Innocent Brazilian shot dead by London Police

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 24 Jul 2005, 15:08

Anyone else see this on the news???

A 26-year-old Brazilian male was shot dead after refusing to stop when asked to by plain-clothes Police in a tube station. They chased him onto the train and then whilst he was held down shot him in the back of the head FIVE times execution style. It now turns out that them man was completely innocent and had no terrorist connections.

This is the most appalling tragedy and the worst example of what can happen when a shoot-to-kill policy is abused. It's law-enforced murder to me and heads must roll from upstairs.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 24 Jul 2005, 15:22

Shit happens, nothing that can be done about it really, we either kill or be killed, why he ran is beyond me

unless they didnt say they were Police? then its shitty.

Its strange really they pump 5 bullets in his HEAD!

good if he is a bad guy I say, but if he is innocent that thats shite, Wonder when all the facts will come out as it wil ALL be on film on some CCTV, bet they dont release that footage

but in the dn if this is what it takes to get scum then it has to be done, it just a shame we may never learn what actually went on this time

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 24 Jul 2005, 15:26

Interesting when a Brazilian hardly looks like someone from Muslim background, if there is such a thing?

It's possible he didn't understand them and was scared (later being likely). He could equally have been an illegal asylum seeker (or similar) hence he ran but that doesn't mean we have the right to murder him.

Besides FIVE times in the head that sounds like very much over the top if you ask me. I read he was shot five times in his body not head.

romerojpg wrote:Shit happens, nothing that can be done about it really, we either kill or be killed

You're right shit happens lets kill everyone who looks like Muslims just so we don't get killed. Better yet lets drop an atom bomb on Afghanistan and Iraq. That will solve the terrorist threat, get real.

I'm sure his family are in complete agreement with you.

romerojpg wrote:but in the dn if this is what it takes to get scum then it has to be done, it just a shame we may never learn what actually went on this time

OMG so it's okay to kill innocent people just in the chance they maybe terrorists (without trial)?

Where's my gun I think I'll go and shoot Romero's family because they look like terrorists to me! (harsh I know but it makes the point).

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 24 Jul 2005, 15:31

Romero as Brad says thats stupid. To kill an innocent person (as they did there) is far worse than to allow someone who may be guilty to live.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 24 Jul 2005, 15:31

hE HAS BEEN IN uk FOR 3 YEARS AND SPOKE PERFECT ENGLISH, SO ITS NO EXCUSE, THE ONLY THING i CAN THINK OF IS HE MAY HAVE DONE SOMETHING IILLEGAL? OR THEY DIDNT SAY THEY WERE COPPERS? AND FLASHED THERE GUNS BEFORE SAYING WHO THEY WERE, THEN WE ALL WOULD RUN.

caps lock

Anyway I say yes bomb the shit out of them all and eradicate the scum from the planet I couldnt care less if scum are killed without trial! hope they all die slow and in pain.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 24 Jul 2005, 16:25

romerojpg wrote:hE HAS BEEN IN uk FOR 3 YEARS AND SPOKE PERFECT ENGLISH, SO ITS NO EXCUSE, THE ONLY THING i CAN THINK OF IS HE MAY HAVE DONE SOMETHING IILLEGAL?

Oh right that makes it okay then to shoot him in the head FIVE times. Sorry my bad

Anyway I say yes bomb the shit out of them all and eradicate the scum from the planet I couldnt care less if scum are killed without trial! hope they all die slow and in pain.

Are you a member of the BNP? I see no difference between that statement and what the BNP stands for. I remembering you saying not to long ago they were scum, hmm interesting.

If we were to try and eradicate all the scum from the earth as you say we'd also have to eradicate far more completely innocent people at the same time.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 24 Jul 2005, 17:25

Your totally reading what I said wrongly.

I didnt say he deserved to be shot 5 times for the fact he may have done somthing illegal, I meant he may have got worried and ran if he had done something.

and hey your saying its wrong for me to say bomb the shit out of "guilty" scum who kill people! and that makes me like the BNP?

I dont think so.

Scum deserve death as do most the BNP.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 24 Jul 2005, 18:01

romerojpg wrote:Shit happens

An innocent man was murdered for no good reason and that's all you can say? Damn, that's cold. It's truly frightening to think that something like this can happen... he wasn't even Muslim so how could he be the suicide bomber they were looking for? What if the Police failed to identify themselves or the man didn't understand them clearly? If a bunch of plain clothes guys with guns chase you you'd run wouldn't you? They didn't kneecap the guy before he got to the train. They waited until he was on board and then shot him severeal times whilst he was down and subdued. That's murder. Plain and simple.

He could equally have been an illegal asylum seeker (or similar) hence he ran but that doesn't mean we have the right to murder him.

I think he was legal and worked as an electrician. Not that it makes a difference in terms of human life.

Besides FIVE times in the head that sounds like very much over the top if you ask me. I read he was shot five times in his body not head.

Sometimes reports can be premature... so maybe it was body? But I'm sure I read a witness statement in the paper that said five times to the back of the head. Either way it's still a grotesque use of excessive force.

