Taser stun guns are in today's news in Texas as well. According to
the article below, Taser International, Inc. is being investigated by
SEC. According to proxy statement
(http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/fetchFilingFrameset.aspx?FilingID=3598857&Type=HTML),
Directors
Patrick W. Smith , Chief Executive Officer and Director. Mr.
Smith has served as Chief Executive Officer and as a director of the
Company since 1993. He is a co-founder of the Company. Mr. Smith holds
a B.S. degree in Biology and Neurobiology from Harvard University, an
M.B.A. degree from the University of Chicago, and a Masters Degree in
International Finance from the University of Leuven in Leuven, Belgium.
Mark W. Kroll , Director. Dr. Kroll has served as a director of
the Company since January 2003. Since 1995 Dr. Kroll has held various
executive level positions within St. Jude Medical Inc., most recently
as Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer, Cardiac Rhythm
Management Division. Dr. Kroll holds a B.S. degree in Mathematics and
a M.S. degree and a Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering from the
University of Minnesota and a M.B.A. degree from the University of
St. Thomas. Dr. Kroll is a director of Harbinger Medical, Inc (Cardiac
Diagnostic), Guidance Interactive, Inc (Diabetes Monitoring),
Arrowhead Offshore Partners, Ltd (Venture Capital), and OncoStim, Inc
(DC Ablation for Cancer).
Judy Martz , Director. Ms. Martz has served as a director of the
Company since April 2005. From January 2001 through January 2004, Ms.
Martz was Governor of the State of Montana and was Lieutenant Governor
of the State of Montana from January 1996 through January 2000. From
1989 through 1995 Ms. Martz served as state representative for U.S.
Senator Conrad Burns and campaigned with Governor Marc Racicot during
part of 1995 and 1996.
Phillips W. Smith , Chairman of the Board of Directors. Dr.
Smith has served as a director of the Company since 1993. From 1999 to
December 2004, Dr. Smith has served as Director of Investor Relations
with the Company. Dr. Smith was Chairman of the Board of Pentawave
from January 1999 through October 2000 and its Chief Executive Officer
from January through March 1999. From June 1990 to September 1997, Dr.
Smith served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of Zycad
Corporation, a developer of engineering and manufacturing applications
software. Dr. Smith holds a B.S.E. degree from West Point, a M.B.A.
degree from Michigan State University, and a Ph.D. degree in Business
Administration from St. Louis University.
Bruce R. Culver , Director. Mr. Culver has served as a director
of the Company since January 1994. Currently he is the CEO and
Chairman of IdealHire, Inc. a recruitment software company he founded
in 2001. In 1990, Mr. Culver co-founded and was Chairman of
Professional Staff, p.l.c. (PSTF), in England, a human resource
staffing company, and served on its Board of Directors until 2001. In
March 1993, Mr. Culver acquired California Distribution, a company
providing warehouse, transportation and distribution services. In 1985
Mr. Culver founded Lab Support, Inc., now called On Assignment, Inc.
(ASGN) and served as its Chairman and a director until 1990. Mr.
Culver also serves on the Board of Digital Map Products, Inc. From
1997 until 2001 Mr. Culver served on the Board of Pentawave, Inc.,
becoming its Chairman in October 2000. Mr. Culver holds B. Sc. and
M.S. degrees in Chemistry from University of South Dakota and Montana
State University.
Thomas P. Smith , President and Director. Mr. Smith has served
as President of the Company since April 1994 and as a director since
1993. He is a co-founder of the Company. Mr. Smith holds a B.S. degree
in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology from the University of Arizona and
a M.B.A. degree from Northern Arizona University.
