Ecce Homo: Latin for “behold the man.” When Christ was driven through the streets mocked and humiliated, scourged, bloody and beaten, wearing a purple robe and a crown of thorns, Roman authorities were quoted as saying, “Ecce Homo.” Behold the man.
On July 22 on the Underground Tube in London, the Metropolitan Police, along with a special unit of Security Forces, shot dead an innocent man. Seven shots to the head and one to the shoulder. His name was Jean Charles de Menezes. He was a Brazilian electrician who had lived in London for five years.
Surveillance teams had been watching the apartment complex where Mr. de Menezes lived because they had found the address among the effects of one of the failed July 21st bombers. The targets of their surveillance were two men, one of whom was about de Menezes’ height, weight and build. But the suspect’s complexion was listed as C3: he was a dark complected Ethiopian, Hussein Osman. Mr. de Menezes was a light-complected Brazillian.
The surveillance team was stationed in the building across the street from the building where de Menezes lived. One of the team was not watching as de Menezes left the building, as he was busy “relieving himself.” The Sunday UK Times did a two page spread on the surveillance team. (This was a few months ago… don’t have it with me.) One guy on the team passed de Menezes to ID him. Then that guy was off the team. Another guy passed de Menezes looking at him face to face. He was off the team. I think there were three passes on the sidewalk in front of de Menezes apartment building. After three face-to-face passes they apparently made the determination that this was indeed the man they were looking for. That’s why I called this piece “Behold The Man.” There was this problem. Right age group, right build and height. Wrong complexion. Wrong ethnic origin. He didn’t fit the profile. There was a shadow of a doubt.
Last week some of the results of a six-month Independent Police Complaints Commission investigation into the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes were published in the UK Sunday Times. The shoot-to-kill order could only have come from the Gold Shield Commander, and that is Cressida Dick. Commander Dick has told investigators that she ordered officers only to stop de Menezes from going down into the Stockwell tube station: Her message: “Stop the man.” She said she had only had two hours sleep the night before. (See: “Mixed Up Messages That Killed Menezes”; UK Sunday Times, January 15)
The surveillance team following de Menezes sent a message to security officers, “This is the man.” The firearm officers received the message, “This is the man. This is the suicide bomber.” They did not receive the message: “This is the man. This is the man we have been following.”
When Mr. de Menezes was shot, he was sitting in the subway train reading the Metro Newspaper. He had passed through the ticket gateway, picked up a free newspaper, and entered the train. He was dressed in jeans and a denim jacket that was open. Witnesses who described a man with a bulky jacket vaulting the ticket gateway were describing an armed security officer. Throughout the day following the killing of de Menezes the papers were filled with reports that the suspect had been wearing a bulky jacket and vaulted the ticket turnstile. Throughout the day the papers were full of rationalizations for the shoot-to-kill policy.
The officers who shot de Menezes understood that their orders were to stop him by deadly force. They understood that this shoot-to-kill policy had been authorized from the top. Did any one of them question whether they had the right man? Did any one of them question the sense of shooting a suspected terrorist rather than taking him in for questioning?
A full day passed until the news was released that the Metropolitan Police had killed an innocent man. Prime Minister Tony Blair and Chief of Metropolitan Police Ian Blair both made statements during that first day that they had used deadly force on a suicide bomber, even when they were aware that de Menezes was not a suspect. They both tried to prevent an investigation, and once underway, to impede its progress.
The public’s response: The day after the shooting, just 8 hours before it was announced that de Menezes was an innocent man, the front page of one UK paper read, “SHOOT ALL BOMBERS.” de Menezes was described as a terrorist. All that day officials in UK government and law enforcement put out statements to explain and justify a shoot-to-kill-on-suspicion policy, even as it was being revealed to them that they had killed an innocent man.
- * * * * * * * *
- * * * * * * *
- * * * * * * *
I am not making the comparison between Christ and de Menezes here. Christ was, among other things, a political activist. Some might say he was a revolutionary. de Menezes was an electrician trying to save up enough money to return to Brazil and start his own business. I am making a comparison between the Roman authorities of Jesus’ time, and the British authorities of our time. When Herod and Pilate threw Christ back and forth on his judgement day neither one could find him guilty. Pilate washed his hands of the matter, and left it to the people to decide. When Blair and Blair threw it back and forth on the day after de Menezes was killed execution style, they were searching for a way to make de Menezes look guilty after he had been executed, and looking for a way to make their shoot-to-kill policy look like the right one.
The final judgement in Jesus’ case was placed before the people whose recreation was to watch public executions. They judged that there was greater entertainment value in watching an innocent man die than a thug like Barrabas. In the de Menezes case one British newspaper came up with a solution. Shoot all bombers. Shoot all terrorists, shoot all suspected terrorists. This eye-for-an-eye type revenge comes from fear, powerlessness and terror in the wake of the London bombings. It may look barbaric to us now after six months; it did not appear so then.
