British police to shoot suicide bomb suspects in head: chief

LONDON (AFP) - British police remain under orders to shoot suspected suicide bombers in the head if necessary, London's police chief Ian Blair said, despite having mistakenly killed an innocent man.

When asked by Sky Television if the police had shoot-to-kill instructions in such cases, Blair replied: "They have to be that. Because there's no point in shooting at somebody's chest because that's where the bomb is likely to be."

He added: "There's no point in shooting anywhere else because if they fall down they detonate it. It is drawn on the experience from other countries including Sri Lanka."

~snip~

more:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050724/wl_uk_afp/britainattackspolice_050724100907

up for all the law suits stemming from shooting the innocent.

for executing an innocent Brazilian man on the street.

Sorry.

oops is right.

visit London and Die

LOL

he did?

...sound fair to you, or do you like the idea of circumventing the judicial process completely?

And how about wearing an official police uniform when chasing somebody so that the exposed firarms don't make suspects think they're being pursued by a bunch of scruffy looking thugs?

And despite what the media has reported, plenty of eyewitnesses stated that the police never shouted "Stop, Police!", which has been the customary process in most countries claiming to be a Democracy.

And what should one assume when it becomes public that a 27-year-old man was shot several times in the head while being held down on the ground?

I guess quite a few of totally innocent people will die like this.

--------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

the head is a pretty small target for a pistol shot unless the shooter is right on top of the suspect -- especially if the shooter is your typical slightly-out-of-practice cop...

Also -- I wonder when some after-the-fact investigators start carrying "throw-down" bombs in addition to the usual throw-down pistols... To save embarrassment...

times in a head wasn't a suicide bomber, but he is just as dead.

-----------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

i'd hate to be dead.

Wear a really nice suit and move VERY SLOWLY. Also, tanning is OUT on the beaches this year!

even in winter!

both he and I think the police should be held accountable for this. The officers were undercover with no identifying characteristics, and had been following him. The man in question was not wearig a winter parka or mask, he was wearing a heavy jacket of some kind. He had no reason to believe the men chasing him were actually police until they identified themselves VERY late in the game. He was obviously terrified and clearly there was a natural instinct to run. Once the man was caught and lying on the ground, surrounded by several plainsclothes officers yelling at him, he was shot in the head. That is a Dialou-type response to an (admittedly) terrifying situation.

I do sympathize with the police in this situation, because I know what sort of constant pressure they face, and how difficult it is to make judgment calls (especially under the incredible circumstances they face in London right now). Still, they made the wrong call, and they are now responsible for the pointless death of a completely innocent man. They must be held responsible for their part in following the policy. NOT FIRED,perhaps the officers (or all officers) could use some more updated training. The higher-ups who institute the policy have a more difficult task -- clarifying and "cleaning up" the policy, and properly training the police officers on the changes. They are the really responsible ones, whether they pulled a trigger or set their officers up to placed in this sort of ridiculous situation.

Whether it seems "fair" or not, police must be held to a very high level of accountablity at all times. "Oh, they thought he was a terrorist" is not good enough -- echoes "I thought he was reaching for a gun." Again, I do feel bad for the police involved in this. However, if this is an acceptable excuse, the roads could soon be littered with the bodies of innocent people. It's much too grave a risk to take.

Ultimately, this is a policy fault -- now that the weakness of the policy has been exposed, it needs to be revised.

UK police were sent to israel to learn their tactics.

So now they are killing innocent people just like israel. Whose bright idea was it to take advice from a state that only ever manages to increase terrorism.

If this is the accepted policy, then I'm just revolted. I don't even know what to say to that, other than "Welcome to the police state, enjoy your stay." We can all see how well this has worked to protect the people of Israel (and the surrounding nations).....

Such an ugly situation.

What's next, will they chase 'terrorists' with tanks in London?
/ feel sorry for Londoners

and welcome to DU, mamiesb2001 :hi:

If they aren't fired (though a thorough inquiry *could* determine that this is necessary), then at least permanent reassignment...How effective could they be in the future in the same kind of position? If they come to understand the gravity of their error, who can say if they would hesitate when they shouldn't OR cast caution to the wind as they've crossed a killing line before?

officers who had shown a knee-jerk tendency to kill innocent people in the heat of the moment. That sort of attitude and apporach is easy to"spread."

and then he started running, and leapt the barrier at the Tube station. I would say they did make mistakes - too much suspicion of someone just because he came out of the same block of flats, which might not then justify having lots of armed policemen around him. I also wonder if there wasn't proper communication between the police officers - someone doing surveillance might say "one guy leaving the flats, follow him", and those called in to do that might think there's more suspicion than there was, and when he ran, others might think he must have done something wrong - where if the same policeman was involved the whole way through, they might not think the guy was a deadly danger. A lot of speculation on my part, of course.