Matthew R. McBrady , Director. Dr. McBrady has served as a
director of the Company since January 2001. From August 1998 though
July 1999, Dr. McBrady served as a member of the staff of President
Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers. In December 1997, Dr. McBrady
began working as a financial and analytical consultant for Avenue A,
Inc., an internet marketing company, and served as its vice president
of analytics from June 1999 through October 1999. Dr. McBrady taught
corporate finance and economic courses at the University of Southern
California during the summer terms of 1997 and 1998, at Harvard
University from September 1996 through May 1997, at Harvard Business
School during the spring term of 1998, and taught advanced corporate
finance at the Wharton School of Business at the University of
Pennsylvania from September 2002 through May 2003. Dr. McBrady
currently teaches business administration at the Darden Graduate
School of Business Administration at the University of Virginia and
has held that position since 2003. Dr. McBrady holds a B.A. degree in
Economics from Harvard University, a M.S. degree in International
Economics from Oxford University (UK), and a Ph.D. degree in Business
Economics from Harvard University.
http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/content/metro/stories/09/29taser.html
By Tony Plohetski, Claire Osborn
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Austin police officers involved in a struggle with a man shocked him
three times with Taser stun guns twice in the chest and once in the
right forearm minutes before he died, officials with the Travis
County medical examiner's office said Wednes- day.
The officers apparently followed department policy and training in
aiming the devices at the suspect's chest, a tactic also recommended
by Taser International Inc., the company that manufactures the
electric stun guns.
However, the company warned in a bulletin three months ago that
repeated shocks to the chest could increase chances of respiratory
difficulty.
Deputy Medical Examiner Elizabeth Peacock said that she is still
investigating what led to the death of Michael Clark, 33, and that she
will make a determination after toxicology tests are complete, which
is expected to take three weeks.
Clark died Monday, police said, after officers responded to a call
about fight between him and an unidentified woman in the 6400 block of
East William Cannon Drive, near Salt Springs Drive. Clark struggled as
officers were attempting to arrest him, bit a detective on the hand
and injured a sergeant's shoulder.
Nine officers eventually were involved in subduing him. Officers used
pepper spray, and officers Douglas Drake and Blaine Eiben administered
the Taser shocks, police said. Soon afterward, Clark went into
"medical distress" and was taken to South Austin Hospital, where he died.
Drake and Eiben, initially placed on restricted duty per department
policy, returned to regular duty Wednesday.
The two officers received honors last year and were featured in a Page
One story in the Austin American-Statesman after rescuing a
6-month-old inside a mobile home where her father had died days
earlier. They found the child next to her father amid blood and other
body fluids.
Assistant Police Chief Cathy Ellison said department leaders decided
after reviewing witness statements and videotapes from the incident
that the officers should return to work.
Ellison said she did not know when the tapes would be made public.
"It appears to us the officers followed the policy that we have
established," she said.
Austin police officers are trained to aim their Tasers at a person's
chest or the "center mass" of the body. Taser International also said
the preferred target area is a person's torso or legs.
However, the company warned customers in a June 28 bulletin that
repeated shocks "may cause strong muscle contractions that may impair
breathing and respiration, particularly when the probes are placed
across the chest or diaphragm." It was unclear how the bulletin was
distributed.
The Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating the company,
including claims the manufacturer made about safety studies concerning
the stun guns.
Company officials did not comment Wednesday.
Austin police policy said officers should avoid delivering Taser
shocks to sensitive areas such as the head, face, neck, groin or
female breast area. It also says that only one officer may use a Taser
on a suspect "unless it is obvious that deployment was not effective."
Department training instructors said it is not unusual for officers to
use a Taser against a person more than once, depending on how they
respond.
The weapon fires wired electrical probes that attach to a person's
skin or clothing before delivering a shock of about 50,000 volts. Each
officer carries two rounds of Taser ammunition.
The department documents information about how often Tasers are not
effective, and Police Chief Stan Knee said that information would be
available today.
So far this year, Knee said, Taser use is down by more than 40 percent
from the same period last year. From Jan. 1 to Sept. 28, 2004,
officers used their Taser stun guns 265 times, compared with 153 for
the same period in 2005.
Cmdr. Jim O'Leary, who supervises the department's training, said a
person's reaction to being stunned could depend on a number of factors.
"The size, the weight of the individual, the complexity of the muscle
structure will have an impact on the success of that current passing
through a person's body," O'Leary said.
Officials said officers must evaluate how many times they should shock
a person who is resisting and whether they should attempt to use other
force.