Revenge Not Justice: This solution does not take under consideration the most important failing of the “war on terrorism.” More harm has been done to innocent people who have been suspected of terrorism than direct and just sentencing has been meted out to actual terrorists. Shoot-to-kill-on-suspicion is the whole rationale for the war against Afghanistan and the war on Iraq.
Suspected terrorists have been imprisoned, tortured and killed without evidence, without legal representation, without a trial. How many innocent people have been killed? We’ll never know. How many civilian homes, schools and hospitals have been bombed out of existence on suspicion that they were bases for terrorists and terrorist communications? We’ll never know.
The difference is that Jean Charles de Menezes was executed in London before everyday people on their morning commute. Ordinary people have read and listened and watched their government struggling to find a justification for what the de Menezes family calls “an execution.” The family said Jean Charles had acted as “training” for the security forces. They said by shooting dead 27-year-old Jean Charles de Menezes the police had learned the wrong course of action and were now using stun guns instead. Thus, de Menezes has become part of the “learning curve” of the Metropolitan Police Force, and the Blair government.
The case of Jean Charles de Menezes should demonstrate to the British and American people what is wrong about the war on terrorism. I would hope that people now understand what “due process of law” means, and what “innocent before proven guilty” means. I would hope that the Metropolitan Police Force now understands under what conditions deadly force can and should be used. I believe that Commander Cressida Dick should be relieved of office, as well as Police Chief Ian Blair. I believe the officers who executed de Menezes should be tried for negligent use of deadly force. But I expect none of this will happen.
So my hope must remain with the people, like those who witnessed the killing of an innocent man. My hope is that no one will ever forget Jean Charles de Menezes, who was killed on July 22, 2005. He was 27 years old. For me his death is symbolic of what the “War On Terrorism” is all about: the use of deadly force on suspicion of guilt, bad communication, sloppy surveillance, wrong intelligence, no co-ordination of law enforcement and security, no due process of law, civilian casualties, an ever-broadening scope of hysteria, fear and terror, and the effort of government to justify criminal acts in broad daylight and in the public view. The people have the power to change this: through their vote and through their voice, or they can sponsor and support it through their silence.
– Edmund Burke
Hi Suskind, been wonderin where you were. I have to agree with you on this one. Let me tell you something I did about 5 years ago now. When th eone who sits in the WH of our nation came out and was saying all this stuff about WoT, I wrote to cnn and asked them to explain to me about this WoT. What was it, exactly. Of course I did nto get a response! They did not know themselves. I asked them if it was like the war on drugs etc. They didnt’t have the balls enough to answer my email. To this day, no response. It is such a shame that we ahve to take what the governments of the world today have to push on us to believe. It is like we can not think and judge for ourselves on things. When we do think for ourselves, we then become terrorist for doing so. I have never in my life known such ways of thinking. Anyhow, good to see ya back in action. hugs..
Thanks suskind for this diary on Jean Charles de Menezes. Now innocent people killed during this phony ‘WOT’ are not only collateral damage but part of a ‘learning curve’ for police. Isn’t that swell.
When the story of JC de Menezes was first being reported I pretty much refused to listen to it or comment on any of the diaries because by now I’ve learned that what is reported-especially in the first 24/48 hours-of a story like this is almost sure to be completely wrong…and especially given the nature of how MSM now does/doesn’t do their jobs. Reporting rumors, speculation, innuendo and more is what passes for investigative reporting it seems…but good for the ratings, right.
Shoot to Kill because everyone is now presumed guilty.
As you said the real horror is that we will never really know how many completely innocent people have been killed, jailed, had their lives and their families lives completely disrupted on a ‘tip’ from someone who says that person could be a terrorist. The WOT has done more to terrorize and kill innocent people than the terrorists ever could.
There are some details which nevertheless are very material.
The investigation was not, as you imply, by the Sunday Times but the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) who passed a copy of their report to the prosecuting authorities last week. They are to make decisions on prosecuting the gunmen and any others.
The report has not been passed to the DeMenezes family which they have criticised. If this was the usual practice in cases where a prosecution was likely, that is insensitive but to some extent excusable. Even the Sunday Times article could prejudice the trial under English law, indeed that might be a reason for it being leaked.
The family are also factually wrong. Te “shoot to kill” policy has not been superceeded by stun guns. Some forces are using them to subdue people armed with guns and knives but not in he Met area and not in cases where someone is thought (albeit wrongly) to be wearing a bomb. This is for the simple reason that electrical jolts from a taser or similar device would set off the detonator.
