Jean Charles de Menezes Permanent Memorial Unveiled

Photo- Harpymarx

More @ Harpymarx and her Flickr stream. Almost lost in the seasonal fog was the news that Cressida Dick was awarded a Queen’s Police Medal for distinguished service, yes really. Such is the level of sincere contrition from our establishment at executing Jean Charles, ie None. RIP Jean Charles de Menezes, and sorry to his family, Britain is not the country it should be, much to our shame.

Permanent Memorial To Jean Charles deMenezes Unveiled 7th Jan

UPDATE: For any of you who were planning to come to the unveiling of the mosaic tomorrow morning, the time has now changed to 10am due to the snow. We hope you can still make it if you live nearby – it will be a short and sweet ceremony. Please come and show your support if you can, as this may be the last public event for some time.
Happy new year from all at the Justice4Jean campaign.

Just a quick note to let you know some very exciting news. The family of Jean Charles de Menezes will be unveiling a permanent memorial to Jean Charles at Stockwell tube station at 9am on Thursday 7 January 2010.

After a public campaign by the Menezes family last year, Transport for London agreed to mark the Menezes shooting by installing a mosaic in Jean Charles’ image outside Stockwell station. Your support during the public campaign to get the memorial last year made a massive difference – thank you all so much!

Vivian Figueiredo, cousin of Jean Charles said today,

“The 7 January would have been Jean’s 31st birthday. We will be marking this day by unveiling a mosaic which will serve as a lasting legacy to the injustice that took place at Stockwell. We hope generations to come will remember Jean Charles through this memorial and it will act as a public reminder that police officers should not be above the law”

We would love to see you down there on Thursday for the big unveiling – 9am, Thursday 7 January, Stockwell Tube

Jean Charles de Menezes Gets Permanent Memorial

I see Harpy also posts this, some good news-

Today, on International Human Rights Day, the family of Jean Charles de Menezes can announce that permission has been granted for the official installation of a permanent memorial to Jean outside Stockwell tube station.

After hundreds of signatures were collected in support of a petition backing the mosaic and following discussions between the family and London Underground, agreement was reached to place it on the wall outside of the station.

The mosaic will serve as a permanent reminder of the Menezes family’s fight for justice and will replace the shrine that has been maintained for four and half years outside Stockwell tube station.

The mosaic was created by artist Mary Edwards with help from Jean’s cousin Vivian Figueiredo and Chrys Vardaxi.

Speaking on behalf of the family, Vivian Figueiredo said:

“All of our family are so happy this memorial has been approved and we thank London Underground for their support. The pain of never achieving justice for Jean’s killing continues to haunt us everyday. But knowing his memory will be kept alive in the local community through this memorial is a tribute we could not have dreamed of. We thank all the members of the public who have supported us from the bottom of our hearts”

Jean’s family will be joined by special guests to unveil the beautiful locally-designed mosaic at 9:00am on January 7th 2010 to mark what would have been his 31st birthday. Further information on this event will be issued in early January.


Posted in Human Rights. Tags: . Comments Off on Jean Charles de Menezes Gets Permanent Memorial

4th Anniversary of Jean Charles De Menezes Murder

Join us at Stockwell Tube tomorrow morning at 9:45am to mark the 4th ANNIVERSARY OF THE SHOOTING OF JEAN CHARLES DE MENEZES

AT 10AM THE FAMILY OF JEAN CHARLES WILL UNVEIL A BEAUTIFUL NEW MEMORIAL MOSAIC that it hopes can form a permanent memorial outside Stockwell Tube.

The family will be launching their petition entitled ‘Never Forget’ calling on the Mayor of London and Transport for London to allow the mosaic to remain outside Stockwell Tube.

The family needs your support to make this a reality by signing the petition.

Jean Charles de Menezes was shot dead on 22nd July 2005 at Stockwell tube station during a pre-planned police anti-terror operation. Four years on from his brutal killing no-one has been held accountable for his death.

The family will be unveiling a beautiful mosaic memorial of Jean Charles which they have helped make and have requested be allowed to remain as the permanent memorial to him outside Stockwell Station. The Mosaic would replace the current memorial which has been at Stockwell Tube for the last four years and has been carefully looked after by the family and supporters.

