STOCKWELL SHOOTING
(Comments: tpapard@btinternet.com)
As the spokesperson from the civil liberties group 'Liberty' has conceded, it is not always possible when dealing with potential suicide bombers to avoid mistakes happening, such as the shooting of an innocent man at Stockwell Tube station by armed plainclothes police last Thursday.
However, what is very worrying is why plainclothes police targeted this totally innocent Brazilian electrician, followed him from his flat, on to a bus, then to a Tube station and on to a train, then felt it necessary to pump 8 shots into him as he lay on the floor, all within view of terrified passengers. This was hardly a split-second decision, they were following him for at least 20 minutes it seems, possibly longer.
See it from the unfortunate victim's point of view: He comes out of his flat as usual, is followed by a gang of suspicious looking men who it soon becomes apparent are armed. Is it any wonder if he panicked and vaulted over the barriers into the Tube station to try and escape what may have looked like an attempted mugging? According to relatives, the police now say he didn't vault over the barriers.
This tragic incident raises an awful lot of questions, which must be answered very quickly. Why were the armed police in plain clothes for a start? How are the innocent public supposed to know they are armed police? If they'd been wearing police uniforms, the innocent man would no doubt have stopped when challenged, and his life would have been spared. It is even in doubt that the police challenged him at all. We will have to hope the truth comes out in the inquiries.
There may well be a case for having armed plainclothes policemen mingling with the public to try to stop attempted suicide bombings, but even this is worrying. Does this mean every Pakistani or Asian looking person with a rucksack on the Tube/buses is liable to be shot dead by a plainclothes policeman? And the Brazilian was neither Asian, nor was he carrying a rucksack, or as far as we know, a bag of any description. Of course for all the police knew he could have had explosives strapped around him under his clothes, but the same could be said for any member of the traveling public. Are we all liable to be shot dead at the whim or unfounded suspicion of a plainclothes armed policeman?
This case needs looking into urgently, and the rules of engagement changed if necessary. I personally feel armed policemen should always be uniformed, or at least be able to positively identify themselves as policemen very quickly. It is bad enough Londoners being worried about terrorists and suicide bombs, without having to wonder if every passenger around them, or every person in the street, is an armed policeman who may shoot them dead.
What happens when someone is mugged in London now? Are they going to be too scared to run away in case the 'muggers' are plainclothes armed policemen looking for a terrorist suspect?
I'd rather see uniformed armed policemen on every Underground train, at every Tube station and jumping on and off buses at random, than have plainclothes armed officers carrying out actions such as occurred at Stockwell last Thursday. At the very least we need to know why they suspected this totally innocent man was connected to the current wave of suicide bombings and attempted suicide bombings, and why they thought it necessary to pump 8 shots into him as he lay helpless on the floor of a train, with no rucksack on him and apparently no other obvious sign that he was about to explode a bomb, except he might have been wearing a rather bulky anorak for the time of year (though relatives say the police now deny this, and say he was just wearing a denim jacket). Also, if they were so worried he was a suicide bomber, why did they risk letting him board a bus for 15 or 20 minutes before he got to the Tube station? It has been reported the flat in the block they were watching was number 21 not number 17 where this Brazilian lived.
We know the police have a very tough job to do, and have to make split-second decisions. But clearly they made the wrong one in this case, and it is not clear yet what exactly happened at the Tube station. It seems one group of plainclothes police followed the man from the flats, on to the bus to the Tube station, and possibly another group chased him at the station. Did either group reveal they were policemen when they told him to halt, and if so, how did they identify themselves? As someone wrote in my newspaper today, do muggers now just have to shout: 'Halt, police!' for their victims to stop and be mugged? This is not good enough, plainclothes policemen must positively identify themselves or clearly have uniformed policemen with them in such situations as the one outside Stockwell Tube station.
However, there could be situations where armed plainclothes police strongly suspect someone is about to set off a bomb, and they have no other option but to shoot to kill in order to save innocent lives. What is worrying about this case is the suspect, a totally innocent man as it turned out, was followed by plainclothes police for so long, including a bus journey, and was then shot dead on the floor of a Tube train. There could be any number of reasons why he panicked and ran at the last minute, but why wasn't he apprehended earlier? They may have hoped he would lead them to other suspects, but why let him on a bus and not on the Tube? Was this putting the bus passengers at risk? It seems the man jumping over the barrier to the Tube station was the act which sealed his fate and convinced the armed police he was a potential suicide bomber, but what caused him to jump the barrier? That is the crucial question which needs answering. Did he realize the men chasing him were police, did he think they were muggers, muggers posing as police, or did he have some other reason to avoid the police? It has been suggested his visa could have been out of date, yet the Home Office says the victim was in the country legally.
In any event, it is not at all clear why the man could be followed, unchallenged, on to a bus full of passengers, but not on to the Tube, if plainclothes police just wanted to see where he was going. What exactly happened outside Stockwell Tube station is the vital clue to this tragedy. If he was suddenly told to stop by men in plainclothes with guns, then he may well have panicked and tried to escape thinking they were going to mug him. And why couldn't they have challenged him as soon as he left the block of flats and before he got on the bus, possibly endangering other passengers?
Apart from the tragedy of an innocent man being killed, if he had been connected to the bombings and attempted bombings all the more reason to arrest him before he posed a danger to the public, and get vital evidence out of him to lead them to the other bombers. A dead man is no good as a witness. This case needs a thorough investigation. There are already too many conflicting accounts/contradictions less than a week after the shooting.