Peacock said she could not tell whether Clark's Taser injuries were at
close range or from a distance. He had superficial puncture marks from
the Tasers about 1 millimeter deep.
Clark also had a few minor abrasions, Peacock said, but she could not
tell whether he had a leg injury, as his family had alleged, that
would limit his ability to fight police. Jeff Clark, the victim's
oldest brother, said they will have an independent autopsy performed
for a death they blame on police.
"I don't care what the police say to justify that," he said. "Their
hands were the last to touch my brother alive."
==========
--- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, "David Guyatt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is of passing interest, that apart from Blair and the Met's gung
ho attitude, that regional police forces have preferred to opt for use
of a Tazer to stun and immobilise suspected terrorists.
>
> This has caused Blair (the copper) some frustration, as it leaves
him standing alone amongst his senior officers. However, it is fairly
well known that the Met is the police service that usually does the
bidding of the government politicians whereas other forces continue to
strive to maintain their independence.
>
> But not for long I suspect, especially with the current craven Home
Secrectary, who is arguing to suspend the European Charter of Human
Rights. He argues that this will alow him to deport suspected
terrorists. However, since he already has ample power to do that
under existing legislation, his real reasons must lie elsewhere.
>
> The future does not bode well.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: norgesen
> To: cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 10:48 PM
> Subject: [cia-drugs] Jean Charles de Menezes shooting continued...
>
>
> A couple more articles referencing the London subway shooting this
past summer
> --------
> Monday, July 25, 2005
> Shoot-to-kill
> Shoot-to-kill:
>
>
> 1.. The Official Story for the London police actions is set out
in the Daily Record:
> "THE young man killed in Stockwell yesterday was subjected to
summary execution by police operating a shoot-to-kill policy.
>
> It is a controversial tactic deployed only in the most extreme
circumstances but one police have been preparing to use for the last
two weeks.
>
> Minutes after first news of the four bombs ripping through the
underground and the No 30 bus reached Scotland Yard on July 7, a
message was sent to the Met's elite SO19 firearms unit.
>
> They were instructed to launch 'Operation Kratos' - codename for
the secret guidelines which tell officers how to react to suicide
bombers."
>
>
> and:
> "The marksmen were briefed by officers who had been to Israel to
meet their counterparts there and pick up tips gleaned from the
experience of dealing with Hamas bombers."
>
>
> and:
> "During the Kratos briefings, the Met team were told that,
contrary to their normal arms training, they should fire at the head
rather than the chest.
>
> Although the chest is easier to hit, it is not as reliable in
causing instant death, giving a bomber a chance to detonate his device.
>
> A blow to the torso also risks setting off any explosives that
are strapped to the body."
>
>
>
> 2.. The shooting would therefore be the act of a part of an
elite London police firearms unit called SO19. As Michel Chossudovsky
writes:
> "Essentially what we are dealing with is the formation of a
death squadron mentality under the auspices of what is still
officially considered a 'civilian police force'."
>
>
> Bad enough, but it might even be worse. Some are questioning
whether this is actually a police operation, and wondering whether it
might be an SAS operation (i.e., a British military special operations
unit which seems to regard itself as completely unaccountable to
civilian oversight). The question of who is involved may, or may not,
be answered as a result of official inquiries:
> "The shooting is being investigated by officers from Scotland
Yard's Directorate of Professional Standards, and will be referred to
the Independent Police Complaints Commission."
>
>
> I would expect nothing to come of this except for
congratulations for heroic police work, so the question of military
involvement in policing may never be answered.
>
> 3.. We have received a rather elaborate justification for the
'shoot to kill' strategy. One problem I have with this is the fact
that the execution of Jean Charles de Menezes followed none of the new
guidelines. The theory is that rapid shots to the head are necessary
to instantly kill a bomber before he can trigger his payload,
something he could do even after shots to the torso which would
normally be considered sufficient to incapacitate, or even quickly
kill, a threatening person. In the case of Jean Charles de Menezes,
the authorities pursued him from a place of relatively few people into
a crowded subway train, apparently made no attempt to fire at him
until he was on the ground (witnesses reported no shots until the five
fatal ones), and only killed him when he was closely surrounded by a
number of official shooters. In other words, they followed absolutely
no part of the protocol apparently learned from the Israelis on how to
deal with suicide bombers. Had he been a real suicide bomber, they had
given him ample time to set off his bomb, forced him to a place where
the bomb would have done the maximum harm, and might even have
accidentally triggered the bomb by their firing at him at close range,
surrounded by policemen who would have been victims of the bomb. I'm
always suspicious when I read elaborate explanations for official
behavior that don't match what the officials actually did.