We hope you can join us for a short while tomorrow morning to commemorate Jean’s death and support the mosaic.

Jean Charles De Menezes Family Campaign

Theatre Tackles The Jean Charles deMenezes Killing

This appears it will be considerably better than the ITV ‘docudrama’ which came off like a 24 copy, overwhelmed with a melodramatic score and deference to the establishment. Imagine using the public execution of an innocent man to sell advertising to an action friendly audience demographic, ain’t commercial teevee grand.

Via Justice4Jean

Directed by Tom Mansfield
Cast: Matthew Duggan, Susanna Fiore, Charlotte Flintham, Benjamin Peters

16 June – 4 July
Union Theatre, 204 Union Street, London SE1 0LX
Tues-Sat 7.30pm

Tickets £12 full/£10 concessions
Gala Night Saturday 20 June – call Box Office for info
Box Office 020 7261 9876

“They should know that people are forcing us to take sides. That our paper is susceptible to whichever pressure group shouts the loudest, to the point where it changes facts and stops us doing our jobs.”

 21 July 2005. James Fisher’s news team are struggling to report the day’s events in time to meet their evening deadline. When police marksmen shoot a man dead at Stockwell underground station the next morning, the team are caught between the need to report the truth and a combination of political pressure, professional rivalry, and personal resentment.

 Written after extensive research and interviews with working journalists, Oh Well Never Mind Bye is a daring, compelling and darkly comic political drama exploring the workings of the media and the rise of “churnalism” in the era of 24-hour news, set against the background of the July 2005 terrorist attacks on London and the shooting by police of innocent Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes.

In the offices of a fictional newspaper, news editor James Fisher is struggling to keep his team on task as they report the failed bombings of July 21st, 2005. Charlotte, his most talented reporter, has been taken off essential duties after a report she sent from the occupied West Bank angered a pro-Israel pressure group. The team’s new addition, George, is beginning to ask awkward questions about the accuracy of the reports coming in off the wire. Only the cynical Fin seems to actually get the job done. When news comes in the next morning of a police shooting at Stockwell underground station, the divisions within the team become even more pronounced as Charlotte seeks to bypass the paper’s pro-security editorial line and report the unpalatable truth.

Facebook           Upstart Theatre

Posted in Culture(!). Tags: , , . Comments Off on Theatre Tackles The Jean Charles deMenezes Killing

The IPCC’s Inexhaustible Supply Of Whitewash

The police officer, who was granted anonymity at the inquest (because who wants an accountable non secret police force) did these things-

Before he gave evidence, he revealed that he had made a note on the Metropolitan police computer in late July 2005, before he made his original statement in November 2005. He had then accessed and altered the note in October 2008 before handing it to the Met’s lawyers.

Owen had been present in New Scotland Yard’s room 1600, which was under the direct command of Commander Cressida Dick on 22 July 2005, although he was not within the nucleus of senior officers commanding the operation, the IPCC said.

The text he deleted read: “Management discussion. CD [Cressida Dick]: can run onto Tube as not carrying anything. Persuaded otherwise by UI [unidentified] male amongst management”.

The independent investigation found Owen had acted alone both in failing to disclose his note, as required by the IPCC in 2005, and in redacting it on 7 October 2008.

So today the IPCC concluded-

But the IPCC said today there was no evidence of deliberate deception in this instance by the Met as a whole or any individual within it.

Bear in mind he is a Special Branch officer, they liaise with the intelligence services, they are literally secret police, he gave evidence anonymously and is now found to be blameless while Dick has been promoted. What does this note suggest? That prior to Jean Charles de Menezes being shot at point blank range multiple times the officer in charge was thinking he was not carrying anything, ie. not a bomb threat. The common refrain of the killers (the coached and rehearsed testimony they were able to collude on) was they were acting in self defence because they claim to have believed he could have been a suicide bomber.

That she was dissuaded or failed to communicate her judgement to the armed personnel means the ‘UI [unidentified] male amongst management‘ bears great responsibility for the killing, as does Cressida Dick who is shown to make weak & faulty judgements and bad communication shows up these professional paramilitaries to be utter chumps. Clearly evidence was concealed then altered to protect senior officers. But no such issues will be addressed because the IPCC doesn’t think it important or that any malfeasance has occurred in relation to the note. They are as capable at investigating abuses of power by the police as Tony Blair is at not lying a country into war.