To kill an innocent person (as they did there) is far worse than to allow someone who may be guilty to live.

Absolutely. Wise words.

and hey your saying its wrong for me to say bomb the shit out of "guilty" scum who kill people! and that makes me like the BNP?

What Brad is saying is that you can't just carpet bomb Asian cities without killing innocent people. And that is wrong. By all means blow the shit out of Bin Laden's Caves. No one would compain here. But collateral damage is not acceptable otherwise we start to tow the same line as the terrorists we're hunting.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 24 Jul 2005, 18:14

Again your totally reading things I write wrongly, I cannot be bothered to explain all the time.
Re Read it all I say. I never said bomb all the people including innocents, just the scum. Which is not possable, thats why I said it, there is no way at all to get them all, unless they have a village meetig and they all go to that meeting. Which is not gonna happen.

and yes Shit happens, whats wrong with saying that, its happened nothing we or they can do now, I think it awfull he died, but really we cannot change it at all.

Re read things I said and take them in a different context as you lot seem to see the worst in my posts, when if you read them another way they are not at all.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 24 Jul 2005, 19:16

romerojpg wrote:Again your totally reading things I write wrongly, I cannot be bothered to explain all the time.

Maybe that's why people misunderstand you? If you spent a bit more time thinking about what you type you wouldn't have to keep repeating yourself.

I never said bomb all the people including innocents, just the scum. Which is not possable, thats why I said it, there is no way at all to get them all, unless they have a village meetig and they all go to that meeting. Which is not gonna happen.

Scum-detecting missiles are a few thousand years off I think... so yeah, you can't just bomb countries at random. So why say it?

and yes Shit happens, whats wrong with saying that, its happened nothing we or they can do now, I think it awfull he died, but really we cannot change it at all.

Because it's flippant and callous. If you came on here tomorrow and posted that your grandparents were tragically killed in a car crash... would "Shit Happens" be my appropriate response?

Re read things I said and take them in a different context as you lot seem to see the worst in my posts, when if you read them another way they are not at all.

Of course, you're right. It's not your writing. It's just the rest of us can't read properly. Silly me.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 24 Jul 2005, 20:24

Nope you just look the wrong way at what I write.

Balls to it anyway, I just hope they acctually catch and kill the real bastards. Soon.

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 25 Jul 2005, 05:15

A 26-year-old Brazilian male was shot dead after refusing to stop when asked to by plain-clothes Police in a tube station.

I thought UK policemen were usually unarmed.
Why IN THE NAME OF HELL did they have guns ?!!!

Something really weird is going on here. Just because some guy is running in a subway station they catch him and shoot him in the head ?? 5 times ??

Another reason for me to hate the police.

Now I wish they had blown up a police station instead of a subway.
(actually that's a good idea, there are only cops and crooks in police stations

)

I just hope they acctually catch and kill the real bastards.

Bastard yourself. There is no death penalty in the UK.
In other words there's no excuse to kill somebody, EVER.

When we catch them they'll be judged (hopefully) and they'll go to jail.

Mordib · Post by **Mordib** » 25 Jul 2005, 05:33

defending against suicide bombers.... we either dont bother or we have to kill lots of people. I personally am fine with either, everyone else needs to decide whether they want the police to try and stop suicide bombers or not and then accept the consequences. if the cops dont try and stop them then we have to rely on the bombers to cock up, if we do let the cops try then we have to accept that its nerely impossible to 100% confirm a suicide bomber in the timeframes the police get to stop them (eg person under surveilance ignoring police and running towards a train) and as such people will get killed, both innocent and guilty...

There is no death penalty in the UK.
In other words there's no excuse to kill somebody, EVER.

your in a room with your friends and loved ones, someone is executing them one by one, the have a bomb strapped to them, you have a weapon... what do you do? true it will probably never happen to you, but this is the situation facing police in these situations, peoples lives at stake, more chance of fatalities every minute... if good people never killed then it would just take one bad person to systematically wipe out the worlds opulation one by one.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 25 Jul 2005, 08:37

What happened is scary.. when the police consider themselves above the law and shoot an innocent man in cold blood, then something is seriously wrong.

Mordib of course we should stop suicide bombers but what did the guy have to do with them??? I thought the police had already identified who the bombers were.
This incident illustrates perfectly why bringing back the death penalty is a bad idea.

At the ending of Fritz Lang's "M":
one of the mothers says letting Peter Lorre live "won't bring our children back". Well neither will killing him. What would you do? Would it be different now if that film was made today?
Of course child murder is a heinous crime but maybe by letting him live its more torture for him, as he lives with the thought of what he has done all the time.

Mordib · Post by **Mordib** » 25 Jul 2005, 10:17

grim_tales wrote:
Mordib of course we should stop suicide bombers but what did the guy have to do with them??? I thought the police had already identified who the bombers were.

we know that now, at the time all they knew is he was coming out of a building where they believed terrorists connected to the suicide bombers might be hiding, they see someone come out who they do not recognise, wearing a big padded jacket in what was considered quite warm for britain, who when they tried to arrest him legged it straight towards a train station. Right up until the shooting part at the end I can 100% understand the police reactions.

the only explanation that I can imagine is that the gunman really did appear to be trying to go for something, no doubt just id or something but again, with the big jacket how could thy be sure?

