocent Brazilian man at Stockwell Underground station.

Damning witness reports, police statements, and photographs of the aftermath of the murder of innocent Jean Charles de Menezes on 22 July have been leaked from the IPCC investigation into the incident, finally exposing the lies designed to cover up a series of catastrophic failings in police procedure, intelligence and basic common sense.

The de Menezes Murder - The Facts

The facts about the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes such as they slowly and disparately appeared in various news reports since 22 July have now flooded into the public domain, courtesy of ITV News, with full confirmation of the extent of the incompetence demonstrated at every level of the police, security and intelligence services.

Here are a few of the initial stories (read: blatant lies) that were spun and which had already been proven to be false:

  • de Menezes was not an illegal immigrant, or an illegal electrician.

  • de Menezes did not vault over ticket barriers.

  • de Menezes was not carrying a bag, or wearing a rucksack.

  • de Menezes, horrifically, was not challenged by police.

  • de Menezes did not run from the police that did not challenge him.

  • de Menezes was not wearing a padded jacket that concealed a bomb, but instead a denim jacket that concealed nothing.

  • de Menezes was not wearing a "bomb belt with wires coming out of it" as described by Anthony Larkin, a possible Metropolitan Police Forensic scientist who, coincidentally, gave the only statement that would provide, albeit tenuously, some justification for the shooting.

Some more facts that have emerged with the leaked documents:

  • de Menezes was not positively identified at any point during the surveillance operation, save for a last-minute and totally incorrect 'positive ID' that resulted in his murder by two plain-clothes police officers.

  • de Menezes flat was staked out by a surveillance team, complete with an armed response unit, all with orders to not allow de Menezes to enter the Underground system.

  • Channel 4 News said that Flat 21 was under surveillance. de Menezes lived in Flat 17.

  • de Menezes did not know he was under surveillance by armed police.

  • The officer charged with operating the camera trained on the front door of the flats was preoccupied with relieving himself so no positive identification was made.

  • de Menezes was allowed to board a Number 2 bus to Stockwell station. Odd considering the instructions were to stop him as soon as possible. That the surveillance and armed units outside the block of flats in which de Menezes lived did not stop him when he exited the block flats, nor before he boarded the bus, much less entering the Underground system, raises far more questions than it answers.

  • de Menezes entered the Underground system using his Oyster Card, not by leaping over ticket barriers.

  • de Menezes was not in a hurry and was walking at a normal pace.

  • de Menezes descended to the train platform in a perfectly normal manner, stopping along the way to pick up a free newspaper.

  • At no point did the plain clothes and armed officers identify themselves to de Menezes.

  • de Menezes boarded a train and found a seat before he was bundled and bear-hugged by one officer, reported as being a lone surveillance officer, as others launched a barrage of bullets at the innocent man. Who was the lone surveillance officer?

  • A total of 10 shots were fired by two officers.

  • Of the 10 shots that were fired, 7 were fired by one shooter and 3 by another.

  • 8 of the bullets hit the innocent target, 7 in the head and one in the shoulder.

  • 'Mongolian eyes' made de Menezes a target in the absence of a positive ID.

A Catastrophic Collection of Failures At All Levels

The surveillance operation which involved various police and intelligence services, including the Special Reconnaissance Regiment which was only set-up in April of this year, and their involvement in the killing of de Menezes provides us with some testament as to quite how 'special' their 'reconnaissance' abilities are and how well the intelligence and security services work when required.

A senior police source last night told the Guardian that the leaked documents and statements gave an accurate picture of what was known so far about the shooting.

The IPCC stated: "Our priority is to disclose any findings direct to the family, who will clearly be distressed that they have received information on television concerning his death."

Perhaps they should have been a bit quicker off the mark as the de Menezes family have already announced their complete loss of confidence in the police investigation. It wasn't enough to take from them a beloved family member, now the authorities are adding further insult to injury.

As every single authority that has been indicted by these leaked documents declines to comment on their damning indictment, the evidence for abandoning the recently implemented shoot-to-kill policy, disarming the police further, and removing the powers that allow them to shoot innocent people is now stronger than ever.

Update: Channel 4 News report from last night is online and downloadable for offline viewing [Windows Media File].

Update April 2006: Did Ian Blair know an innocent man had been killed? See Ian Blair 'clear' (aka 'Liar'). See also, "de Menezes Murder: IPCC report leaks more evidence of a cover up" and "de Menezes Murder: IPCC Investigation Number 2".


The Antagonist said...

If you know the answer to the following question, feel free to post it here:

How did Jean Charles de Menezes shoes end up not on his feet and lying next to his dead body?

Anonymous said...

they mustav figured he was the sole bomber, hhh

Anonymous said...

was mark whitby also a plant?

(btw - all the accounts ive seen have a total of eleven shots being fired)

The Antagonist said...