Best case: The armed security forces, licensed to employ state violence couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery.

Worst case: Execution by state paramilitaries protected from legal responsibility by the establishment.

Yasmin Khan, spokeswoman for the Justice4Jean campaign, accused the IPCC of failing to hold police officers to account. She said: “It doesn’t matter if you are a policeman fiddling notes after a shooting or a politician fiddling expenses on the sly, no-one should be above the law. This latest decision is one of a long line of IPCC decisions which have led every police officer involved in the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes off scot-free. This weak and woefully poor excuse of a watchdog must now be overhauled and replaced with a robust body that can actually hold police officers to account.”

Posted in Lockdown, War on Terror Scam. Tags: , , , . Comments Off on The IPCC’s Inexhaustible Supply Of Whitewash

Crown Prosecution Service Refuses To Pursue Jean Charles De Menezes’ Killers

You’ll never guess, the Crown Prosecution Service, the government agency which works closely with the police in constructing prosecutions has found no reason to prosecute any Police involved in the killing of Jean Charles De Menezes. Apparently next week they plan on donning bear costumes and going for a shit in the woods. In response the Justice 4 Jean campaign have expressed their disgust and note how the family were not informed about the media release that came coincidentally just as they prepared detailed representations to the CPS of reasons why a prosecution of certain officers should be considered. Funny that, eh?

Vivian Figuierdo

“Today’s decision is deeply upsetting to my family. The CPS have not met with us or our lawyers about this, we have been totally shut out of the process again. We are all in shock and simply cannot understand how the deliberate killing of an innocent man and an attempt by the Metropolitan police to cover it up does not result in a criminal offence. We condemn the CPS decision and reject the logic of their argument.

The inquest put the truth out there for all the public to see, but the authorities want us to forget the truth to stop us getting justice. But we will never forget.

After almost four years of tireless campaigning by my family and a struggle which has disrupted all of our lives in unimaginable ways, it is clear to us that the state will continue to block any of our attempts to achieve justice through the legal system. We have therefore decided not to continue with our legal challenges. We now turn our efforts to parliament. Justice for Jean will be done one day and we are determined to follow any route to get it”

A spokesperson for the Justice 4 Jean Campaign said

“The decision by the Crown Prosecution Service today marks another low point in appalling way the British legal system has dealt with the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes. Last year, the jury at the inquest found that Jean was not lawfully killed; rejected the police’s versions of events and found that the police lied. How can the public have faith in the police service if they know officers can literally get away with murder? The Menezes family, their lawyers and supporters now call on parliamentarians to act on repairing the failing legislative framework around deaths in custody and police accountability and we will be stepping up their campaign in this area.

Almost exactly 10 years from the publication of the Stephen Lawrence inquiry today’s decision makes it clear that there has been no progress in achieving any sense of a decent system of police accountability in the UK and while the shoot to kill policy remains in place, another family could go through the same horrendous ordeal as the Menezes family “

Yasmin Khan of the Justice 4 Jean campaign described the CPS decision as “morally reprehensible and legally wrong”.
She said: “It’s unbelievable that the CPS had taken this decision without talking to the family or their representatives.” The de Menezes family said they would now turn their energy to lobbying parliament on the laws surrounding police accountability.

The family’s lawyer, Harriet Wistrich, said the legal action would not continue because of the significant cost to the taxpayer. She said if they were successful it would lead to a fresh inquest which they believed would have little benefit.
But she said they have made fresh representations to the CPS about the possibility of bringing a prosecution against officers and were seeking a meeting with the Director of Public Prosecutions. The family will also be asking the Independent Police Complaints Commission to reconsider disciplinary action against the officers involved, she said. An application has already been lodged with the European Court of Human Rights about the issue of prosecutions in cases where someone is killed at the hands of the state.


Have to wait until a recording of it makes its way to me tomorrow, but Harpymarx writes about it here.