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 25 Jul 2005, 21:16

The reports have changed now

He was shot 7 times in the head!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
7 times my good holy god! what on earth did they shoot him 7 times in the head for!? one whole clip unloaded into a mans head! jesus its amazzing the could even identify anyone from that! ohh yeah and once in the shoulder, an entire clip from one mans gun unloaded into a man, very, very fricking strange if you ask me! They had to be other info to this case beyond what they are telling us for them to to that, yes you have to kill him if he is a bomber with his hand on a trigger ready to blow people up and that I say yes kill the shits, but 7 times? thats way past overkill aint it.

The man at the moment is 100% innocent and spoke perfect english, lived and worked for 3 years and they just had reasons for doing this to him that they are not saying, yet. Maybe its info that if they tell us it may inpede the case, and if thats right then yes keep it from us and catch them shits. He did run fast from them and jumped pay tolls and stuff to get away, so it is odd that he tried to evade them so much!? esspecially if he understood them, well thats if they acctually told him they were plolice.

I just wonder what ourage it would have been if it was anyone but a brazillian loner from a country with no real probs. If it was a Muslim, an innocent muslim imagine the shit storm then! or a black man! there would be riots if it was either of them, so in a way they picked one of the only people I can think of that wont kick up a big storm, a working man from another country with no strong religions or race to back him up.

Very odd indeed. Will be interesting to see how this pans out, and wy shoot 7 times in the head.

and by the way the UK iof full of hundreds of thousands of armed Police units, and hundreds are undercover in London right now. Which is a good thing to me.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 26 Jul 2005, 07:35

I heard that the guy's visa had expired or something..

Still Its' the shooting I find very disturbing.

If they thought the guy was dangerous, couldnt the police have asked the tube to stop?

Why was he not subdued? Why was no information got from him?
I thought it was "innocent until proven guilty" not the other way round.

degeneration · Post by **degeneration** » 26 Jul 2005, 09:07

On the subject of suicide bombers the police have "Shoot to kill" orders.

the police could not have asked the tube to stop if they thought he was a suicide bomber, as that would mean making all the people in it sitting duck targets for the bomb.

The running away from the police was obviously the worst thing the guy could have done, as to them on their suspicions that would be a major "guilty" indicator.

The police may not be releasing info on the case just now that would help explain it, but it is also possible the guy saw someone with a gun coming towards him and then in a blind panic (especially with what had been going on recently in london) tried to get the hell out of there. He could have thought the POLICE were the bad guys, and even if they did shout "Stop! We're the police", fear and panic could easily have stopped him hearing them. His breathing could have been nigh on hyperventilating as he feared for his life...

If I saw someone with a gun coming towards me, I don't think I'd be able to calmly stand there, wait for them to identify themselves etc. I think I'd try and save myself and get out of there and away from the guns.

Yet to read the "7 times in the head" reports... but that is most definitely over-kill to a sick level if it is true.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 26 Jul 2005, 13:22

I think it was eight shots in total. One to the mouth, six to the back of the head, one to the shoulder. The man was tailed because he was an ethnic-looking guy who happened to leave through the communal exit to a block of flats which contained an address found in a bomber's backpack. In other words it could have been anyone. The Police over-reacted. Unfortunately so did the deceased in panicking. Assuming the idenitifcation of armed police was made clear there was no reason to run. But it's possible a misunderstanding took place that led to his horrendous death. A full investigation needs to be carried out so that this kind of gross human error cannot be repeated. Once is once too many.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 26 Jul 2005, 16:09

Yup I said 8 shots

7 in head, 1 shoulder.

But still its just very strange they shot him that many times? a few times in the head is enuff to kill anyone! so why 7, will be interesting to see how they explain that? if they can, did that one gunmans trigger finger just go mental? he only had 8 bullets in his gun, so imagine if he had an automatic machine gun! he would pribibly have 32 or more bullets in his head!

I want them to explain it, but I do understand why it happened from what we know so far, but I am sure we know only small facts so far.

Mordib · Post by **Mordib** » 26 Jul 2005, 16:40

on the why did he run question its worth rememebring that where he came from the police have a habit of being both corrupt and somewhat violent. stop for them just because they shout they are police and your likely to end up dead...

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 19 Aug 2005, 15:41

The truth is out now.

The guy was not wearing a padded jacket but a denim one.

For heavens sake, he went to buy a paper in a newsagents (AFAIK).

Heads must roll.

Mordib · Post by **Mordib** » 20 Aug 2005, 01:52

yes this whole things has rapidly descended into some bizarre but very serious police farce.

if the leaked reports turn out to by the accurate account then the guy seems quite literally to have been executed whilst posing no threat at all.

m.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 20 Aug 2005, 10:24

The cops really fucked up on this one and an innocent was murdered. Someone other than the victim must pay the price.