Police: Man shot 'not connected' to bombings

[gldstwmn]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe...ube/index.html

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Police say the man they shot dead at a London Underground station "was not connected" with this week's attempted bombings on the city's transit system.

"For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police Service regrets," the police statement said Saturday.

During a news conference following Friday's shooting, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Ian Blair said "this shooting is directly linked to the ongoing and expanding anti-terrorist operation."

The man -- whose identity has not been released -- on Friday emerged from a south London apartment building that had been under surveillance as part of the investigation into the attempted bombings Thursday.

Officers followed him to the Stockwell Underground station. The man's "clothing and suspicious behavior at the station added to their suspicions," a police statement said.

He challenged police and refused to obey orders, before he was shot and killed Friday morning, Blair said Friday.

Meanwhile, police said Saturday that a second suspect had been arrested in connection with the attempted bombings.

The man was arrested in Stockwell on Friday night by anti-terrorism officers in connection with the failed attacks, police said.

The first arrest came Friday in the same neighborhood.

Police said the two detained men, who have not been identified, were to be questioned Saturday.

The arrests came after police released images of four men caught on closed-circuit television at the incident sites around the time the attacks were attempted.

Friday's shooting is a rarity in London, where police generally are not armed except for special response units.

The latest attacks came two weeks to the day 52 people were killed in four bombings targeting the city's mass transit.

As in the July 7 attacks, three subway trains and a double-decker bus were attacked, but in Thursday's case, the four homemade bombs stuffed in backpacks only "partially detonated," said Assistant Police Commissioner Andy Hayman. He noted that it was too early to determine how they went off.

One person was wounded.
Hayman said police searched three locations Friday, one of which was in West London. Scotland Yard identified the area further saying, "in West Kilburn, W9." Police cordoned off part of Harrow Road in that area.

It is not clear if one of the three locations mentioned includes the place of the arrest.

[strandinthewind]

That is awful, but I think the police really thought he was part of the bombing and it was a tragic mistake. Maybe when and if more details are available it will be easier to see how they made such an awful mistake and, hopefully, prevent it from happening again.

[Hawkeye]

That Sucks why couldnt they shoot him with some kind of tranquilizer or something. This is quite irresponsible by the british police.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

That Sucks why couldnt they shoot him with some kind of tranquilizer or something. This is quite irresponsible by the british police.

I know - I was wondering the same thing. But, from what I read, they apparently thought he was getting onto a train with explosives and thus the situation was exigent.

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

That Sucks why couldnt they shoot him with some kind of tranquilizer or something. This is quite irresponsible by the british police.

Yeah, why don't they use tranquilizer guns more often, since things like this can happen? If someone's being uncooperative, that could make the person submissive, and he or she can be brought into custody. I don't get it. I know you need some type of gun as a police officer, but I'm not sure why a stun gun or tranquilizer or something like that wouldn't do the trick.

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I know - I was wondering the same thing. But, from what I read, they apparently thought he was getting onto a train with explosives and thus the situation was exigent.

There isn't another type of gun that would have stopped him just as quickly?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by GateandGarden

There isn't another type of gun that would have stopped him just as quickly?

I do not know. Maybe they did not expect him to try and get on a train and thus did not plan to shoot him - most articles indicate they were just shadowing him. The whole thing is just awful though.

[tuigirl]

they were saying on the news today, that normally, until 7/7 that is, British police had always had the "shoot to disable " policy ie shoot in the chest to bring a man down but not actually kill. They were saying now that in some cases it's a "shoot to kill" method ie in the head, because if they shot a would be bomber in the chest, then he/she would automatically then explode with worse consequences....perhaps they had to undertake this snap decision, on that assumption in this case.
And why didn't that stupid man do what he was told esp if he had nothing to hide, I know I sure would have if I had a gun pointed at me!

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by tuigirl

they were saying on the news today, that normally, until 7/7 that is, British police had always had the "shoot to disable " policy ie shoot in the chest to bring a man down but not actually kill. They were saying now that in some cases it's a "shoot to kill" method ie in the head, because if they shot a would be bomber in the chest, then he/she would automatically then explode with worse consequences....perhaps they had to undertake this snap decision, on that assumption in this case.
And why didn't that stupid man do what he was told esp if he had nothing to hide, I know I sure would have if I had a gun pointed at me!

They know how to shoot people in the chest and avoid killing them every time?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by GateandGarden

They know how to shoot people in the chest and avoid killing them every time?

I think it was the position of the guy, the timing of the moment, and the difficulty of the position of the train - from what I understand, they were surprised when he went to get on the train and, again, they thought he had a bomb of some sort. Thus, I think this was unavoidable given what they thought he was up to. For the life of me, I cannot understand why the guy did not stop when they told him to. That suggests he was up to no good, but it could be something else like he spoke no English, etc.

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I think it was the position of the guy, the timing of the moment, and the difficulty of the position of the train - from what I understand, they were surprised when he went to get on the train and, again, they thought he had a bomb of some sort. Thus, I think this was unavoidable given what they thought he was up to. For the life of me, I cannot understand why the guy did not stop when they told him to. That suggests he was up to no good, but it could be something else like he spoke no English, etc.

I thought she was saying that shooting people in the chest is what they normally do if the person resists arrest.