Posted in Media. Tags: . Comments Off on Stockwell

Murderers Christmas


Cressida Dick spoof ad from Xmas edition of Private Eye

Private Eye also has a report on the inquest (No. 1226 page 7) which makes the point that had they not been so limited by the coroner who ‘sympathised greatly’ with the killers of Jean Charles de Menezes, they may well have brought in a gross negligence manslaughter verdict based on their responses to the 12 questions the coroner inflicted on them. Such a verdict which ‘can only be bought if an individual or individuals are responsible for a series or errors or if there is systemic failure’ would have been uncontroversial from the known facts, it is what happened with the killing in the best case scenario for the police (worst case is premeditated racist animus on the part of the shooter enabled by an institutionally racist, incompetent, unaccountable and authoritarian police force). However that was avoided by the very accommodating coroner who showed how he earned his knighthood… excusing establishment perjury and stopping a jury of the public from making a free decision thus excusing the state from responsibility for murder.

Posted in Establishment. Tags: , . Comments Off on Murderers Christmas

Suspiciously Unsuspicious

Another day of travelling, but one thing stuck in my mind about the DeMenenzes inquest, one of the parts of the leading questions the fuzz friendly coroner inflicted on the jurors.

4) Do you consider that any of the following factors caused or contributed to the death of Mr de Menezes?
e) The innocent behaviour of Mr de Menezes which increased the suspicions of some officers. Jury: No

I mean really, not reaching or anything was old coroner ‘Sir’ Michael Wright. ‘Sir’ as in loyal & faithful services to the crown, you dig? Anyway together with that was this frankly hilarious addendum to The Independent story-

John Cooper, a criminal law expert at chambers in 25 Bedford Row, London, said prosecutions against police officers for perjury are rare, writes Robert Verkaik, Law Editor. “Just because a jury disbelieves the evidence of the police it does not follow they think the officer is lying. If there were to be a perjury trial every time the jury rejected police evidence, the system would break down.” But if the coroner considers there is evidence that a witness has lied to frustrate the course of justice, he may refer the case to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). The family can ask the CPS to review the evidence. As a last resort the family can bring a private prosecution.

Yes heaven forfend the system gets in trouble, much better the police can lie with impunity, that way everyone keeps their nice little earners as justice rolls along.

DeMenezes Inquest Returns Open Verdict

The jury has returned an open verdict at the inquest into the death of Jean Charles de Menezes, whom police mistook for a suicide bomber. It rejected the police account Mr de Menezes was killed lawfully by two officers who shot him seven times at Stockwell Tube in south London. His mother, Maria Otone de Menezes, said she was very happy and felt “reborn” after hearing the verdict. [nb this quote is misleading see below]

The Metropolitan Police said the Brazilian’s death was a tragic mistake. The jury were given the choice of two possible verdicts, but chose to reject the option that Mr Menezes was killed lawfully by the police. Earlier in the inquest they were instructed not to return a verdict of unlawful killing.

The 10 jury members were asked 12 specific questions about whether or not a series of events on 22 July 2005 contributed to the 27-year-old’s death. After a week of deliberations, a majority of eight to two returned an open verdict and said they did not believe officers had shouted “armed police” before opening fire.

They said they believed Mr de Menezes had stood up from his seat before being shot. However they did not believe he had moved towards the first officer to open fire. They also rejected that Mr de Menezes’ innocent behaviour had increased suspicions.

The establishment are making all the right (pre prepared) regretful statements, the family continue to press for some greater accountability-

The de Menezes family have called on the Crown Prosecution Service to re-examine the case to see whether a criminal prosecution can be brought. They are also asking the IPCC to review their inquiry into the death in respect of disciplinary action against police officers and are calling on the Home Secretary to suspend the shoot-to-kill policy. They plan to apply for judicial review of the coroner’s decision not to offer the jury the option of returning a verdict of unlawful killing.

However once denied the unlawful killing verdict this was a fixed result with the open verdict being the worst the jury was meant to consider, in theory they could have returned an unlawful verdict against the coroner’s instructions but whether they knew that we don’t know. The coroner has been adept at stage managing the inquest and if it weren’t for the families protests the withdrawal of their legal team would have remained explained away as a usual and unimportant absence. However let’s drop the spin and see the implications- the police lied in testimony, their narrative of self defence was nonsense. Are we now to let that go with polite statements and regrets and mistakes (WMD’s, ahem?), the deliberate concoction of a story to cover up a murder by macho authoritarian idiots. The War-on-Terror ™ is the gift that keeps on giving.

