The Metropolitan Police was recently found guilty on health and safety charges after the unlawful killing of Jean Charles de Menezes. This would be a welcome verdict if it had sent to jail those responsible for killing an innocent man. But I’m not surprised: the Met has a record for getting away scot free after killing innocent men. That such a high-profile police killing should end up being investigated by just the Health & Safety Executive says a lot about the current state of governance in England.
I’ve written before about Azelle Rodney, the innocent man shot dead by the Met in 2005. But sadly, the campaign to restore his name seems to have foundered. Azelle is now forgotten by pretty much everyone but his family. No protest marches for him anymore. But his family are still fighting for his name. A release of ‘secret’ intelligence could finally allow an inquest in to his death to take place.
Ian Blair was Met Commissioner when Azelle was shot, too. What will it take to make this man resign?
10 thoughts on “But what about Azelle?”
Who do you reckon should be jailed?
Whoever’s found guilty in court, I suppose. But the Met aren’t being criminally investigated for either of these killings, which means that no one can get sent to jail.
With the Azelle Rodney case, the police used exactly the same techniques they used against de Menezes: they gave anonymous tips to reporters that the dead man was a known criminal, was armed etc etc, and when it turned out that these were lies, they went silent.
These are the same people who say that 28 days internment without charge (the longest time in any equivalent democracy) isn’t enough time to interrogate suspects. How can we trust them when they’re so obviously self-interested, gung-ho and dishonest?
Not a big fan of the Police then!!!! A little worrying the extension of the 28 day rule..but then again I havent read the evidence.
Do you charge the men who fired the shots or the desk officer in charge.
The police are the government’s armed agents and as such should always be under scrutiny.
Look: there are several men who have been shot dead incorrectly by the police and the police officers involved have not been put through the normal legal process which any other citizen would be.
In the UK, there is a crime called ‘Corporate Manslaughter’ under which a corporation, agency or other body can itself be charged when an unlawful killing has taken place. That would be the obvious method to obtain justice. But beyond that, the fact is that the police have been shown on multiple occasions covering their own arses by lying to reporters because they killed the wrong guy.
Do you think that’s reasonable behaviour? It’s not surprising, perhaps, but it’s still not right.
hey, I agree with you. But do you not agree that being a police officer is not that same as being a corporation! It is not an easy job to carry out, yet it is a job we need to be done. They should be scrutinised and scrutinised well.
The corporate body is the Metropolitan Police Service, of which Ian Blair is the top guy.
The officers involved would, however, have to undergo cross-examination to ensure that they hadn’t acted improperly.
That’s how I’d do it anyway 🙂
Ever thought of going into politics – trust me its a strange world, and the UK media is an even stranger world.
There’s no denying that the police shot an innocent man and then made a shameful attempt to slander their victim, but we shouldn’t forget the circumstances. Two weeks earlier fifty people were killed on the underground and the police thought that there was a risk of it happening again.
Sure, but the circumstances don’t negate the need for proper process. Besides, in the Azelle Rodney case (where they used the same tactics), there had not been a recent terrorist attack.