Channel 4 news - "Mistakes led to tube shooting"

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by hackle, Aug 16, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Well obviously we knew that, but did anyone see the revelations/allegations on Channel 4 News tonight?

    Link to follow.

    I did say at the time that "Darwin award" type remarks about the dead man might be unwise. I remain very sympathetic to the officers directly involved, who were acting on incorrect information. This includes the Gold Commander. However, if tonight's allegations prove correct we should be asking exactly who dished out so much misinformation eg "wearing heavy jacket", "refused orders to stop", "vaulted ticket barrier" and so on.
     
  2. Please delete my other thread (2 minutes behind Hackle's).

    www.itn.co.uk/news/1677571.html

    It was reported on the Channel 4 news that ITN had received leaked material from the inquiry into the Tube shooting.

    I don't think it is wise at this stage to make any judgements as the inquiry is still in progress.

    However, what concerns me greatly is the fact that self-justifying statements were rushed out shortly after the incident that attempted to blame the unfortunate Brazilian for his own demise, based on his suspicious clothing and his decision to run or to vault a ticket barrier. Furthermore, it was claimed that a warning was issued before shots were fired.

    news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm


    It turns out that all these claims, from official sources, were untrue.

    Why were they made? I know that there is the issue of the "fog of war" etc but a simple "wait out" until the details were known would have sufficed.

    Is it overly cynical to draw the conclusion that an attempt was being made to obscure liability and that leaks are more reliable than official releases of information?
     
  3. Overly cynical? These days, there's no such thing.
     
  4. Sadly, there were several comments on this forum attacking the Brazilan man for 'stupidity' straight after the shooting. I hope people will wait for the full facts to come out before rushing to judgement in future.
     
  5. I must say I shall follow the hopefully to follow further (and unbiased) investigation witha close eye. Until then, I shall refrain from further judgement except to agree that I don't believe there is such a thing as being overly cynical these days.
     
  6. The report stated that ALL officers involved had photographs of the real suspect who was subject to surveillance. Things started to go wrong when the Brazilian came out of the building (not the same flat). The surveillance officer was having a slash at the time (not his fault) thus did not get a good look at him. He did not have time to switch on the video camera at the same time as reporting it in. A second officer got a glimpse of the man as he boarded the bus. All easy to imagine - things do go wrong. [self-edit here]

    Yet another piece of misinformation - IF the Ch 4 report is correct - was that the CCTV system in the tube station wasnt working. Apparently some cameras were working.

    At a time of crisis it is all the more important that we can rely on the integrity of information issued by the police - and accept it when they can't give information. Or was all the misinformation invented by the evil media?
     
  7. I agree with all above comments.

    edit: and with MrPVRd's analysis which goes to the heart of this matter.
     
  8. If something dramatic or of interest happens people will post on this forum about it, even if it is only to bring other people's attention to a news story. Once that's done others are going to post what they think. Or do you expect the thread to freeze for a couple of days while the facts catch up? The thing is, people can only post what they think or their opinions based on what they know at the time. That knowledge, and so their opinion is sometimes clouded by inaccurate reports on the news. I think it is the news that starts this, as in these days of 24 hour news reporting they rely on reporting speculation as fact in order to fill their time in what would otherwise be even more repetitive programs than they have now. All 24 hour news programs like Sky News, BBC News 24, CNN and Fox are all equally to blame. They should report facts, not speculation.

    What we should remeber on this forum is that people may post what they have read, what they think they know or just their opinions... all can be equally inaccurate and should be read with that in mind. Not tell people that they shouldn't post what they think..... that's just not going to happen in reality now is it?
     
  9. Nobody said anything about not having an 'opinion'. But making definitive judgements such as 'Darwinism in Action' (which one poster did) about the death of an INNOCENT man was both in very bad taste and (if these new reports have substance) very premature. This man's life had every bit as much value as the innocent people who died on July 7th. Some people don't seem to appreciate this.
     
  10. If some have leapt to the conclusion "the idiot shouldn't have run - it's his own fault" then this was a fair enough opinion to express at the time - as any honestly-held opinion is (within reason or moderation) - particularly in light of the information that was given out.

    Edited, because I forgot the second half of this:

    I happen to disagree with the analysis that someone fleeing is the author of their own destruction, but that is what debate is about.
     
  11. I can`t understand what the surveillance guy was doing working alone, christ knows what would have happened if he`d had to take a dump, probably would`ve missed the whole episode. 8O
     
  12. LOL@slick

    In reply to Plant-Pilot, agreed, just a couple of thoughts inspired by your goodself:

    1. IF there really has been misinformation, I would have expected those who blamed the victim at the time to be the ones most annoyed about it, after all they were the ones who were apparently misled.

    2. You blame "news speculation" for the misleading accounts. What would be your view if the media were in fact accurately reporting a line fed to them by police news management?
     
  13. Despite my earlier pledge that no conclusions should be leapt to until the inquiry has concluded, one thought leapt unbidden into my mind:

    One-man surveillance job...overstretch...huge police effort since the first bombings...overstretched police during the G8 Bliar and Dubya vanity fest.

    I will repress such thoughts henceforth.