>
> 4.. There is still no logical explanation of how Jean Charles de
Menezes even ended up under police surveillance. Officials claim that
he was living in an apartment in the same building or in a building
close to the building which the police were watching as the residence
of someone suspected of being connected to the bombings. At least,
that's the Official Story. It makes no sense. Did they not know what
the person they were supposedly watching actually looked like? Would
any person living in the building, or even in the area of the
building, become a suspect? From the Telegraph (my emphasis in bold):
> "The officer can open fire only if authorised to do so by a
chief police officer - either at the start of a pre-planned operation,
as seems to have been the case at Stockwell, or by police radio during
a 'spontaneous' incident.
>
> The suspect shot dead had been under surveillance and officers
from the Metropolitan Police's firearms squad are understood to have
been briefed that he posed a grave risk to safety."
>
>
> Pre-planned? If they thought he was a suicide bomber, why did
they let him walk into a subway station? Why did they only challenge
him - if in fact they did - or run after him after he was in a place
where he could do real damage? The Official Story has so many holes in
it that it appears that at least part of it was made up after the
fact, in order to justify what seems to be an unjustifiable shooting.
>
> 5.. Shoot-to-kill makes some sense in the twisted world of
Israel. After all, in the Occupied Territories, if you shoot someone
in the head who you think just might be a suicide bomber, you've
either stopped a suicide bombing or killed a Palestinian. It's a
win-win situation! In London, however, the odds are against you. You
have to weigh a very, very tiny chance of stopping a suicide bomber
against the huge probability of allowing the police - or military - to
be judge, jury and executioner of an innocent man. On top of that, you
have to consider that the fear and anger caused by a mistake could be
the cause of real suicide bombings in the future (this side effect is
another thing that is considered a bonus in Israel, as the provocation
of terrorism allows for the Israeli state terrorism which is being
used in the ethnic cleansing of the Occupied Territories). How are
young Asian men going to feel riding the subway, or even walking down
the street, knowing that at any instant they might be fatally shot by
plainclothes policemen? Unless the British authorities want to start a
race war against a significant portion of the British population,
shoot-to-kill is dumb as a practical response to terror, as well as
being immoral and politically fascist. It is extremely dangerous as it
is subject to abuse by the type of right-wing factions you always seem
to find in the military and police who would like nothing better than
to provoke a race war (which is exactly what this incident looks like).
>
> 6.. Shoot-to-kill is still official British government policy.
> http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2005/07/shoot-to-kill.html
>
> -----------
>
> Could this 'police officer' be a soldier?
> British special forces took part in the shoot-to-kill death of
innocent Brazilian
> SAS link
>
> by Michael Smith
> London Times - 2005-07-31
> British special forces soldiers took part in the operation that
led to the shoot-to-kill death of an innocent Brazilian electrician
with no connection to the London bombings, defence sources said last
week.
>
> Jean Charles de Menezes was tailed by a surveillance team on July
22 as he caught a bus to Stockwell Underground station in south
London. He was shot eight times when he fled from his pursuers at the
Tube station.
>
> The Ministry of Defence admitted last week that the army provided
"technical assistance" to the surveillance operation but insisted the
soldiers concerned were "not directly involved" in the shooting.
>
> Press photographs of members of the armed response team taken in
the immediate aftermath of the killing show at least one man carrying
a special forces weapon that is not issued to SO19, the Metropolitan
police firearms unit.
>
> The man, wearing civilian clothes with a blue cap marked "Police",
was carrying a specially modified Heckler & Koch G3K rifle with a
shortened barrel and a butt from a PSG-1 sniper rifle fitted to it - a
combination used by the SAS.