I did not say or imply that the investigation was BY the UK Sunday times, but that they had published some of the results of a six-month investigation.
Today’s news is full of the news: COVER-UP MENEZES KILLING
As to the use of stun guns, the next time they went after suspected terrorists, based on the same type of evidence that caused them to target de Menezes apartment building, they did indeed use tazer stun guns. Sorry, I believe the family is correct here.
.
LONDON (The Guardian) July 30, 2005 — One of the suspects, Yasin Hassan Omar, 24, a Somali who has lived in Britain for 13 years, is already being questioned after being arrested in a dawn raid on a house in Birmingham three days ago.
He is reported to have demanded an interpreter during questioning at Paddington Green police station in west London, and is said to be complaining that he is suffering headaches and nausea after being hit with a Tazer stun gun.
One of yesterday’s raids led to a tense three-hour stand-off while scores of heavily armed officers from the Yard’s SO19 firearms unit surrounded the building.
“But I will not let myself be reduced to silence.”
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
I don’t know how you do it, and I never thank you often enough for all the work you do, and for the support you give to so many. You are a wonder !!
I am happy to be associated with you out here in cyber-space !!
Marveilleux!! Viva M. Oui !!
.
That’s the joy you have given so many here at BooMan’s Place, a solid community as was demonstrated recently.
Pleasure is all mine.
A Community“But I will not let myself be reduced to silence.”
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
And I’ll absolutely second what suskind said Oui-you’re a treasure trove of information followed up by linking to articles so that we can all read information for ourselves. Always the best policy.
Oui, the case you quote was an arrest in Birmingham which is policed b the West Midlands force. In fact the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police criticised the its use.
As for the position in the Met, this is part of a report of Ian Blair’s evidence to a Commons committee in September:
In December the Met also announced a consultation to be conducted by an internet survey
So the policy is still in force. Quite apart from anything else, only a few of the UK’s police forces have tasers as they are only in a test phase with them at the moment. The Met is, I believe, not one of those forces.
I have linked and edited, so no one else would get the same impression. txs
.
Thank you suskind, for excellent series on Jean Charles de Menezes ::
Racial Profiling — Your Patriotic Duty ◊ by suskind
Wed Jul 27th, 2005 at 03:10:20 AM PST
Menezes’s family condemned the shooting and rejected the apology. His grandmother said there was “no reason to think he was a terrorist.”
“We will not be bought off. We will not be silenced,” the Daily Mail quoted the man’s parents, Matozinho and Maria de Menezes, as saying.
Metropolitan Police rejected the report. “The only discussions we have had so far with the family of Jean Charles de Menezes have been about initial expenses and we strongly refute any suggestion that a figure anywhere in the region of one million dollars has been offered as compensation,” the force said in a statement.
Comment and diaries @BooMan and @EuroTrib
● … unloaded five shots into him
Fri Jul 22nd, 2005 at 03:43:35 AM PST
● Too Much Opinion – Little Evidence
Mon Jul 25th, 2005 at 08:26:18 AM PST
● BREAKING: 3 Incidents on London subway
● Sharm el-Sheik Bombs ¶ London Bombing :: Perfect Timing
● Documents Leaked on Menezes Death in London Subway ¶ Updated
● The Guardian :: Sir Ian Blair Tried to Stop IPCC investigation!
“But I will not let myself be reduced to silence.”
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
Menezes Killing Casts Ugly Glare On Racial Profiling
July 26, 2005; by Earl Ofari Hutchinson is a featured columnist for BlackNews.com, an author and political analyst.
What’s Goin On? Sang Marvin Gaye. That’s the world I’m in. What’s goin on from a black/asian/etc point of view is NOTHING like what’s going on from a white point of view. I can’t cope with this stuff. People must be willing to open their eyes and look. Or, at least admit that they prefer to wear blinders. I’ll accept that.
I went and left a comment on that remarkable diary “Character Assassination — Mine.” I’m just stupefied…… What’s Goin On?
I frankly do not care who did what, when or where! The police was wrong in their action in this case. They simply are! I wish the very best to the family so that they can endure the most horrible kind for smearing available by the police there, and you know it London. It is not a hard stretch to figure this one out! They have been in CYA mode all along since day one!
You’ve got it. The Sunday UK Times did a two page spread on the surveillance team. (This was a few months ago… don’t have it with me.)
One guy on the team passed de Menezes to ID him. Then that guy was off the team. Another guy passed de Menezes looking at him face to face. He was off the team.
I think there were three passes on the sidewalk in front of de Menezes apartment building. And they could not make a determination if this was the guy they were looking for. There was this problem. Right age group, right build and height. Wrong complexion. Wrong ethnic origin. He didn’t fit the profile.
That’s why I called this piece “Behold The Man.” This story hurts.
