Jury's response to the Coroner's questionnaire
Jurors were asked and answered the following questions:
"Did firearms officer C12 shout armed police?"
NO
The police officers on the tube train all insisted that a warning was shouted before two opened fire, but passengers sitting in the carriage said they heard no warning. The jury believed the passengers and rejected the evidence of the police
"Did Mr de Menezes stand up from his seat before he was grabbed in a bear hug by officer Ivor?"
YES
"Did Mr de Menezes move towards C12 before he was grabbed in a bear hug by Ivor?"
NO
Officer C12 said that he fired fatal shots because jean stood up and moved towards a gun pointed at his head. The jury didn’t believe this evidence. They accepted that Jean had stood up, but did not believe he had moved forwards in a manner suggesting he might be about to detonate a bomb.
"Do you consider that any of the following factors caused or contributed to the death of Mr de Menezes;
a. "The pressure on police after the suicide attacks in July 2005."
CANNOT DECIDE
The Metropolitan Police have always maintained – and continue to argue – that police officers were under enormous pressure in the aftermath of the 7th July bombings and the attempted suicide attacks on 21st July 2005. Acting Commissioner Paul Stephenson said today, “July 2005 brought with it unparalleled challenges for the Met and the people of London including the unique situation where there were four failed suicide bombers on the run.” But the jury, after many days of deliberation, were unable to agree that this was a key contributory factor in Jean’s death.
b. "A failure to obtain and provide better photographic images of failed bomber Hussain Osman to surveillance officers."
YES
The jury concluded that the fact that surveillance officers watching the flats in Scotia Road had only seen a poor photo from Hussain Osman’s gym membership card, when there was a much clearer image available from his wedding day (found at the scene of the attempted bombing), was a far more important factor than the inability of officers to properly identify Jean.
c. "A failure by police to ensure that Mr de Menezes was stopped before he reached public transport."
YES
The police operation was supposed to stop anyone leaving the flats so they could be identified and checked, away from the property so as not to reveal the surveillance operation to any would-be bomber.. However, when Jean left for work, the operation was in chaos: there was no firearms teams in position to stop suspects.
d. "The general difficulty in providing identification of the man under surveillance in the time available."
NO
The surveillance officer closest to the flat, codenamed 'Frank', was apparently relieving himself as Jean left the property, leaving the officers following Jean to establish his identity. But this error was compounded because Jean was not stopped as he boarded a bus, or before entering Stockwell station. The jury clearly believed that there was more than enough time available to identify him.
e. "The innocent behaviour of Mr de Menezes increasing suspicion."
NO
This suggestion was one of the most bizarre – that by acting innocently, Jean was suspicious.
Officers claimed he was acting nervously and strangely, standing on the bus stairwell and being twitchy. When his bus reached Brixton town centre, he got off and walked towards the tube station before doubling back and getting back on another bus. However, the jury did not feel this behaviour was a factor – after all, Brixton station was closed amidst tightened security from the previous day’s incident and Jean was late for work. His supposedly ‘suspicious’ behaviour was shared by many Londoners on 22nd July 2005.
f. "The fact that the views of the surveillance officers regarding identification were not accurately communicated to the command team and firearms officers.
YES
g. "The fact that the position of the cars containing the firearms officers was not accurately known by the command team as firearms teams were approaching Stockwell Tube."
YES
h. "Shortcomings in the communications system between various police teams on the ground."
YES
i. "Failure to conclude at the time that surveillance officers could have been used to carry out the stop on Mr de Menezes at Stockwell."
YES
The jury were clearly convinced that the repeated communications failures between the surveillance team and a chaotic Operations Room was an important contributory factor. This included the descent of positive identification into little more than guesswork, the failure of DAC Cressida Dick’s instructions to stop Jean from entering Stockwel tube station to reach those on the ground and the evidence from firearms officer C12, who claimed he had heard the surveillance officers positively identify Jean over the radio, when other claimed this message had not be given.
The family believe that unbalanced briefing given to firearms officers, who were evidently ready to deliver a critical shot to any suspect suicide bomber, without being warned of the risks of uncertain identification, meant that these officers were sent into a situation where the chances of arresting a suspect as opposed to shooting them dead were almost negligible.
