In London, the Metropolitan Police are on trial (sort of) for the killing of Mr. de Menezes. Authorities decided long ago that none of the individuals directly involved in the murder should be disciplined. That the Metropolitan Police lied about the event also is not a problem. Perhaps later the supervisory staff will be disciplined (how many years later?). But that won't even be considered until after the current trial is completed. The point of the current trial is a bit hard to make out. The charge is 'serious breaches of health and safety laws' (viz., murdering someone) conviction of which would subject the Police to a fine. But it is serious because the fine is "unlimited." So the government might be required to pay itself fine. Oh, well yes, there was an apology -- sorry we murdered the man, won't happen again.
For its part, the Police admit the slaying was an error but denies misconduct. More here.
Update:
From September, a comment by the head of the Met Police:
Sir Ian said he wished he had known earlier that the wrong man had been shot. The questioning led him to admit: "We got it appallingly wrong, but we are not guilty of complete idiocy. My feeling is if this happened again the information would flow very differently."
Appallingly wrong, but not culpably. Appallingly wrong, but not complete idiocy -- obvious implication is that they are guilty of something short of complete idiocy.
Recent Comments