The cover-up begins on the day of the shooting in the UK papers. Proceeds on into the Met Police Files…. and on it continues….
All one can do is to follow the story and keep the heat on. This case is pivotal.
in the “war on terror” is actually an important element, and necessary for its success.
While some sad headshaking, what a shame about poor Jean Charles, wrong place at the wrong time, too bad such stringent measures are necessary, it’s that fault of those damn terrorists, that’s what. Can’t blame the guys who are just doing their job to protect us, may be allowed as an outlet for what passes these days for a “left,” beyond that it cannot be permitted to go.
Just think, if you had people making strong objections to the murder of Jean Charles, objections to the danger to the public, not of terrorists, but of gunmen paid with their own taxes shooting guns in trains where mothers sit with their children on the way to the pediatrician – and remember in the UK that will not necessarily be only poor mothers –
Next thing you know you WILL have people questioning sending other gunmen to this or that country to shoot anyone there who looks suspicious, and before you know it, support for extrajudicial executions of Palestinians starts to soften and that is just one step away from people starting to read history and questioning the very principle of imperialism and might makes right, thus turning themselves into terrorists, possibly so many terrorists that they cannot all be shot on sight.
And then there goes the war.
.
Will be broken by the time it arrives in the U.S. through all filters of MSM ::
by Simon Walters – Mail on Sunday
A White House leak revealing astonishing details of how Tony Blair and George Bush lied about the Iraq war is set to cause a worldwide political storm. A new book exposes how the two men connived to dupe the United Nations and blows the lid off Mr Blair’s claim that he was a restraining influence on Mr Bush.
He offered his total support for the war at a secret White House summit as Mr Bush displayed his contempt for the UN, made a series of wild threats against Saddam Hussein and showed a devastating ignorance about the catastrophic aftermath of the war.
See my diary — MI5 Find No Clues On July 7 London Bombings! ¶ Independent Inquiry?
“But I will not let myself be reduced to silence.”
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
Note: Before I printed this diary I gave it to a former cop/soldier/security force guy. He read it and gave me some insight into the motivations and mentality of the surveillance and law enforcement teams, as well as the Commander in the de Menezes case. He told me that this diary was well written and well reasoned.
And as far as the Jesus story, both of us believe that Jesus was a real guy who really lived and was publicly executed, though found guilty of no crime. Neither one of us believe, however, that he was the one and only “Son of God.”
Hey Suskind – good to see you back. Thanks for this wonderful piece. There is nothing to say about this murder, except why do we give them guns?
Who is the man who would not weep?
Is there one who would not weep?
Whoever you are, susanw, your comment means so much to me. This is probably the 12th story I have done on Jean Charles de Menezes in the last six months.
I want to get it into shape so to send it to his best friend in Brazil, and to his solicitor in London.
In your comment, I see that you understand what I have tried to put across. You have made my effort worthwhile. Thank you sincerely.
Yes, I do understand. Your heartbreaking diary echoed for me the “Stabat Mater Dolorosa”, a mediaeval hymn to Mary’s torment at the unjust death of her son.
Quis est homo qui non fleret,
matrem Christi si videret
in tanto supplicio?
Who is the man who would not weep
on seeing the Mother of Christ
in an agony of humble entreatly.
There is a Getty photograph of a young Iraqi girl. She is crying hysterically. Her parents had just been killed before her. The blood of her parents is on her hands and on her clothes, and on the floor. One can also see in this photo the boots of US soldiers, whose forces had killed this girl’s parents.
One thought, on seeing this Getty photograph, that it would have had the effect of the Ut photograph of the Vietnamese children running down a road, having been burned by napalm gas. During those years they said this was the photo that brought an end to the Vietnam War.
But I have learned. We are not the one human family. We do not share the same history. We are not moved to pity and grief, where what happens to you is as if it had happenned to me. There is a central soul of humanity, pathos, compassion that has become fragmented and disconnected.
And all of this…. hovers around the war between religious ideologies that are so extreme and destructive as to be interchangeable. I do not know this world. I do not relate to this world.
The verse you quote will get you criticized, will get you flamed, will get you insulted. But I understand this verse. It is from an ancient language, from an ancient civilization…. when mankind still had a soul.
Strange, I never thought about it that way, but I suppose you’re right. I’m a classically trained composer, arranger and vocalist. I immediately thought of the “Stabat Mater” when I read your diary because I have sung and conducted the Pergolesi setting for many years. It is one of the most moving pieces of music ever written. As we prepared to “go on”, I always reminded my singers that I knew several of them were religious, but I’m an atheist. I don’t have a talent for spirituality that allows me to appriciate such profundity as the death of god; that is beyond me, and I can’t sing it. But I am a mother, and I can sing the pain of watching my blameless child being tortured.