>
> Another man, dressed in a T-shirt, jeans and trainers, was
carrying a Heckler & Koch G36C. Although this weapon is used on
occasion by SO19 it appears to be fitted with a target illuminator
purchased as an "urgent operational requirement" for UK special forces
involved in the war on terror.
>
> The soldiers who took part in the surveillance operation that led
to de Menezes's death included men from a secret undercover unit
formed for operations in Northern Ireland, defence sources said.
>
> Known then as 14 Int or the Det, it is reported to have formed the
basis of the Special Reconnaissance Regiment, the newly created
special forces unit stationed alongside the SAS at Hereford. The men
include SAS soldiers serving on attachment and are part of a team of
around 50 UK special forces that has operated in London since the July
7 bombings in which 56 people died.
>
> Special forces counterterrorist experts have been regularly used
to support police at Heathrow since the September 11 attacks. They
moved into London a day after the July 7 bombings and have been
supporting the police and gathering intelligence to help snare the
suspects.
>
> Members of SO19 (technically known as CO19) are trained by SAS and
SBS instructors. One key tenet of that training is to ensure that a
suicide bomber is killed rather than wounded, which would allow them
to trigger a bomb.
>
> The use of multiple shots to the head is the modus operandi of the
special forces, whether from the SAS, the SBS or the undercover
intelligence operators used in the Stockwell operation. Over the past
30 years the SAS has developed a reputation for never allowing gunmen
to remain alive, an attitude shown most graphically during the 1980
Iranian hostages siege and the Gibraltar IRA killings eight years later.
>
> "It is vital to strike fear into the minds of the terrorists," one
former SAS officer said. "In an ongoing situation such as we have now
the fear must be directed to the fact that we are watching them and
will eventually (get) them. They need to know that they cannot escape.
>
> "We know they are happy to kill themselves but that doesn't mean
they are happy to be killed by others. As long as they evade the
police they will think they are in control but the minute they are
intercepted they lose control."
>
> The Ministry of Defence insisted last week that the military
involvement was limited in the operation that led to de Menezes's
death. "We would describe it as technical assistance as part of a
police-led operation under police control," a spokeswoman said. "It is
a particular military capability that the police can draw on if
needed. It was a low-level involvement in support of a
police-controlled operation."
>
> The Det is made up of the army's best urban surveillance operators
using skills honed in Belfast against republican and loyalist
terrorists. Its speciality has always been close target
reconnaissance: undercover work among civilians, observing terrorists
at close quarters, and carrying out covert searches of offices and
houses for information and weapons.
>
> The unit was very egalitarian when it operated in Northern
Ireland. An operator's rank was always regarded as less important than
his or her capabilities; it was also the only UK special forces unit
to use women.
>
> The Det broke into homes to gather intelligence and plant
listening devices or hidden cameras. Weapons were left where they were
found but "jarked" with tiny transmitters placed inside them that
would provide warning should they be moved.
>
> Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers Ltd.
>
>
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=SMI20050804&articleId=799
>
> ~~~
>
> Targeted Assassination in London
>
> Execution is not only permitted, but in this case, it was the
preferred method
>
> by Kurt Nimmo
> July 23, 2005
>
> "We need to await the inquiry to learn the full facts. But if this
man [executed in Stockwell] was unarmed and not carrying a bomb, it
will raise worrying questions-not least that if we behave as badly as
the terrorists don't we risk losing the moral high ground in the war
against them?" opines the Daily Mail. It appears he was not only not
carrying a bomb or armed but he was chased by "undercover" cops, that
is to say cops dressed in civvies. "It is not true to say that police
officers must identify themselves or shout a warning when confronting
a suspect believed to pose a grave and imminent threat," notes the
BBC, citing a manual published by the Association of Police Officers.
"The manual says that that procedure 'should be considered' but
recognizes that the key aim of an operation is to 'identify, locate,
contain and neutralize' the threat posed."