-----------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

alternative?
Hope you can handcuff the supposed bomber before he flips the switch on the belt bomb, then load him up in the paddy wagon and wait for the bomb squad to show up?
It's rediculous to assail such a policy under the current circumstances in London right now. Sure, cops must be trained appropriately and be held accountable if mistakes are made, but the policy, if instituted correctly, is, sadly, appropriate.
So, seriously, what other techniques/policies should police use iftehy encounter a suicide bomber on a train/bus?

as we continued to sort out the newest information. No matter what choices are made, there will be risks (and possibly horrifying consequences) for those involved. In this case, it is becoming clear that some serious mistakes were made -- but this sort of situation will, God help us, develop again. Then what?

As an aside, we were also discussing today: if, in this case, the man had been a suicide bomber, he might easily have detonated the bomb on the bus or in the station/street as he was being chased. It's another thing to consider as police forces and citizens around the globe grapple with this. Clearly poice can't simply kill a man as he comes out his door because he's wearing a coat and in a housing complex under watch -- much less do so and call it "policy" or justify it by saying "could have been a terrorist." (Well, they can, but holy shit....) SO where is the line drawn? What evidence is needed? Is merely suspecting reason enough to kill someone? If the man you don't kill (because instinct is no reason to murder someone) then blows up an Amtrack train, whose blood is on whose hands? Unbelievably complex situations, made worse by the fact that each situation will doubtless have its own little ugly twist.

I have no answers at all, unfortunately. I suspect that, no matter who says otherwise, nobody does. Our world is in a terrible mess, and the answers become harder to find -- though more important to seek.

suspected crooks????

I don't like crooks, but shooting them in the head might be a little over the top.

Edit: Maybe they don't intend to.

And if they're innocent non-criminals, cidivism too.

and that could be cidivism or recidivism, depending.

This is so sickening on so many levels.

... then the shooting will trigger the explosion -- not prevent it! Given that the police have made a point of publicizing the shoot-on-sight policy, doesn't it seem probable that those who are planning future terrorist acts might take this shooting incident into account when choosing switch mechanisms and such things?

And this is all in addition to the obvious risk of shooting innocents like that poor man from Brazil!


So, what is the right policy to follow in this situation?

Damned if I know.


:think:

The short-sighted 'policy' of head-shots will become even more of a disaster. Idiots.

All too often, the reasoning of the authorities doesn't add up when you give it two minutes thought.

This has nothing to do with the Iraq war, by the way, it's just Islamic Fundamentalists that hate British Freedom.

"it's just Islamic fundamentalists that hate British Freedom?...I Have to disagree, Bush's War solidified and created a distrust of the US/Britain and their intent to change the countries of the mideast by supposedly bringing 'democracy and freedom' to those people by bombing. There has been so much anti-Muslim rhetoric from this country that hatred is bound to fester. Add to the hate-mix Bush's frequent statements that his 'god' is leading him in his actions and what do you get, a religious war.

There doesn't have to be a solution. Thanks to the little feller, we are well and truly screwed when it comes to terrorism.

That's the effin point. Because he was brown and he ran that's all the London police needed. Clearly shows an assumption about minorities that apparently will prosper even after this deadly FU. The justification (war on terra), doesn't cover the act of executing a suspect after he's no longer running.

Gyre

Under secret guidelines codenamed Operation Kratos,
armed officers were instructed that they should shoot to
kill suspected suicide bombers. "The most effective way
of dealing with someone with explosives is to shoot
them in the head," said the officer.

They are armed with Glock pistols, Heckler & Koch MP5
semi-automatic machineguns and G3 short-barreled
rifles, which are small enough to be carried discreetly in
a shoulder holsters. The rifles, equipped with "red dot"
sights, use "frangible" ammunition that releases all its
energy in the target’s body, instead of passing through it
and endangering nearby civilians.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1697662_3,00.html

You, Too, Could Be A Suspected Terrorist

are shot in the head? The innocent guy they murdered was slammed down to the floor and THEN shot in the head? Are these guys on crack?

Witnesses said he was being held down when shot. If someone has other info let me know,But word is that he was down when they executed him.

