"We are now satisfied that he was not connected with the incidents"

[Gibsie]

Two policeman walk down the road towards him, two walk in the other direction. If he runs, they catch him. If he doesn't, they catch him. A little bit of panic on either side, but not at the same level of, "OMG HE'S GONNA BLOW UP STOCKWELL TUBE STATION!!!", meaning no need to blow him away.

It's hardly rocket science. would your security forces let a suicide bomber walk right up to his target if they thought he was a genuine threat, lotm?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Gibsie
Two policeman walk down the road towards him, two walk in the other direction. If he runs, they catch him. If he doesn't, they catch him.

What, with their bomb proof hands and suicide bomber nets ?


The point being they couldn't tell from a distance if he was a suicide bomber or not. Perhaps they could have texted him on his mobile and asked.

[Gibsie]

You really think there is no alternative whatsoever to letting the suspect get within a few metres of his supposed target? Are you really that braindead?

They had no huge reason to think he was a suicide bomber (Especially given how, you know, he wasn't). But there is a middle ground between setting 20 armed officers on him and giving him a free reign to go to wherever he likes, in order to find this out.

He ran because he thought he could get away. Take away his potential escape route, and he would not have run. Except maybe into the arms of some officers who might have decided he was better off in custody. He may even have co-operated. But now we'll never know, because the police gave him a potential escape route.

Come on, you have to admit it's pretty shoddy policework if they thought he was planning to blow up a tube station and they let him run right in there. Don't buy into Asher and Pat's mindset that they did everyting right, when theyclearly did not. No-one did the right thing here, least of all the victim- but he's already paid.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Gibsie
You really think there is no alternative whatsoever to letting the suspect get within a few metres of his supposed target? Are you really that braindead?

They had no huge reason to think he was a suicide bomber (Especially given how, you know, he wasn't). But there is a middle ground between setting 20 armed officers on him and giving him a free reign to go to wherever he likes, in order to find this out.

He ran because he thought he could get away. Take away his potential escape route, and he would not have run. Except maybe into the arms of some officers who might have decided he was better off in custody. He may even have co-operated. But now we'll never know, because the police gave him a potential escape route.

Come on, you have to admit it's pretty shoddy policework if they thought he was planning to blow up a tube station and they let him run right in there. Don't buy into Asher and Pat's mindset that they did everyting right, when theyclearly did not. No-one did the right thing here, least of all the victim- but he's already paid.

I dont know for sure if police made the right decision, I will await results of an investigation. But my sympathy goes out to police who had to make a split second decision. IE, I share the sentiment of the Mayor of London, which i quoted above.

[Bereta_Eder]

i dont buy that "victim was wrong" mantra. he was human. different people react differently to the police. even if he had nothing to fear maybe he got panicked. this is a split second decision in front of a gun. (unlike the luxury of surveillance the police had) asher, for example, could have done exactly the same.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn
And why couldn't they shoot him in the leg or shoulder? Most cops are trained to shoot to maim, not kill.

Really ?? Where?

AFAIK police are trained to aim for the torso and to fire to kill. At amy distance, shooting at moving body parts is foolish anyway.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Asher

I think running from cops who think you're about to be the 9th bomber in a week to try to maim hundreds of civilians, you do deserve to die as a precaution. Thems the breaks...

While I don't agree that he "deserved" to die, I don't blame police for taking the actions they did in that fact situation.

Would it be beyond the capabilities of the terrorist groups to have a few of their members try stunts like this? The actual bombings tend to unit people while an incident like thisdivides public opinion and perhaps makes it more likely that a future bomber may succeed (police hesitate etc )

[Bereta_Eder]

believe me if the police had even a miniscule shred of evidence linking that man to anything other than light bulbs they would have been yelling it from the rooftops.

[Gibsie]

Update: Shot seven times in the head, once in the shoulder. Probably not the back. Ouch. There's being sure, and there's being sure, I guess.

[Winston]

Why do I get the feeling that next time we see an incident of police officers shooting and killing an actual bomber, some people here will keep on and on over the course of several days, blaming the police for overreacting. "It wasn't a very big bomb", "He didn't even detonate it", "He lived his entire life in Iceland, that ought to be taken into account".

[Gibsie]

If that happens, I'll go back to my original complaint, which is that it's a wasted opportunity to get some first-class intelligence.

[Flubber]

The police definitely were not perfect on this one. After all, someone they suspected of being a bomber made it into a train station. But for those advocating early apprehension, think about it.

Police were watching a block of flats . . . Dozens of police or just a few-- I assume just a few and probably not the people best trained in a takedown. You see something that looks suspicious so you detail a few officers to follow a suspect. You then call for a takedown team of some type while surveillance continues-- No one is in position to prevent him boarding a bus but perhaps knowing the bus routes, a group of officers can be congregated. You still hope this suspect will lead you to some information but the bulky coat is worrisome so the order goes out that he is not to enter a train station.

Police confront him to stop him but when he bolts, does not fire due to the crowds. Whe he trips/is tackled an officer(or two) immediately begins firing with the result that the supect is shot dead numerous times.

Plausible scenario??

I just think the folks that say he should have been taken down elsewhere/sooner are losing sight of the fact that it take time to get a team together, particularly when you don't know where a suspect is going

[lightblue]

They were tailing him to see if he would lead them to other people would be my guess. They knew he wasn't one of the 4 from the cctv pictures. When he went into tube station they decided that the risk was to big and that they had to stop him and check him out. They moved in with armed uits and told him to stop. He didn't, instead jumped over a barrier and ran for the tube. Police caught up to him, and assuming he was a suicide bomber, shot him.

His main misfortune was that he lived in the same block of flats that they had under surveillance. You can't go "They must know he was brazilian, he couldn't be a terrorists". Remember that one of the 7/7 terrorists was Jamaican. Can't racially profile really.

[Chemical Ollie]

According to Swedish news, his work permit had expired, which might be a reason for him to run from the police.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Agathon
Israel is a really bad example, by the way. Don't they shoot many times as many innocent people as they do bombers?

Nope.