"Did firearms officer C12 shout armed police?"
NO
The police officers on the tube train all insisted that a warning was shouted before two opened fire, but passengers sitting in the carriage said they heard no warning. The jury believed the passengers and rejected the evidence of the police
"Did Mr de Menezes stand up from his seat before he was grabbed in a bear hug by officer Ivor?"
YES
"Did Mr de Menezes move towards C12 before he was grabbed in a bear hug by Ivor?"
NO
Officer C12 said that he fired fatal shots because jean stood up and moved towards a gun pointed at his head. The jury didn’t believe this evidence. They accepted that Jean had stood up, but did not believe he had moved forwards in a manner suggesting he might be about to detonate a bomb.
"Do you consider that any of the following factors caused or contributed to the death of Mr de Menezes;
a. "The pressure on police after the suicide attacks in July 2005."
CANNOT DECIDE
The Metropolitan Police have always maintained – and continue to argue – that police officers were under enormous pressure in the aftermath of the 7th July bombings and the attempted suicide attacks on 21st July 2005. Acting Commissioner Paul Stephenson said today, “July 2005 brought with it unparalleled challenges for the Met and the people of London including the unique situation where there were four failed suicide bombers on the run.” But the jury, after many days of deliberation, were unable to agree that this was a key contributory factor in Jean’s death.
b. "A failure to obtain and provide better photographic images of failed bomber Hussain Osman to surveillance officers."
YES
The jury concluded that the fact that surveillance officers watching the flats in Scotia Road had only seen a poor photo from Hussain Osman’s gym membership card, when there was a much clearer image available from his wedding day (found at the scene of the attempted bombing), was a far more important factor than the inability of officers to properly identify Jean.
c. "A failure by police to ensure that Mr de Menezes was stopped before he reached public transport."
YES
The police operation was supposed to stop anyone leaving the flats so they could be identified and checked, away from the property so as not to reveal the surveillance operation to any would-be bomber.. However, when Jean left for work, the operation was in chaos: there was no firearms teams in position to stop suspects.
d. "The general difficulty in providing identification of the man under surveillance in the time available."
NO
The surveillance officer closest to the flat, codenamed 'Frank', was apparently relieving himself as Jean left the property, leaving the officers following Jean to establish his identity. But this error was compounded because Jean was not stopped as he boarded a bus, or before entering Stockwell station. The jury clearly believed that there was more than enough time available to identify him.
e. "The innocent behaviour of Mr de Menezes increasing suspicion."
NO
This suggestion was one of the most bizarre – that by acting innocently, Jean was suspicious.
Officers claimed he was acting nervously and strangely, standing on the bus stairwell and being twitchy. When his bus reached Brixton town centre, he got off and walked towards the tube station before doubling back and getting back on another bus. However, the jury did not feel this behaviour was a factor – after all, Brixton station was closed amidst tightened security from the previous day’s incident and Jean was late for work. His supposedly ‘suspicious’ behaviour was shared by many Londoners on 22nd July 2005.
f. "The fact that the views of the surveillance officers regarding identification were not accurately communicated to the command team and firearms officers.
YES
g. "The fact that the position of the cars containing the firearms officers was not accurately known by the command team as firearms teams were approaching Stockwell Tube."
YES
h. "Shortcomings in the communications system between various police teams on the ground."
YES
i. "Failure to conclude at the time that surveillance officers could have been used to carry out the stop on Mr de Menezes at Stockwell."
YES
The jury were clearly convinced that the repeated communications failures between the surveillance team and a chaotic Operations Room was an important contributory factor. This included the descent of positive identification into little more than guesswork, the failure of DAC Cressida Dick’s instructions to stop Jean from entering Stockwel tube station to reach those on the ground and the evidence from firearms officer C12, who claimed he had heard the surveillance officers positively identify Jean over the radio, when other claimed this message had not be given.
The family believe that unbalanced briefing given to firearms officers, who were evidently ready to deliver a critical shot to any suspect suicide bomber, without being warned of the risks of uncertain identification, meant that these officers were sent into a situation where the chances of arresting a suspect as opposed to shooting them dead were almost negligible.
Labels: Verdict
This entry was posted
on Friday, 12 December 2008 at 13:56.
