NEWS: Police shot the wrong man in Stockwell.

[Ja'chyra]

There's so many high horses around here that I'm suprised some people can still see us on the ground.

Why not try waiting for the inquest before we condemn the policeman??

I'll say it again, unless you know all the details all you're doing is spouting uninformed opinions.

[Papewaio]

It would make for some really short threads if we started doing that now...

Off to my high horse...

[JAG]

Pape, you are completely spot on with all you have said, totally right.

Personally, I am still trying to work out exactly why they shot him when they did. They had him pinned down..

The reason thus far? He may have had a bomb'. Well if he had a bomb, why the hell didn't they stop him when he got out his house or while he was in his house, ended it outside a public place like a tube station... Surely it is terrible policing if they believed he had a bomb yet they still allowed him to get on a train.

Either way, stupid and terrible policing and policemen that need to be seriously looked into about their motives and orders, someone seriously messed up and they need to be held to account.

Also I think there is real anger from a majority of people in the country, that a hardworking young man has been victimised by the police like this, while NO terrorist has been brought to justice. What the hell are the police doing?!

[Efrem]

Personally, I am still trying to work out exactly why they shot him when they did. They had him pinned down..

Because there was reasonable evidence to suggest he had a bomb, and just because he's pinned down doesn't mean he can't detinate it, he was in the carriage at that point remember?

why the hell didn't they stop him when he got out his house or while he was in his house, ended it outside a public place like a tube station... Surely it is terrible policing if they believed he had a bomb yet they still allowed him to get on a train.

Because they didn't know he had a bomb and couldn't be certain he was up to something until when asked to stop by UNIFORMED police he ran into a crowded carriage.

Also I think there is real anger from a majority of people in the country, that a hardworking young man has been victimised by the police like this, while NO terrorist has been brought to justice. What the hell are the police doing?!

I ask for like the 3rd time Jag, if you were one of thsoe policemen, what would you have done? Let him blow himself and 30 other people up? Or eliminate the threat?

[Ser Clegane]

Because there was reasonable evidence to suggest he had a bomb

Uhm ... what "evidence"? The fact that he was wearing a coat is not evidence

Because they didn't know he had a bomb

Didn't you just say there was "reasonable evidence" that there was a bomb?

What is it now?

[TonkaToys]

The policemen involved have been removed from fire-arms duties but not suspended from police work.
The enquiry will be run by the Independent Police Complaints Commission - they normally run these types of investigation.

[_Martyr_]

Wearing a coat certainly is no evidence that he had a bomb. Refusing to stop on multiple occasions when confronted by armed anti-terror police, running into a subway station, jumping over a ticket barrier, legging it down the escallator and lunging into a crowded train, a day after attempted suicide bombibgs and just two weeks after the deadly 7th July bombings is IMO enough to warrant what the police did. Seriously, he gave the police EVERY reason to believe that he was a suicide bomber. He was living in London for over 3 years, surely by now he must have realised that the Met dont go round like has been suggested certain police forces do in Brazil. He spoke perfect english, and was of course aware of the suicide bombings. He put the police in a position where the only course of action they had was to shoot him dead. Its trerribly sad, but the police made the right call based on what was known at the time. Sadly this turned out to be incorrect, but thats the beauty of hindsight.

If I was going to criticise the Police over this, I would say that they should have confronted him much earlier. Allowing him to enter a bus if he was a suspect is very poor indeed.


Let me ask you something, clear the information out of your head that he didnt infact have a bomb, and all you have heard since this story broke. You are one of the officers in close persuit. You have been informed that a terror suspect wearing a large coat has alluded armed police when directly confronted to stop. You are very aware of the risk of suiced bombers and have been trained on how to take them out. The suspect reaches the ticket barrier, you shout again to stop, he jumps the ticket barrier and continues running down the escallator, you and your colleagues jump over the barrier as well, close behind him. Atr this point, there is little to no doubt in your mind that this guy is a suicide bomber, why would he run away from armed police, even if he was just scared and innocent, surely he wouldnt try head into a tube station!! You are all running at a pace where it would be impossible to get a good clean shot in, without risking a potential detonation. The suspect heads for a train, you are slowly catching up with him. Just as he reaches the doors of the crowded train, he stumbles and you and your colleagues lunge at him taking him down to the ground. There are maybe a hundred people in the crowded carriage, if this guy pulls the bomb chord he would surely kill 20 innocent people, not to mention you and your colleagues. Why would he run, surely he must be a bomber, he ran into a tube station while being chased!! You pull out your automatic pistol, you remember the training you have received based on the experiences the Israelis have made... the only way to completely disarm a suicide bomber is to shut down his central nervous system, you aim for the head. Do you:

A) Unload and neutralise the threat to all those around you.
B) Merely try to pin him down, knowing that this guy could have a pull chord, trigger or anything else in any part of his body, which he could pull very easily even while pinned down and risk the lives of all those around you.