> In other words, execution is not only permitted, but in this case,
for a South Asian man we are told was followed from a house connected
to "suicide bombings," it was the preferred method for "confronting a
suspect believed to pose a grave and imminent threat," even if the
available evidence reveals he wasn't a grave and imminent threat. "The
appropriateness of the tactics deployed at Stockwell and the
intelligence on which they were based will now be considered by the
Independent Police Complaints Commission," reports the BBC. "Its
inquiry may well redefine the ground rules for the use of lethal force
to protect Britain against the threat from suicide terrorism." In
short, targeted assassination will now likely become routine in
Britain, as it is in Israel. It sends the preferred message to
Muslims. "The tragedy is that when indiscriminate murder is planned by
fanatics in our midst, the security authorities are increasingly
likely to be forced into such life-or-death decisions," concludes the
Daily Mail. Of course, we have no idea who planned this
"indiscriminate murder" and the Brit authorities have no conclusive
evidence it was the work of suicide bombers.
>
> Next up: targeted assassination of "militants" in "Londonistan" of
the caliber of targeted assassinations in the West Bank and Gaza.
Recall the "Right Honorable" David Blunkett, Labor Party politician,
telling us he "didn't give a damn" how many foreign suspects (or for
that matter South Asian British citizens) are detained without due
process in Britain (under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act)
and insinuating that the "airy-fairy, libertarian" views of human
rights advocates endanger Britain. "The terrorist attacks in London on
7 July and today provide an opportunity for us to reflect on our
systems and practices to ensure they are sufficient to counter such
unprecedented events," declared Ken Jones, Chairman of the ACPO
Terrorism and Allied Matters Committee, and Chief Constable of Sussex,
after meeting with Tony Blair yesterday. It now appears, after the
incident at Stockwell, the "practices. sufficient to counter such
unprecedented events" will include targeted assassination of
individuals who do not pose a threat to the people of Britain.
However, in the expanding "war on terrorism," in essence a war on
Islam at the behest of a small camarilla of Straussian-Machiavellian
neocons, all Muslims are a threat and will be eliminated accordingly.
>
>
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20050723&articleId=728
>
> ~~~
>
> Disputed facts and events
> Disputed facts include:
>
>
> Clothing
> With regards to his dress on the day of the shooting The Observer
reported that he was dressed in "baseball cap, blue fleece and baggy
trousers." Mark Whitby, a witness to the shooting, told Reuters that
he observed Menezes wearing a large winter coat, which "looked out of
place". Vivien Figueiredo, a cousin of Menezes, was later told by
police that Menezes was wearing a denim jacket on the day of the
shooting.[26] Anthony Larkin, another eyewitness, told the BBC that
Menezes appeared to be wearing a "bomb belt with wires coming out."
>
> Based on these eyewitness reports, press speculation at the time
said that wearing such heavy clothing on a warm day raised suspicions
that Menezes was hiding explosives underneath, and was therefore a
potential suicide bomber. At the time of the shooting, the temperature
in London (at a Heathrow Airport weather station) was about 17 °C (62
°F) [27].
>
> No device resembling a bomb belt was reported as found. Menezes
was also not carrying a tool bag, since he had left it with his work
colleague the previous evening. According to the report on leaked IPCC
documents, Menezes was wearing a pair of jeans and a light denim
jacket. This was confirmed by a photo' of his body on the floor of the
carriage after the shooting.
>
>
> Police challenge
> Police initially claimed that they challenged Menezes and ordered
him to stop outside Stockwell station. Metropolitan Police
Commissioner Sir Ian Blair said in a press conference that a warning
was issued prior to the shooting. Lee Ruston, an eyewitness who was
waiting on the platform, said the police did not identify themselves.
The Times reported "senior police sources" as saying that police
policy would not require a warning to be given to a suspected suicide
bomber before lethal action was taken. [28]
>
> The leaked IPCC documents indicated that Menezes was seated on the
train carriage when the SO19 armed unit arrived. A shout of 'police'
may have been made, but the suspect never really had an opportunity to
respond before he was shot. The leaked documents indicated that he was
restrained by an unarmed officer before being shot.