Anonymous - another bomber that tried Shoe-icide to be famous?

Lukery - Mark Whitby is an interesting one as his very public statement on the day, which is doing the rounds again with the breaking of this story, doesn't tie-in with anything that has since been revealed with the leaked documents.

Definitely worth checking out Whitby further as the story about Anthony Larkin now seems to have more truth in it than not.

Anonymous said...

oh no! the shuicide and sole jokes are too much!

re whitby - there were a number of people at the time who thought that he was telling porkies. he certainly did get a lot of exposure - and there isnt much true in what he said.

on a separate note - one thing that ive found incredible in the coverage is that Kratos policy is to fire two shots - but its never mentioned. maybe the fact that a guy was shot at eleven times says all it needs to say - but if we are sposed to feel safe that 'shoot2kill' is handled by professionals - then even if we can excuse all the other mistakes as being 'unfortunate' somehow - the doubtless reality is that people who are being asked to implement the policy demonstrably arent professional.

(btw - antag - did you see that your post is timestamped 07/07! lol)

Anonymous said...

You may wish to note in relation to this and your previous story on the BS witness account by Anthony Larkin (bomb belt with wires) that there is nothing to suggest that he is the same Tony Larkin who works in forensics for the UK police. The only report which I could find concerning futher personal details referred to him as a care worker.

The Antagonist said...

Lukery - I arose early this morning to catch the 0810 interview on Radio 4 in light of all the lies... and there wasn't one!

Now we'll never know who would have been in the hotseat. ISTR that Humphreys wasn't in today either. He certainly would have had a thing or two to say.

Anonymous - The stories on this blog in relation to Larkin or, Tony, as you seem to prefer, merely highlight the coincidence between the names of these individuals.

Say hello from me.


Anonymous said...

antag - there's a lot of international press on this story - i saw it on CBS i nthe US, and it is also oon the nightly news here in oz

Anonymous said...

Anonymous - The stories on this blog in relation to Larkin or, Tony, as you seem to prefer, merely highlight the coincidence between the names of these individuals.
Say hello from me.

Rubbish. You refer to him as a possible policeman and link to a previous story dedicated to speculation on that concept.

It is interesting to note the relative efforts put into researching the police identity rather than that of the actual relevant person, the witness. Illustrates a greater preoccupation with chasing myth rather than fact.

Say hello to the other fiction writers for me.

The Antagonist said...

On a myth-by-myth basis, this blog, as compared with 'Sir' Ian Blair and his catalogue of International mass media lies, is running a rather poor second.

Anonymous said...

Sure. Your blog is still in the fiction section though.
How about some dragons in your next story.

The Antagonist said...

Really, do keep up, it's happening by degrees.

Anonymous said...

Jean Menezes was Murdered by MI5 as part of the cover up to do with 9/11 and 7/7 Apparently he worked as an electrician on the underground an may have seen the bombs (which exploded up through the floors)being planted. so he had to be disposed of!
Dont believe me?
go to http://100777.com/

Anonymous said...

Apparent leaks from Whitehall,with regards to de menezes illegal killing, Two vital questions, first, It is alleged, that senior aids to ian blair, knew De menezes was an innocent man hours after he was killed, but did not inform him, WHAT WAS THE MOTIVE FOR THIS, AND MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY , WHO WERE THESE PEOPLE, WE MUST HAVE NAMES, Secondly,officers failed to pass on alerts from an undercover team that they were tailing an innocent man, WHY WAS THIS, and WHO ARE THESE OFFICERS, WE MUST HAVE NAMES , HEADS MUST ROLL , AND ROLL QUICKLY, WE MUST START AT THE VERY TOP./

Anonymous said...

Is is true that this is what really happened?
Charles de Menezes was assassinated to prove that London was safe again shortly after July 7/7. He was fed into the system as a suspect by Special Forces SRR as part of operation Kratos. He was assassinated by special forces too, hence the confusion by the surrounding team of SO19 officers which led to 'Lawrence' being grabbed off the train with a gun in his stomach. All the misinformation was deliberate to make us beleive that a real terrorist had been 'stopped'. The assassination squad were so hyped they nearly shot the tube train driver too (in case he's seen too much). SO19 were not meant to let de Menezes enter the tube station but the Special Forces team knew they had to let him get on a tube so they could shoot him there. The Met are being made to carry the can for this because it's too hot a potato for the public to know that the de Menezes assassination was planned by senior Whitehall figures and carried out by Special Forces.

Anonymous said...

Murdering scum!!

Anonymous said...

All i'm gonna say is that although i hate the authorities and pretty much everything they stand for, i hate terrorists more. and a bit collatoral damage is better than another hole in our country's capitol! so they made a mistake....better that than not doing bugger all and even more innocent british people eh?