Registered user login:

A cop with paramilitary pretensions

Darcus Howe

Published 09 August 2007

They were given the order to shoot to kill - and this referred to anyone they deemed a suicide bomber

I will not hunt with the pack. Whether Sir Ian Blair lied or not over the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes is a matter between him and his God. Much more than that was involved in this disastrous episode in the Met's history.

The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police bought hook, line and sinker the idea that he and his force had to abandon the ordinary pursuits of policing to plunge themselves into that other Blair's "war against terror". I went on record, in this column, warning Sir Ian to stay away from Downing Street and to focus on his job of dragging the Met out of a cobwebbed past and into the modern world.

He had my sympathy, as he was buffeted by the old guard in his organisation. His insistence on lifting talented blacks and Asians from lowly positions to roles they deserved earned him the wrath of the Daily Mail and others who dubbed him the politically correct commissioner. Perhaps he thought his new, paramilitary status would free him from the abuse of right-wing journalists and fellow officers. He was wrong.

Blair transformed his force into a land army. His officers were off the leash. They were given the order to shoot to kill - and this referred to anyone they deemed a suicide bomber.

The new regime warmed to its task. A team was shipped out to Israel, Sri Lanka and Russia to learn from their experiences of dealing with suicide bombers. We know what was the most important lesson learned on these trips: the need to buy time to identify the suspect through accurate intelligence and to intercept the bomber as far away as possible from the intended target.

So, Jean Charles de Menezes's fate was sealed when Hussain Osman, one of the failed gang of four 21 July bombers, was targeted as living on Scotia Road, Tulse Hill, in the same house in which the Brazilian lived. The Met, armed with the pompous military title "Gold Command", set in motion the task of tracking him down and executing him. The target was wrong; the location was doubly wrong - Osman was in Italy when Gold Command set off on that fateful day, 22 July 2005. The first surveillance officer was poised to take video footage of the suspect to send down the line. His bladder suddenly popped and he turned away to pee. No footage was taken, even though he identified de Menezes as Osman.

I asked a military officer, who was trained at Sandhurst, what happens when the first surveillance comes into contact with the target and his bladder explodes. He answered: "Piss in his trousers." These ill-disciplined officers, unfit for purpose, could not correct this early mistake during that journey from Tulse Hill to Stockwell. Men ezes was murdered by trigger-happy cops elevated to soldier status with code names such as Hotel 1, Hotel 2 and Hotel 3. It was all pomp and ceremony, signifying nothing.

The field marshal remained in his bunker at Scotland Yard, out of touch with his men and women on the ground. The disinformation proceeded within minutes of the Brazilian's execution: "illegal immigrant" and "Pakistani" just two of the identifications tossed out to a hungry press. The field marshal then left the bunker for an early night, his mission unaccomplished. The war was over before it even began.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

1 comment from readers

dejsaba
10 August 2007 at 16:40

Not to mention, months and months later, the baseless accusation planted by the police in the media that Jean Charles de Menezes was a rapist -- based on the claim of a woman who, after seeing his face on the television for six months, decided that he looked like the man who raped her some years before. Never mind that such belated identifications by a victim in a traumatic episode are highly suspect, and that Jean Charles de Menezes had not yet arrived in the country at the time of the reported rape (and, for that matter, how, even if true, any of this would have even partially justified police actions at Stockwell station). Instead of acting as a competent and professional police organization, quietly waiting for DNA evidence (which of course absolved him), the police immediately pushed the story through the usual media sewer lines. Many bloggers still profess it to be true, apparently not having seen the tiny press corrections. The police disinformation campaign against Jean Charles de Menezes was no 24-hour cockup in the midst of a desperate search for terrorists. The claim that it was is just one more lie from Sir Ian Blair. It was a full-tilt demonization campaign, remarkably similar to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police campaign against Maher Arar and Rudy Giuliani's vilification campaigns against Patrick Dorismond and other victims of police killings in New York. No one is ever charged or dismissed from the force for these "anonymous" leaks to the press. There seem to be special courses and police liaisons among police forces as to how to conduct such campaigns (and in Sir Rudy's case, a special police flying squad charged with finding something with which to smear the victims). The refusal by the IPCC and the media (especially The Guardian) to address this lengthy and deliberate campaign is one of the worst parts of this ongoing crime.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

You may enter up to 2000 characters (about 300-350 words)

Characters left:

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

About the writer

Darcus Howe

Darcus Howe is an outspoken writer, broadcaster and social commentator. His TV work includes ‘White Tribe’ in which he put Anglo-Saxon Britain under the spotlight. He also fronted a series called Devil’s Advocate.

Read More

Vote!

Should Darling have been bolder with the 45% tax rate?