Update: Statement from the family

“Today is a very important day for our family and campaign for justice. We have spoken to Jean’s family in Brazil and they like us feel vindicated by the jury’s verdict. The jury’s verdict is a damning indictment of the multiple failures of the police and the lies they told. It is clear from the verdict today that the jury could have gone further had they not been gagged by the Coroner. We maintain that Jean Charles de Menezes was unlawfully killed” – Patricia Armani Da Silva, cousin of Jean Charles on behalf of all of the family.

The family’s legal team argued that evidence heard by the jury provided sufficient grounds for the jury to return unlawful killing (murder) in respect of the two police shooters, C12 and C2 as well unlawful killing (gross negligence manslaughter) in respect of the actions of three of the command team. We also submitted that, in accordance with Article 2 (ECHR) the jury should be permitted to return a meaningful narrative verdict that could identify all the police failings that caused or contributed to the death of Jean Charles de Menezes.

The five legal teams representing supposedly separate interests of the police combined ranks to oppose our submissions, maintain that the evidence only supported a lawful killing or open verdict. The coroner ruled in favour of the police. As a consequence the family sought to challenge the decision, lodging an urgent application at the High Court. Mr Justice Silber considered the challenge in relation to the narrative verdict only but ruled that the coroner had a wide discretion and he would not interfere with his ruling.

The family considered that the coroner had effectively gagged the jury. Any verdict returned by them would have at best limited meaning and would not have the effect of holding the police accountable for any failings. At that stage, having exhausted all legal avenues, the family instructed their legal team to cease participating in the inquest proceedings.

We have lodged grounds to appeal the decision of Mr Justice Silber and our judicial review challenge of the coroner’s decision in respect of unlawful killing remains to be considered.

To date, not one police officer involved has been held personally accountable for failings that led to the death of Jean Charles. In fact the two most senior officers in the command team have been promoted. The law as it stands, effectively provides legal immunity for police officers who shoot innocent people in the cause of protecting the public.

This case raises questions of critical constitutional importance. Should our armed police service be protected from meaningful criticism (let alone criminal sanction) or are the public entitled to go about their day to day business free from the fear that they could be shot dead without warning if mistaken for a suspected terrorist?

More @ Harpymarx

Update2: The BBC quote from Jean Charles mother is rather misleading (more establishment rallying round?) , here is The Independent report-

Responding to the evidence heard at the inquest, Mrs de Menezes, 63, said: “Police officers made a lot of mistakes. There were a lot of failures on their part.

“However, the one who was in command was, in my opinion, the one who made the biggest mistake because she was supposed to be in command of something and whatever she did, she did it wrong.”

Mr de Menezes’s brother, Giovani da Silva, 36, added: “We will carry on fighting because what we want is justice.”


Maria Otone de Menezes, Jean Charles’s mother, thanked the jury and said that she had been “reborn” by the verdict. Her reaction to the decision was read out during a press conference held by De Menezes’s family.

“I am happy with today’s verdict and would like to express my gratitude to the jury,” she said. “Since the coroner ruled out the option of an unlawful verdict, I was sad. But today I feel I have been reborn.”

Mrs de Menezes, who came to England for the inquest but has since returned home to Brazil, told the Press Association in an interview before today’s verdict, that she believed some officers lied to the inquest and called for the resignation of Cressida Dick, the senior policewoman who led the operation that ended in her son’s death.

“After Jean was killed they started telling us lies,” Mrs de Menezes said. “As a mother I would like to really know the truth about why they killed an innocent man. I wanted to be here to see with my own eyes, to hear with my own ears, because I wanted to know everything that happened that day. I wanted to know the truth and we want justice for this case.

“The most difficult thing to hear during the inquest was when the police officer said he shot Jean three times and his colleague shot six times at Jean. Everything that has been said during the inquest has been very difficult for us to hear. But those words were the most difficult. It was really painful.”