[Ser Clegane]

To make my view a bit clearer - once the situation unfolded and turned into the chase the policemen had not much of a choice anymore IMHO.

Of course the guy might have had a good reason to wear a coat (obviously he did) and it might indeed be the case that something just "snapped" in him when guys started shouting at him, chasing him with guns in their hands - some people might just panic in such a situation and do something unreasonable, like just trying to break away.

OTOH - the policemen in this situation just did not have the time to consider all possible options and did what they thought would be the best to ensure the safety of other people.

But the point is indeed - that if the police considered him to be a suspect and thought that he might carry a bomb, they should have stopped him as soon as he left the house they were observing.
Perhaps they were hoping that he would lead them to other suspects - so the question is, at which point and why did they decide that they needed to call out to him and to stop him (were the policemen who did this the same who observed him when he left his house)?
This might be a issues for the investigation and we will see what comes out of it.

I do not think that we should quickly pass judgement on the policemen, given the little iformation we have at this stage.
But I also have a problem with statement that imply that there was "evidence" that this guy had a bomb (there wasn't) or that make this poor guy look like somebody who brought this upon himself - just like for the policemen it might have seemd necessary to kill the guy, it might have seemd a good idea for him to run away - who knows if he e.g., noticed any uniformed policemen chasing him?

[A.Saturnus]

According to what witnesses say, only the three plain cloth policemen were directly behind him. The uniformed men came later. It`s quite possible he didn`t see them, so it`s understandable he ran away.
Of course, we do not know enough facts here, but in my opinion the police had not enough evidence to assume he was dangerous and needed to be killed.

[Kagemusha]

Its a tragedy.I think police was too hasty on its use of leathal force,but i can understand that they werent in their normal state of mind.It was a tragig error.These things shouldnt happen but they do.My condolences to the killed mans family.

[PyrrhusofEpirus]

I'm a policeman and I consider you are a suspect. Can I shoot you dead? Of course if I'm wrong, I will be deeply sorry.

[Kagemusha]

I'm a policeman and I consider you are a suspect. Can I shoot you dead? Of course if I'm wrong, I will be deeply sorry.

And you will be punished accordingly.If someone has a solution to prevent humans making mistakes,please tell me.

[PyrrhusofEpirus]

And you will be punished accordingly.If someone has a solution to prevent humans making mistakes,please tell me.

Simply, Don't shoot!

[Kagemusha]

Simply, Don't shoot!

And what if it have been a real bomber?

[Redleg]

I'm a policeman and I consider you are a suspect. Can I shoot you dead? Of course if I'm wrong, I will be deeply sorry.

LOL - not even the same scenerio that is being investigated in England.

If as a police officer you believe the individual to be a suspect of a crime, and you inform that individual that he must stop and allow you to speak to him, search him (depending apon the civil rights statues of the nation) and arrest him - and he refuses to comply with that message, and if you believe that the individual who is a suspect is about to committ grevious harm to another individual - then as a police officer you are obligated to protect the other citizen from the suspect.

A review panel will then determine if your actions were merited under the circumstances that you were under at the time of the shooting.

As with these police officers from the reports I am reading - its not just a simple case of we made a mistake - so sorry. They are undergoing the same type of review board that investigates all police shootings to determine if the situation and circumstances warranted the use of deadly force.

Will the police go to jail for their actions if found at fault - most likely not - but they could lose their jobs, they will have to live with their bad decision for the rest of thier lives, etc.

[PyrrhusofEpirus]

Will the police go to jail for their actions if found at fault - most likely not - but they could lose their jobs, they will have to live with their bad decision for the rest of thier lives, etc.

Poor policeman! Imagine that! He will probably loose his job! Were are the good ol' days in wild West, when the sheriff was policeman, judge and executioner simultaneously!

[Redleg]

Poor policeman! Imagine that! He will probably loose his job! Were are the good ol' days in wild West, when the sheriff was policeman, judge and executioner simultaneously!

Your knowledge of the United States old west is flawed. The sheriff was not the judge - most often it was someone else like a circuit judge - or the prisoner was transported to a town with a judge, the executioner in some towns was indeed the sheriff and in others there was a circuit executioner that came along with the circuit judge. Your knowledge of history is about as lacking as your understanding of the statement I just made - or the circumstances of why the police shot this individual. At least in my case I ackownledge that I don't know - and am spectulating based upon knowledge of police shooting investigations here in the states.

Keep fooling yourself with your message of hate.

The police have one of the toughest jobs that a civilian can have. They make mistakes, and they suffer the consequences of thier mistakes much worse then you with your hate filled rethoric seem to be able to ackownledge.

Try living with the knowledge that your actions killed another human being that on the surface might have been innocent. You might find it a very hard thing to do.

Lets condemn the police for reacting to a stressful situation before we know all the facts surrounding the events and the circumstances of the shootings.

A great arguemetn on your part. Bah.