>
>
> Ticket barrier
> Witnesses claim that up to twenty police officers in plain clothes
pursued Menezes into Stockwell station, that he jumped over the ticket
barrier, ran down an escalator and tried to jump onto a train.[29] The
Menezes' family were briefed by the Police that their son did not jump
over the ticket barrier and may have used a Travel Card to pass
through.[30]
>
> The pathologist's post mortem report, which was written in the
presence of senior police officers five days after the shooting,
recorded that Jean "vaulted over the ticket barriers" and that he "ran
down the stairs of the tube station". By this time the police knew
that this version of events was incorrect.[31]
>
> Police initially refused to release CCTV footage while the IPCC
investigation was ongoing, even to the family. It had been suggested
that the man reported by eyewitnesses as jumping over the barrier, may
have been one of the police officers in pursuit.[32]
>
> According to the leaked IPCC documents, Menezes passed through the
barrier normally using his pre-paid Oyster card.
>
>
> CCTV footage
> Initial UK media reports suggested that no CCTV footage was
available from the Stockwell station, as recording media had not been
replaced after being removed for examination after the previous day's
attempted bombings. Other reports stated that faulty cameras on the
platform were the reason for the lack of video evidence. An anonymous
source confirmed that CCTV footage was available for the ticket area,
but that there was a problem with the platform coverage. The source
suggested that there was no useful CCTV footage from the platform or
the train carriage. [33]
>
> Extracts from a later police report, claimed that examination of
the platform cameras had produced no footage. It said: "It has been
established that there has been a technical problem with the CCTV
equipment on the relevant platform and no footage exists."
Furthermore, it reported there was no footage, either, from CCTV in
the carriage where Mr de Menezes was shot, saying "Although there was
on-board CCTV in the train, due to previous incidents, the hard drive
had been removed and not replaced."
>
> The platform CCTV system is maintained by the Tube Lines
consortium in charge of maintaining the Northern Line; unofficial
sources from inside the company insisted that the cameras were in
working order. It was also reported that London Underground sources
insisted that at least three of the four cameras trained on the
Stockwell Tube platform were in full working order, and rejected
suggestions that the cameras had not been fitted with new tapes after
police took away footage from the previous day, July 21, when suspects
in the failed bombings caught trains there. [34]
>
>
> Motivations
> Several reasons were initially posited by media sources and family
members for why Menezes may have run from police, as indicated by
initial reports. A few weeks prior, he had been attacked by a gang and
may have relived the situation upon seeing plainclothes officers
chasing him. Several sources have speculated that irregularities about
his immigration status may have given him reason to be wary of the
police[35]. According to some reports, Menezes' student visa had
expired, suggesting that he was working illegally, thus fearful of
being deported by authorities[36]. The Sydney Morning Herald reported
that a work colleague believed that Menezes ran simply because he was
late for his job[37].
>
> It was later indicated by the leaked IPCC documents that Menezes
ran across the platform apparently to get a seat on the train, but did
not know at the time that he was being watched or pursued.
>
>
> Gunshots
> It was initially stated by police that Menezes was shot five times
in the head. Mark Whitby, a passenger on the train Menezes had run
onto, said: "one of [the police officers] was carrying a black
handgun-it looked like an automatic-He half tripped. they pushed him
to the floor, bundled on top of him and unloaded five shots into him."
Another passenger, Dan Copeland, said: "an officer jumped on the door
to my left and screamed, 'Everybody out!' People just froze in their
seats cowering for a few seconds and then leapt up. As I turned out
the door onto the platform, I heard four dull bangs."[38] Menezes'
cousin Alex Pereira, who lived with him, asserted that Menezes had
been shot from behind: "I pushed my way into the morgue. They wouldn't
let me see him. His mouth was twisted by the wounds and it looked like
he had been shot from the back of the neck." Later reports confirmed
that Jean Charles de Menezes was shot a total of eight times: seven
times in the head and once in the shoulder. [39]
>
> The leaked IPCC documents also indicated an additional three shots
had missed Menezes. Apparently the eleven shots where evenly
distributed over a timespan of thirty seconds.[40]
>
>
> Immigration status
> According to initial reports from UK government sources Menezes
was living in the country illegally on an expired visa at the time he
was killed. Menezes' family believed that his visa had been renewed
for an additional five years and that he was working in the country
legally [41]. On 28 July, the Home Office issued a statement saying
that Menezes had arrived in the UK on 13 March 2002 using a six month
tourist visa, and had later applied to remain as a student. That
application was granted and allowed him to remain until 30 June 2003.