DeMenezes Inquest Moves To Apply The Final Coat Of Whitewash

So after the coroner did not allow a verdict of unlawful killing to be considered, the family walked out, they appealed to the high court, the appeal was turned down, the legal team for the DeMenezes family then withdrew. The family staged a protest at the inquest-


Sir Michael opened proceedings by telling the 11 jurors that the de Menezes family’s legal team, headed by Michael Mansfield QC, would no longer be attending the hearings.

“The first thing you will notice is that Mr Mansfield, Miss [Henrietta] Hill and their instructing solicitors are no longer in their places,” the coroner said. “The evidence and legal submissions are now all over and we have had their assistance throughout these very important stages.

“I understand that from this point they will no longer be here. There is absolutely no difficulty about that. No disrespect is meant by it to anyone.”

At that point the five family members, who were sitting at the back of the court, stood up and removed their coats. They stood silently, revealing white T-shirts with large black lettering, for a few moments as startled court staff watched uncertainly.

The relatives then walked from their seats towards the jury box. Court ushers and security guards hurried forward, intercepted them and ushered the group out of the courtroom through a side door.

The family then issued a statement-

“Today the family both here and in Brazil instructed our lawyers to withdraw from the inquest proceedings. We do this with deep regret and frustration but we feel we have been left with no alternative.

For three and a half years we have had one simple request, that all the evidence be put in front of the jury and for them to be allowed to decide.

We have faced a system which has repeatedly blocked, silenced and stopped all the avenues we have tried in order to get justice. And now we face the situation that after three months, 100 witnesses and a cost of £3 million pounds, the jury is being restricted from considering all the options. We have full confidence in the jury to return a verdict that will deliver justice for Jean. The jury have the legal right to return any verdict they want to and we hope that these 11 ordinary members of the public will do the right thing.

Jean loved living in Britain. One of the reasons he would tell me why liked this country was because it was the home of justice and fairness. We would like to thank the British public for all their support, especially over the last few days.

We do not want any other family to go through what we have gone through. Unless there is justice, the tragic death of Jean could so easily be repeated. Our campaign for justice continues and we hope the jury will do the right thing.”

Now after deliberating for four days the coroner is saying he will accept a majority verdict and has imposed a questionnaire on the jurors, spot the leading questions-

Sir Michael previously took the unconventional step of issuing a “questionnaire” relating to the circumstances surrounding the incident.

After choosing between lawful killing or an open verdict, the jurors must decide:

* Did officer C12 shout the words “armed police” at Mr de Menezes before firing?

* Did Mr de Menezes stand up from his seat before he was grabbed in a bear hug by officer Ivor?

* Did Mr de Menezes move towards C12 before he was grabbed in a bear hug by officer Ivor?

In other words questions that reiterate the police testimony and like the Fox news trick by adding the trusty question mark – Hey I was just asking, little ole innocent butter-wouldn’t-melt me.

I’ll tell ya, If I ever wanted to commit murder I’d want this guy as my friend on the bench, in fact with him in place I’d not even have to waste money on a defence team. But I would guess he does not put out like this for anyone but the big lovely British establishment.

PS. And good to see how honourable the top cop was-

Former Metropolitan police chief Sir Ian Blair was a “cheerleader” for the Labour government who used the cash for honours scandal to secure his position during the de Menezes affair, according Britain’s former top-ranking Asian officer.

DeMenezes Inquest- Judge Opens The Whitewash, Family Walk Out

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.


De Menezes Inquest Adjourns

But not before the fuzz bemoan the DVLA, because of course we all have to cope with delays from them but only the police reckon such delays mean it’s a reason to shoot someone (and what of their prior intelligence…)-

Jean Charles de Menezes was shot dead after pictures identifying the real terror suspect arrived too late, an inquest has heard. Detective Inspector Kevin Southworth said police could only order copies of a driving licence belonging to Hussain Osman “during office hours”. As a result the images did not arrive until about two hours after Mr de Menezes was shot dead in South London.

The inquest heard there were also pictures of Osman available from immigration authorities. But, as only hard copies existed, there was no way of obtaining them in time either. Police shot the 27-year-old electrician seven times in the head on a train carriage at Stockwell Tube, south London, on 22 July, 2005.

