I believe either the BBC are too manipulative to be trusted OR our own CPS and Judiciary let our Police force down badly- please let me know what you think as personally i'd like to see another hearing where jurors are specifically informed of how anti-terrorist operations are conducted- please read this and give me your opinion:Were the jurors on Jean charles de Menezes inquest properly informed by our CPS or Judiciary?
I've just done a report for my criminal justice degree on these events and find either the BBC to be manipulative liars OR our own judiciary to be lacking in professionalism - either way the Officers that shot the man dead should be exhonerated in my opinion because "if the jurors knew about KRATOS and the tactics allowed under law (as acceptable procedure) they would have known that NO warning is necessary if protecting life comes into the equation? I am but a novice where law is concerned and remember being frightened myself when I heard what had occurred as I felt the Police were acting wrongly BUT NOW- I see that if procedure is observed these Officers were not just in the right but were actually on the par with soldiers as they got close enough to hit a possible terrorist with sidearms- which meant that at any time they could have been blown up (had he actually been wired up to explosives). Nobody states WHO tampered with the railway cctv footage or how- maybe it is as simple as taking something 5 inches by 3/4 inches by 4 inches deep from the door of the train and disabling it - something I'm pretty sure Mr menenzes could have done after learning of his abilities. Maybe he was associated with them and was performing preliminary procedures for the next attrocity? Why was he a CRIMINAL living in this country- who were his associates? What were his allegiances?
All I ask is that you look at the Inquest information and tell me what you think the jurors would have concluded if they knew NO WARNING WAS NECESSARY UNDER LAW.
Opinions PLEASE????
SWEET PEA: I believe you are wrong and the guy did have things about him that may never be exposed!
Carswoody- I commend you for your faith and agree to some extents but what I am really trying to get at is: DID our judiciary let down the Officers that shot Mr menezes? Were they supposed to have breiefed the jury on KRATOS? It may not be simple but surely our Officers would feel better if they knew not just the law but the public are behind them?
Gordon33: you are not correct in any matter of means and I hope you can watch the footage and reflect on how bad it actually was!
Logical: maybe you ought to accompany some Officers on the next operation and be in between the shooters and the suspected terrorist- and maybe you ought to tell them not to shoot yourself- you are so silly in my eyes as they did waht was necessary in all the health and safety laws I have thus far read and under their own tactiocal strategies need not have issued a warning- our crappy BBC have manipulated the truth yet again and put the public against the Police unnecessarily- its the BBC that ought to be in a civil court!
I've just done a report for my criminal justice degree on these events and find either the BBC to be manipulative liars OR our own judiciary to be lacking in professionalism - either way the Officers that shot the man dead should be exhonerated in my opinion because "if the jurors knew about KRATOS and the tactics allowed under law (as acceptable procedure) they would have known that NO warning is necessary if protecting life comes into the equation? I am but a novice where law is concerned and remember being frightened myself when I heard what had occurred as I felt the Police were acting wrongly BUT NOW- I see that if procedure is observed these Officers were not just in the right but were actually on the par with soldiers as they got close enough to hit a possible terrorist with sidearms- which meant that at any time they could have been blown up (had he actually been wired up to explosives). Nobody states WHO tampered with the railway cctv footage or how- maybe it is as simple as taking something 5 inches by 3/4 inches by 4 inches deep from the door of the train and disabling it - something I'm pretty sure Mr menenzes could have done after learning of his abilities. Maybe he was associated with them and was performing preliminary procedures for the next attrocity? Why was he a CRIMINAL living in this country- who were his associates? What were his allegiances?
All I ask is that you look at the Inquest information and tell me what you think the jurors would have concluded if they knew NO WARNING WAS NECESSARY UNDER LAW.
Opinions PLEASE????
SWEET PEA: I believe you are wrong and the guy did have things about him that may never be exposed!
Carswoody- I commend you for your faith and agree to some extents but what I am really trying to get at is: DID our judiciary let down the Officers that shot Mr menezes? Were they supposed to have breiefed the jury on KRATOS? It may not be simple but surely our Officers would feel better if they knew not just the law but the public are behind them?
Gordon33: you are not correct in any matter of means and I hope you can watch the footage and reflect on how bad it actually was!
Logical: maybe you ought to accompany some Officers on the next operation and be in between the shooters and the suspected terrorist- and maybe you ought to tell them not to shoot yourself- you are so silly in my eyes as they did waht was necessary in all the health and safety laws I have thus far read and under their own tactiocal strategies need not have issued a warning- our crappy BBC have manipulated the truth yet again and put the public against the Police unnecessarily- its the BBC that ought to be in a civil court!