> panicked, and thought it safer to presume that he was one of the suspects than presume he wasn't.
According to the documents that have been leaked, he said categorically that he couldn't be sure who it was. His words were "It might be worth taking a look". Also, he wasn't a policeman, but a soldier seconded to the police. Not entirely sure what's going on there, but I'm not sure all this puts him squarely in the frame for prosecution—rather, it should be whoever took "worth having a look" to mean "KILL! WITH LOTS OF GUNS! KILL!"
> CCTV footage shows de Menezes progress from the entrance of the station down to the platform.
Indeed it does. However, when they were finally allowed to begin the investigation that should have started automatically the day after the shooting, the IPCC discovered that there was apparently no film of de Menezes in the ticket area or actually crossing the platform to get to the train. All there is, then, is proof that de Menezes made his way down the escalator.
I should point out that the allegation here is not necessarily that tapes were spirited away because they contained damaging evidence—though it pays not to rule anything out, as any good policeman will tell you—but that, if there's been no foul play, the day after the attempted second wave of bombings on the Underground (one of them at the next station up the line) several of Stockwell Tube station's CCTV cameras were out of action—possibly even just out of film. in which case, it's not the police getting the finger pointed at them, but the determined shitness of London Underground.
The picture of de Menezes' body is taken from the train's own CCTV, which, as you point out, clearly isn't missing at all. It's unclear (to me, at least) whether this image was among those materials leaked from the IPCC, or whether it was sanctioned by the Met, though the latter is hard to believe.
> It's not a very good cover-up, is it?
No, it isn't, but it's the fact that it looks there was at least an attempt that leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. In itself, Sir Ian's careful phrasing on the day ("According to the information available to me...", "As far as I understand it", etc) looks like nothing more than someone choosing their words carefully and indeed responsibly; however, coupled with his frantic lobbying only hours after the event to disallow the IPCC to handle the matter, and his apparent success in getting their investigation at least deferred for several days, it begins to look more disingenuous than sensible. Leave it to us, we'll handle it ourselves. His visa had run out, you know.
Over the years the Met has a history of buying off people who've been at the wrong end of its tactics, settling with them before it gets to court, so that it causes a brief kerfuffle in the local press but never makes it to the nationals, and a pattern is never established. Really, someone should do a book about this (among other police forces too, it's not just the Met), but it'd involve far too much time burrowing among microfiches. Maybe old habits kicked in, and it was too late before they realised you just can't play that game when you've just killed an innocent man and now everyone's watching.
no subject
According to the documents that have been leaked, he said categorically that he couldn't be sure who it was. His words were "It might be worth taking a look". Also, he wasn't a policeman, but a soldier seconded to the police. Not entirely sure what's going on there, but I'm not sure all this puts him squarely in the frame for prosecution—rather, it should be whoever took "worth having a look" to mean "KILL! WITH LOTS OF GUNS! KILL!"
> CCTV footage shows de Menezes progress from the entrance of the station down to the platform.
Indeed it does. However, when they were finally allowed to begin the investigation that should have started automatically the day after the shooting, the IPCC discovered that there was apparently no film of de Menezes in the ticket area or actually crossing the platform to get to the train. All there is, then, is proof that de Menezes made his way down the escalator.
I should point out that the allegation here is not necessarily that tapes were spirited away because they contained damaging evidence—though it pays not to rule anything out, as any good policeman will tell you—but that, if there's been no foul play, the day after the attempted second wave of bombings on the Underground (one of them at the next station up the line) several of Stockwell Tube station's CCTV cameras were out of action—possibly even just out of film. in which case, it's not the police getting the finger pointed at them, but the determined shitness of London Underground.
The picture of de Menezes' body is taken from the train's own CCTV, which, as you point out, clearly isn't missing at all. It's unclear (to me, at least) whether this image was among those materials leaked from the IPCC, or whether it was sanctioned by the Met, though the latter is hard to believe.
> It's not a very good cover-up, is it?
No, it isn't, but it's the fact that it looks there was at least an attempt that leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. In itself, Sir Ian's careful phrasing on the day ("According to the information available to me...", "As far as I understand it", etc) looks like nothing more than someone choosing their words carefully and indeed responsibly; however, coupled with his frantic lobbying only hours after the event to disallow the IPCC to handle the matter, and his apparent success in getting their investigation at least deferred for several days, it begins to look more disingenuous than sensible. Leave it to us, we'll handle it ourselves. His visa had run out, you know.
Over the years the Met has a history of buying off people who've been at the wrong end of its tactics, settling with them before it gets to court, so that it causes a brief kerfuffle in the local press but never makes it to the nationals, and a pattern is never established. Really, someone should do a book about this (among other police forces too, it's not just the Met), but it'd involve far too much time burrowing among microfiches. Maybe old habits kicked in, and it was too late before they realised you just can't play that game when you've just killed an innocent man and now everyone's watching.