The coroner, Sir Michael Wright, told jurors there would be no further evidence from witnesses at the inquest. He said: “Over the next couple of weeks I have only to give the opportunity to the various different parties to prepare or present to me the submissions they wish to make to me as to the issues I should deal with and the questions I should determine. At first they will be given in writing and then they will have a chance to give them to me orally. Those are matters which you do not have to attend.”

The inquest was adjourned and the jury was told it would not sit again at the Oval cricket ground before 1 December.

From Justice4Jean-

  • Evidence given by DI Kevin Southworth, an SO13 anti-terror branch officer, revealed that police had significant intelligence about Hussain Osman prior to the 22nd of July 2005 including a report of suspicions by a member of a local mosque.
  • A police firearms chief has said that “very little changed” after the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes. Chief Supt William Tillbrook told an inquest that training for marksmen at Scotland Yard had remained “broadly the same” since the Brazilian was killed. But he said police looked at how they could improve every day.
  • Orders given by a police chief in the case of Jean Charles de Menezes were “ambiguous”, former senior officer Brian Paddick has told an inquest. He was referring to an order by Deputy Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick to “arrest him [de Menezes], but whatever you do, don’t let him get on the Tube”.
  • Dr Kenneth Shorrock, who carried out post-mortem examinations after Mr de Menezes was killed, was incorrectly told by officers that the victim had “vaulted” over a ticket barrier as he was pursued by police before “stumbling” down an escalator in the moments before officers opened fire. He told jurors that he was given the false information during a “walk-through” with officers at Stockwell Tube station, south London, in the hours after the shooting. When asked why there were “significant errors” in his initial report, he replied: “This was what was told to me.
  • The driver of the underground train on which Jean Charles de Menezes was killed believed the police who shot dead the young Brazilian were terrorists, an inquest heard today. Quincy Akpesiri Oji ran across live tracks into a tunnel to escape from the police, who he believed were “fanatics” shooting at passengers.

Are We Done Here?

It has been over three years but now the non-police witnesses giving testimony to the inquest into Jean Charles de Menezes’ killing have comprehensively exposed the police version as a great steaming heap of lies. It’s over, the story the establishment have pushed for three years is dead, what we now need is for the inquest to find a correct verdict that will mean charges can be brought against those responsible from the top to the bottom, perjury, obstruction of justice, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, manslaughter, murder, all are viable. And potential for such charges also explains why the story has been in place for so long.

Ms Dunwoodie was sitting two or three seats to the left of Mr de Menezes when he boarded the train at Stockwell Tube Station, south London on 22 July 2005. She told the inquest that, at the time, she thought the firearms officers pursuing Mr de Menezes were members of a gang.

She said she did not hear officers shout any warning at the electrician. “I would like to say that on whether I heard anything from police officers, I am very, very clear. I had absolutely no idea who they were and had they shouted I would have latched on to that,” she said.

She described the scene on the train as one of panic: “I think it was the man, who I now know to be a surveillance officer, (who) really seemed to be frightened or hyped up and when he was calling the other men they seemed… you know, when people are full of adrenalin and they move quickly and their movements are a bit jerky.

“I felt they were a bit out of control, that’s what it felt like.”

Discussing the moments before Mr de Menezes’ death, Ms Dunwoodie said he had closed his eyes and looked “almost calm”.

“I guess he had a gun pressed to his head and there was not anything he could do about it”, she said.

A surveillance officer, using the code name Ivor, had previously told the inquest that Mr de Menezes had stood up and walked towards him as police challenged him. But Ms Dunwoodie, who had been reading a book on the train, said she did not recall that happening.

After the shooting she told how she thought “something illegal” had happened and said her first impulse was to call the police to let them know.

Two eyewitnesses who sat near the carriage doors where firearms officers opened fire also said they had no recollection of any warnings from armed police. Robert Preston said he only heard police shouting “get down, get down”. “It was quite a general statement and it could have applied to me,” he said.

Mark Whitby, a fellow passenger, added that that was all he heard too. He said: “There was not one mention of armed police.”

Transcripts at

You’ve got to like Anna Dunwoodie-

she thought the firearms officers pursuing Mr de Menezes were members of a gang.

After the shooting she told how she thought “something illegal” had happened

Says it all really.