[Serrart]

He was Brazilian, but I don't know if he spoke English or not... It was a terrible senseless mistake but you also have to understand there's a sense of incumbent new tragedy in Europe right now. Intelligence Reports say it's not over and some Countries are more at risk right now. So I guess the nerves are pretty much shaken.

Romy

[bretonbanquet]

What that report doesn't make clear is that the train was full of people at the time, and they saw the guy get shot four or five times in the head. People here aren't even used to police carrying guns, let alone blowing someone away on a train in full view. You just don't expect it to happen while you're travelling to work in the morning. I use that tube line a lot and I don't know how I would have dealt with seeing someone get offed like that while I'm standing there minding my own business.

Another point is that the police were plain-clothed, so onlookers were not immediately aware that they were police. My hunch is that they were not ordinary police, or even SO19 (the armed section of the police who normally carry rifles not pistols) - maybe they were SAS, and those guys have no compunction about killing anyone at any time.

[madformac]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

That Sucks why couldnt they shoot him with some kind of tranquilizer or something. This is quite irresponsible by the british police.

Really?

Well, I'm going to have a rant now... I don't have them often and usually I tend to keep the peace around here but I'm sick of hearing about criticism of our Police..

First you have a city on high alert at a time when terrorists are likely to strike at any time. Secondly, you have a suspect, followed from a house that has been under surveilance for some time by MI5 and Special Branch and linked with the terrorists in question, thirdly you have a suspect that leaves the property, under surveilance, he heads to the tube and is then followed inside. When it looks like he is to board a train it is felt necessary for the Police to reveal themselves to him... They shout "Halt, armed Police!" and what does he do???? He runs! Runs towards the tube train followed by up to 20 armed officers.. Not even a f**king moron would do that in such circumstances, in such a position... The only reason you run is if you have something to hide or you are going to do something very wrong.. He runs to the doors of the train, trips inside, grabs a pole at which point he is dropped to the ground by a team of very brave officers, confronted with somebody possibly wearing an explosive vest that would kill them all and he is held down and shot in the head five times.. Now you may argue that five times is too many but faced with a possible explosion and the deaths of innocent people it is justifiable force. In a situation with possible panic and hysteria they did exactly as they were trained to do, confront the threat at close range and execute in the head to avoid the possibility of detonation or collateral damage (such an American term, however, it is the correct one) ..

UK Police are noted for not carrying sidearms, and when they do it is virtually unheard of for them to use such weapons.. However, this country and this city is on terrorist alert and if somebody resists and runs when confronted, quite obviously, by an armed response unit, then they will end up dead and rightly so....

And it seems as usual, the cries of wrong doing come from a country with very little history of terrorism.. Before Oklahoma and 9/11 the United States were somewhat naive, indeed, the majority of funding for the IRA terrorist campaign during the 1970's and 80's especially came from the USA. Ah yes, the Irish Republican Army. It has been the norm for more than 30 years for ordinary people walking the streets of London, Birmingham, Manchester, Belfast etc, to go out not knowing if they were the next to die in a bombing. We have suffered terrorist outrages for many, many years and have gotten to the point where we are unfortunately used to it. Which is why London continues with it's daily life as normal.. We are used to this kind of outrage.

I've missed two bombings by 24 and 18 hours, standing in exactly the spots the IRA and London bombers detonated devices in Manchester and London and quite frankly, from this side of both the fence and the Atlantic I have total faith in the Police and in their shoot to kill approach to this situation.. I have to ask myself how the average trigger happy US officer would have reacted in such a situation given their history of shooting people dead in far less obvious scenarios..

I will continue to travel in London by tube and bus, as I always do. It's never been safe, it never will be. But I'm glad we have officers that don't take chances when the lives of innocent people are quite obviously at risk.. If they kill an innocent person in doing so it is tragic, if they kill somebody running away after they identify themselves in a known terroist environment then so be it..

As for the terrorists too. There has been a lot of talk of these bombings being linked to Iraq and UK troops being stationed there. If the troops pull out, the bombings stop.. This has been mentioned by Islamic extremists, they also mention that 26,000 Iraqis have died since the US and UK conflict in Iraq started. What isn't mentioned is that two thirds of those dead have died by insurgents and fundamentalists within Iraq. A little ironic.... Having said that, 26,000 dead in Iraq in three years... 50,000 die of starvation and AIDS in Africa each single day.... It's all relative really isn't it?

[madformac]

Originally Posted by bretonbanquet

Another point is that the police were plain-clothed, so onlookers were not immediately aware that they were police. My hunch is that they were not ordinary police, or even SO19 (the armed section of the police who normally carry rifles not pistols) - maybe they were SAS, and those guys have no compunction about killing anyone at any time.

I was thinking it would have been SO19. Running around playing with pistols is not usually what the SAS do.. They are involved in surveilance work yes but are strictly observing and are only used in extreme situations, particularly explosive entry or hostage situations, plus they will only intervene with direct authorisation from the officer in charge of the operation. However they will always kill given the chance and five bullets rather than the regulation two is more their style, the fact his face was totally blown off too is an SAS trademark so it is a possibility that they were on surveilance and it turned to a threat, and as has been seen in the past the Police were too slow in getting to the scene.