This had not been renewed according to their records[42]. They also
said that that the style of the stamp on his visa had not been in use
on the date indicated, implying it was forged.
>
>
> Involvement of special forces
> Several commentators suggested that special forces may have been
involved in the shooting. Professor Michael Clarke, Professor of
Defence Studies at King's College London, went as far as to say that
unless there had been a major change in policy it was likely that it
was not the police who had carried out the shooting, but special forces:
>
> "To have bullets pumped into him like this suggests quite a lot
about him and what the authorities, whoever they are, assumed about
him. The fact that he was shot in this way strongly suggests that it
was someone the authorities knew and suspected he was carrying
explosives on him. [.] You don't shoot somebody five times if you
think you might have made a mistake and may be able to arrest him. [.]
Even Special Branch and SO19 are not trained to do this sort of thing.
It's plausible that they were special forces or elements of special
forces." [43]
> Later, on 4 August 2005, The Guardian reported that the
newly-created Special Reconnaissance Regiment (SRR), a special forces
unit specialising in covert surveillance, were involved in the
operation that led to the shooting. The anonymous Whitehall sources
who provided the story stressed that the SRR were involved only in
intelligence-gathering, and that Menezes was shot by armed police not
by members of the SRR or other soldiers. Defence sources would not
comment on speculation that SRR soldiers were among the plain-clothes
officers who followed Menezes on to the No. 2 bus[44].
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Charles_de_Menezes
>
> Leaked documents reveal killed Brazilian was not acting suspiciously
>
> Leaks Belie Official London Tube Shooting Story
>
> PEJ News - C. L. Cook - The family of the Brazilian electrician
shot dead in the London subway system by police say those who shot
their son are murderers who should be sent to prison for life. These
accusations come following leaks from the investigation that
contradict the version of events peddled by police.
>
> Leaks Belie Official London Tube Shooting Story
> C. L. Cook
> PEJ News
>
> August 17th, 2005
>
> Jean Charles de Menezes, the unfortunate young man gunned down
last month by jittery post-bombing police in the London underground
was not, as earlier stated by police, wearing an unusually bulky
winter coat on the hot July day he died. Neither was he a turnstile
jumper, acting suspicious as initially reported, nor was he running
from police. The Guardian reported today that, not only was de Menezes
not fleeing police when shot, but being held in custody. Police had
not identified him, as earlier stated, as being followed after leaving
a building under surveillance; it is now understood no-one had
followed the Brazilian before his encounter with police in the station.
>
> On the day he died, de Menezes was walking normally through the
tube station, glancing at his newspaper. He paid his fair properly,
and broke briefly into a run to catch his train to work as it pulled
up to the platform. That eagerness to catch the train cost de Menezes
his life.
>
> The revelations, coming from the investigation into the fatal
incident have critics of London's so-called 'Shoot to Kill' policy
calling for a thorough review. And, it has the family of the slain
Brazilian calling for arrests.
>
> [update I Aug. 18, 2005: de Menezes family lawyer cites police
cover-up and deception.]
>
> [update II Aug. 21, 2005:Police Account(s) Discrepancies
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4158832.stm
>
>
http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=3124
>
> Jean Charles de Menezes
>
> Jean Charles de Menezes
> Born 7 January 1978
> Gonzaga, Minas Gerais
> Died 22 July 2005
> Stockwell tube station, London
>
>
>
>
> Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/
>
> Please let us stay on topic and be civil.
>
> OM
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> a.. Visit your group "cia-drugs" on the web.
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 267.7.7 - Release Date: 16/06/05
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/VpgUKB/pzNLAA/cUmLAA/vseplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/
Please let us stay on topic and be civil.
OM
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