I watched this BBC interview via internet 3 times that afternoon,
and this witness looked VERY credible.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706913.stm

Last Updated: Friday, 22 July, 2005, 11:33 GMT 12:33 UK

I saw Tube man shot - eyewitness

Mark Whitby

Eyewitness report

A passenger has told how he saw armed police officers shoot a man dead on a Tube train at Stockwell.

Mark Whitby said: "I was sitting on the train... I heard a load of noise, people saying, 'Get out, get down'.

"I saw an Asian guy. He ran on to the train, he was hotly pursued by three plain clothes officers, one of them was wielding a black handgun.

"He half tripped... they pushed him to the floor and basically unloaded five shots into him," he told BBC News 24.

"As got onto the train I looked at his face, he looked sort of left and right, but he basically looked like a cornered rabbit, a cornered fox.

"He looked absolutely petrified and then he sort of tripped, but they were hotly pursuing him, couldn't have been any more than two or three feet behind him at this time and he half tripped and was half pushed to the floor and the policeman nearest to me had the black automatic pistol in his left hand.

"He held it down to the guy and unloaded five shots into him...." (More)

UK gov is ok with shooting innocent in the head (5 times, just to be sure...) but it still refuses extradiction of terrorist... (Rachid Ramda).

Found a photo of the departed:



http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-07-24-london-shooting_x.htm

Oh, he's scary, all right. Why was he trying to get stronger if he didn't hope to become even more threatening? Typical terror person. So sinister.

Why did they follow him to the train station
instead of shooting him after he left the flat?

Officers were instructed that they should shoot to kill suspected suicide bombers.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1697662_3,00.html

Several accounts say he took a bus to the tube station. They didn't seem too concerned about a bus suicide bombing, even though there had been on just two weeks previous. It doesn't really add up.

Brilliant!

That bastion of democracy.

In London, have 1,000 Muslim men board the tube in just their underwear, in total silence.

by 1,000 South American, Greek, Southern Italian, Spanish, Portugese, Serbians, Germans with tans and homegrown bi-racial folks to see if these racist idjits could even BEGIN to figger out "WHO-O-O-O ARE YOU, doot-doot, doot-doot..."

Police leaders say they will not abandon their "shoot-to-kill" policy and warn more innocent people could be killed in the fight against terrorism.

The message came after Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, was shot dead by officers after being mistaken for a suicide bomber.

Met Police Chief Sir Ian Blair said "shoot-to-kill in order to protect" would continue, despite the "tragedy".

Police are still questioning three men in connection with Thursday's attacks.

Sir Ian has apologised for the killing of Mr Menezes, but defended the actions of his officers...<More>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4713199.stm

Ian Blair is the british version of Donald Rumsfield but let me ask you guys would we (americans) put up with this?

This is ground-breaking for Britain, not for the US...

Thats news to me

I mean, if the police are going to start shooting innocent people at will, then utter chaos will ensue in society, society breaks down and then I wouldn't be at all surprised if the relatives of these people start killing policemen as a retaliation.

The society of the Western, "civilized" countries is beginning to break down rapidly into totalitarianism. The end can't be far behind when the official policy is to kill innocent citizens and residents of the West. Of course, we (i.e. the West) has always murdered non-Western peoples with no remourse, but now it seems these governments of the UK and the USA are beginning to think their own citizens are fair game.

This is the end. This is how the world ends. With the fascists and/or the religious nutcases of the extreme right in total control.

must now go around in public wearing a thong and flip flops, lest they be wrestled to the ground and shot dead in the name of the "war on terror."

The UK Victorian Colonial-era attitudes haven't changed one bit. Brown people suspected of threatening British Supremacy get summarily executed.

Exactly why Jerry Spence defended a notorious right-winger--when his family was murdered on Ruby Ridge, Spence knew that this kind of arrogance must be fought because the idea of the govenrment summarily executing its citizens (and a dog) is extremely dangerous to our entire civilization. This is a concept that the freepers don't understand--that EVERYONE's rights are important, or we all lose.

Many examples of government murder of citizens has already happened, and not much is done about it--Mayor Goode of Philadelphia bombed his citizens and the ensuing fire consumed a whole neighborhood, Janet Reno ordered the murder of a religious sect near Waco, Texas, an FBI agent shot a young man in the face in Maryland (loose trigger finger of the agent on an innocent person). The list goes on and on.

If I've learned anything in my adult life, its that we ain't free, baby. We ain't really free.

that the US has detained an unknown number of people without filing any charges INDEFINETELY. Of course, considering we're actually fucking TORTURING people, this should come as no shock or surprise.

Summary executions, indefinete detentions, and torture are the telltale signs of fascism.

In california a SWAT officer killed a 19 month old Mexican child. That's going to get ugly. Now Bush sent alot of the national guard to Iraq. What if a riot breaks out here? What are they gonna do? Fly the national guard back to handle it? No that would rediculous. I guess they are going to gave to send out the army. It's not Bush's fault. They were forced to. See "The Family" told them neo-cons those damned Americans where Hostile enemies. Tou so realizr that onec troops are in the streets it's too late. America is dead and the Nazi's won.

protecting innocent people from terrorists, not murdering innocent people while trying to find terrorists.
:shrug:

What gives? There's never been a suicide bombing in London, now there's so many of these chaps commin out the woodwork running around tryin to blow themselves up the police have to start randomly shooting people who look suspicious?!?!

What the hell did they put in the water two weeks ago?! This is so absurd...

The gov'ts behind this whole episode folks. I think Bush's turn at bat is coming up here pretty soon, hold on tight....

25 Jul 2005 02:21:01 GMT
Source: Reuters
By Peter Griffiths

LONDON, July 25 (Reuters) - British police say more members of the public could be shot in error as they escalate their battle against terrorism and hunt for four men who tried to set off explosions on London's transport system last week.

The warning comes after police, who are engaged in one of the biggest manhunts in British history, mistakenly shot dead a Brazilian man on Friday, thinking he was a suicide bomber.

Britain's most senior policeman, Ian Blair, defended the shoot-to-kill policy for dealing with suspected suicide bombers and said police were in a race against time to find those behind last Thursday's attempted bombings of three underground trains and a bus, the second attack on the capital in two weeks.

"This is a terrifying set of circumstances for individuals to make decisions," Blair told Sky News television. "Somebody else could be shot."

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L25492556.htm

No matter what the weather, it is best to go around in shirtsleeves. Better yet, naked. And carry a see through backpack.

sounds like a B*shism if I ever heard one.

It's a little less bizarre in here. But only slightly.

:hi:

but this is just getting ridiculous!!!

Everything seems upside down.

Summary executions and indefinete detentions are NOT the hallmarks of democracies.

The world has gone crazy.

that is horrifying and sickening.

ok, so he ran from the police, who, depending on where you get your info, were either all plain clothes are about half plain clothes. this shouldn't not be a capital punishment crime. if some guy in a polo and khakis holding a gun is chasing me, i am running my fat white ass off.

oh wait, they probably wouldn't chase me...I AM WHITE!!!

They are promising there could be more innocent victims, so who knows.
They might pick a white one next time.

...man, they're just like us....

Chief Wiggum, Lou and Eddie must be on the job.

:kick:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4716127.stm

Muslims reassured by police chief

The Metropolitan Police chief has met leaders of Britain's Muslim community to reassure them in the wake of the London bombings.
Sir Ian Blair told a summit the only way to fight terrorism was for police officers to work with the community.

*snip*

Sir Ian also told the Muslim leaders that the police were working hard to ensure the safety of their community.

The police are hoping this will be the start of community-led intelligence to help them defeat the terrorists.

After the meeting Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, deputy secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "We raised the issue (shoot-to-kill). "He (Sir Ian) said this action should continue. "The community is very fearful, it will not help."

But he said that the meeting "went well and it was very good" to have the chance to discuss its concerns.


What was "this" that would be "the start?": the shooting of de Menezes, or the summit meeting? :shrug:

Edited to add:

And the UK folks are 100% behind the shooting:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4711189.stm

(small sampling of the comments)

True it's a complete tragedy. But it's clear you don't run from the police. You can only look at the incident outside 10 Downing Street last week with the 'suspect' who had a rucksack. He cooperated and was not shot. What we don't know is what was said by the police. Perhaps they should have cornered him instead of chasing cat and mouse.
Luc, London, UK

I read with interest the comments posted about this undoubtedly tragic shooting. However, as someone who lives in London and has to travel on the tube every day it is blatantly obvious that the majority of your respondents from outside London just do not understand what is actually happening in the city right now. They should try coming to London for a week and then see if they still want to criticise the police.
Steve, London

is murdered. A landowner or other upper class guy. Then they will be singing a different tune.

to carry a ruck/back/napsack!
Pity them in the winter, when the big coats and jackets come out.

This over-reacting didn't start recently, ya know!
Kent State
Jackson State
Symbionese Liberation Army