The jury at the inquest into the death of Jean Charles de Menezes will not be permitted to consider returning a verdict of unlawful killing, the coroner conducting the hearing said today.
The coroner, former high court judge Sir Michael Wright, began summing up seven weeks of evidence by telling jurors they would be allowed to return only a verdict of lawful killing or an open verdict.
With all the evidence considered, a verdict of unlawful killing could not be supported, he said.
After consideration and submissions, he told the 11-strong jury, “I so direct you that the evidence in this case, taken at its highest, would not justify my leaving verdicts of unlawful killing to you.”
Wright explained: “I’m not saying that nothing went wrong in a police operation which resulted in the killing of an innocent man.
“All interested persons agree that a verdict of unlawful killing could only be left to you if you could be sure that a specific officer had committed a very serious crime: murder or manslaughter,” Reuters reported him as saying.
The firearms officer testified that after the warning had been shouted, De Menezes’s actions had made him fear the electrician was carrying a bomb. Several passengers on the same carriage contradicted this account, saying they had heard no warnings, and that De Menezes gave no significant reaction to the police’s arrival.
However, Wright added, even if the jury found the officers had lied, they would not be able to blame them for the death. “Many people tell lies for a variety of reasons … [including] to mitigate the impact of what might be a … tragic mistake,” he said.
One law for us and another for them, how clear do you want it? Via HarpyMarx- The family are appealing to the High Court against the unlawful killing verdict being disallowed by the coroner. He has taken away the jury’s freedom to judge and return a verdict of their choice.
And the Justice4Jean campaign say: Lawyers for the Menezes family are going to the High Court today to apply for a judicial review of the Coroner’s decision on the verdict options being left for the jury. Earlier today, members of the Menezes family and their supporters walked out of court at the beginning of the Coroner’s summing up to express their dissatisfaction with the turn of events at the inquest.
As Harpy says show support and solidarity to the Justice4jean campaign.
5 December, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Hi
I cannot stress my heart and sympathy go to the Jean Charles de Menezes family and this appalling decession given by a evil fascist judge who takes great pleasure out of recognizing the police are responsible for a complete serious of failures when they mistakenly identified jean charles as being the suspected terriost bomber just becasue he looked like him. He is simple perverting the course of justice when the overwhelming evidence from witness’es and independant evidence show the firearm and intelligence officers where to blame for gross misconduct and manslaughter the firearm officers and integllience officers had photo ID of the main suspect and Im sry there is no excuse for not identifying jean charles mendez as not being the terriost bomber when they knew the terriost photo ID did not match his jean.
This judge is simple perverting and corrupting the law for the polices convenience and turning a criminal justice system into a criminal perverted justice system. By influencing and controlling a jurys right to return unlawful killing verdicts when the evidence demonstrates this fact.
The judge and jury are a complete fraud and hoax which i think the police have been influencing them with money they say crime does not pay but in the case of the police CRIME DOES PAY they bought themselves a judge and jury to return unlawful killing verdicts to wrongfully and falsely state facts that demonstrate and prove beyond unreaonable doubt that the police are guilty for unlawful killing.
I myself have been victim to wrongful perverted justice and desecessions with a personal expericence of mine and I cannot stress how awful it is and how jeans family is going through. I hope the high court judges quash this evil digusting appalling decession so justice can be served for jeans charles family and the public who sympathize with them
You know what if nothing happens and the criminal justice system and legal courts system fail to return verdict of unlawful killing. THE TRUTH SPEAK FOR ITSELF “THE POLICE SHOT AND KILLED AN INNOCENT MAN” and every reasonable good hear ted minded person knows that is unlawful in a civilized society
The truth serves as punishment to the police and they reputation for protecting innocent people has been destroyed for everyone. The judge needs to take leaf out of the met police commissioner decession to leave and quit the police force
Peace and love to jean & his family
and all people who have been victims of wrongful
persecution and misjustice from the police biggest criminals in this county.
7 December, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Thanks AnandDulare,
I’m sorry you have experienced injustice from the establishment and yes it must be terrible for the DeMenezes family, it keeps the pain of grieving alive until some proper resolution is found and this inquest has now shown itself to be not that resolution. Even as it was shown the police version was absolute garbage the coroner has protected them and every month/year it goes on the sure they are of getting away with it as memories fade and new atrocities occur, as is the establishments way of never being accountable for its actions.
13 December, 2008 at 5:16 pm
[...] leaked to the press but not announced to Parliament (therefore might not happen). We heard that the jury in the Menendez inquest had return an ‘open verdict,’ having been barred by the cor…, but had rejected the mendacious accounts of the Metropolitan Police murder squad. Head shot of [...]
5 January, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Hi
RickB
Thanks for your kind comments and you absolutely right I mean this just a breach of human rights Article 6 Right to fair trial with certain standards apply in both criminal and civil proceedings. These rights include:
* The right to a trial within a reasonable time.
* The right to an independent and impartial judge or tribunal.
* The right to a public hearing (although there are circumstances when the public can be excluded)
* The right to a public judgment (although this may be restricted in certain types of cases, e.g. family cases.)
they have offended and breached the right to an independent and impartial judge or tribunal they should
complain to the HUMAN RIGHTS COURTS
thanks again for your kind comments rickB
Anand UK