war within a breath

The Untouchables

08.02.07 - 01:06pm

While those responsible for the inexcusable killing of an innocent young man escape punishment, people whose bravery and determination helped to expose the Met’s iniquity have been arrested and harassed

On July 22 2005 an innocent young man going about his daily business was wrestled to the floor by armed police officers and killed in front of shocked and terrified passengers on the London Underground.

In the fevered atmosphere following the failed terrorist attacks in London of the day before, Jean Charles de Menezes, an electrician from Brazil, had been mistaken for a bomber and was blasted seven times in the head. But it is the aftermath of this terrible event which gives us an insight into how the state functions, a story of an unaccountable, out of control police force which is not only getting away with murder but misleading the public then using its powers to arrest citizens who worked to expose it. While the fragmented aspects of this case are in the public domain, it is only when all the elements are drawn together that the true picture of the Met’s iniquity becomes clear.

Mr Menezes, minding his own business on his way to work like hundreds of thousands of other Londoners, did nothing to give police any grounds for believing he was even a criminal, never mind a terrorist who might be an immediate danger to the public. Nevertheless, eleven officers involved in the shooting will not be charged.

Britain’s most senior anti-terrorism officer, Deputy Commissioner Andy Hayman, was today found to have misled his own boss, Sir Ian Blair, over what had happened, leading Blair to propagate the story that Menezes had jumped a barrier at Stockwell underground station, was wearing a suspiciously bulky jacket which could have concealed a bomb, and ignored police instructions to stop, a collection of falsehoods. Whether Hayman, in his job to this day, will face disciplinary proceedings remains to be seen, but somehow I doubt they will go very far.

Apologists for the police point to the tension and difficult circumstances of July 2005, but the fact is that there was nothing whatsoever about Mr Menezes which could give anyone reasonable grounds for concluding he was a danger to the public. The magnitude of recklessness here is staggering and those involved are indisputably a danger to the public themselves and unfit to be wielding firearms on the streets of London.

There is also the fact that somebody in the police force, somewhere in the chain leading from the shooter, through the officers directly involved in the operation, to the operational commanders and up to the Met leadership, fabricated a story which would have mitigated the police’s responsibility for the killing. Amid the technical minutiae of today’s report about who knew what and at exactly what time, this fundamental point has been obscured. It now looks as if no officer will be called to account for this outrage.

But while those responsible for the inexcusable killing of an innocent young man escape punishment, people whose bravery and determination helped to expose the Met’s iniquity have been arrested and harassed.

Lana Vanderberghe, who leaked documents from the IPCC to the media detailing the police’s lies, had her home raided by the Met and was taken into custody. Writing in the Guardian, she told about the moment she discovered the truth:

I thought that Jean Charles de Menezes’ suspicious behaviour was the reason he was shot. Then we were given a bombshell briefing at work. We were told he hadn’t vaulted over a ticket barrier and run down an escalator to escape firearms officers, and that he hadn’t been wearing a bulky coat that could have concealed explosives. In fact, he had strolled into Stockwell tube wearing a denim jacket, picked up a free newspaper, then made his way down the escalator to catch his train.

The room went quiet. I thought it was terrible the police, who we were supposed to trust and who we paid to protect us, couldn’t tell the truth.

ITV News producer, Neil Garrett, who was involved in the special television report exposing the truth about the killing of Mr Menezes, was also arrested, as was his pregnant girlfriend, Louise, who had been the conduit by which the revelations had travelled from Lana Vanderberghe to Garrett. Speaking later, he said:

For me personally, working on a story such as this represented everything journalism should be about: righting wrongs, exposing lies, standing up for someone who couldn’t speak for himself.

And he told of the behaviour of the Met as it pursued its investigation into the leak:

Over the next eight months, Louise, Lana and I would answer bail a further four times. Each time, police could see Louise’s baby bump getting bigger, but this did not deter them from locking her up in a cell, sometimes for several hours. Once they offered her a blanket infested with lice. Another time, they offered her no food or drink for over five hours, despite the canteen being just minutes away.

Interviews made it clear the police had delved into our bank accounts and credit records. Text messages retrieved from our phones were read out to us. Silly everyday emails about money, or the lack of it, were twisted and interpreted as a financial motive for the alleged crime.

The police were thorough, I’ll give them that - but they just could not seem to countenance the idea that the only motivation was a desire on the part of our IPCC source to get the truth out. The only solace was that we hadn’t been arrested under the Terrorism Act. One day in a police cell is bad enough, 28 days must be a nightmare.

Even a police officer who stood up to the Met hierarchy was punished. Deputy Commissioner Brian Paddick had told the Independent Police Complaints Commission investigation into Sir Ian Blair’s conduct that officials within Sir Ian’s office feared that an innocent man had been killed just hours after the Stockwell incident. Blair repeatedly claimed that he and his aides had no inkling until the morning of the next day that the man shot was innocent, leading him to make the false claims about Mr Menezes on the afternoon of the shooting.

Already a controversial figure, Mr Paddick was frozen out of the force after challenging Blair’s Stockwell narrative. The Guardian reported:

After clashing with the Sir Ian over the Stockwell shooting, Mr Paddick was then accused, but cleared, of leaking information about the shooting to a BBC journalist.

In June last year he was moved from deputy command of territorial policing to a post involving information management, which was seen as the commissioner freezing him out. It was also a clear sign that his career within the Met would advance no further.

Those responsible for and directly involved in the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes have escaped punishment. Those who tried to bring the truth into the public domain have been harassed and had their homes raided by the very police force responsible for the killing.

One eloquent letter to the Guardian summed up the issue perfectly:

Could someone please explain to me how an innocent young man going peacefully to his work can be grotesquely killed by the police and it appears: 1) no one is to blame; 2) no one is to be brought to justice over the matter; 3) the police officer in charge on the day is promoted; and 4) the statement that he was a suspected terrorist is not challenged

Nobody is to blame. Nobody will be brought to justice. Unaccountable and out of control, the Metropolitan Police are the real untouchables.

Category: police | Tags: