{"id":921,"date":"2007-08-03T01:37:17","date_gmt":"2007-08-03T01:37:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/breaking-news\/the-ugly-rumour-that-never-reached-sir-ian\/921\/"},"modified":"2007-08-03T01:37:17","modified_gmt":"2007-08-03T01:37:17","slug":"the-ugly-rumour-that-never-reached-sir-ian","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/latest-news\/the-ugly-rumour-that-never-reached-sir-ian\/","title":{"rendered":"The ugly rumour that never reached Sir Ian"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Philippe Naughton<\/a> <\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>Sometimes, if you read the IPCC’s Stockwell Two report, you get the impression that Sir Ian Blair must have been the only policeman in London who went to bed on July 22, 2005, without knowing that an innocent man had been shot in the Tube.<\/p>\n

The Independent Police Complaints Commission’s report shows the startling speed at which rumours that the wrong man had been shot spread across the force. There were major problems with the internal communications systems – but not, it seems, with the Met’s grapevine.<\/p>\n

Even officers watching a cricket match at Lords learned about the “terrible mistake”. Among them was Deputy Assistant Commissioner John Yates, the boss of Commander Cressida Dick, the officer responsible for the botched operation.<\/p>\n

He told the inquiry that he received a number of calls through the day, but did not recall being told further details.<\/p>\n

Roy Clark, a former IPCC director of investigations, who was also at the cricket, said he \u201cbecame aware\u201d that a mistake had been made.<\/p>\n

Lambeth Borough officers were also told of the emerging identity of Mr de Menezes. Pc John Jeffrey, a Police Federation representative, said he was told that afternoon that the wrong man, a Brazilian, had been shot.<\/p>\n

\u201cHe also observed that the atmosphere in his workplace was subdued,\u201d the report states.<\/p>\n

Later on July 22, at about 3pm, senior officers met members of the Muslim Safety Forum at Stockwell Tube station.<\/p>\n

One member, Azad Ali, said it was \u201cwhat was not said rather than what was said\u201d that led him to believe an innocent man was dead.<\/p>\n

Four hours later, as Sir Ian, the Met Commissioner, left Scotland Yard, he asked one of his staff officers if the identity of the dead man was known. Detective Chief Superintendent Maxine de Brunner told him it was not and the police must wait for DNA tests.<\/p>\n

She added that it was also not yet known if the dead man had links to terrorism.<\/p>\n

The report makes clear that evidence of Jean Charles de Menezes\u2019 true identity began to emerge before Sir Ian told the public that his death was \u201cdirectly linked\u201d to the anti-terror operation.<\/p>\n

His wallet, containing documents identifying the Brazilian, was first found minutes after he was shot and then searched properly before 3pm.<\/p>\n

At 3.30pm, Sir Ian was telling the world that the shooting was linked to the \u201congoing and expanding\u201d terrorist investigation.<\/p>\n

The miscommunication is the clearest example of how senior officers in the Met failed to speak to each other in the aftermath of the shooting. According to the IPCC report, the wallet was found just four minutes after Mr de Menezes was gunned down.<\/p>\n

It was placed on a seat of the Tube carriage at Stockwell station along with the Brazilian\u2019s mobile phone. Over the next few hours senior officers were briefed that the man they had shot was a \u201clone Pakistani male\u201d as crucial evidence to the contrary lay in the wallet.<\/p>\n

It was not until around 1pm that other evidence began to emerge after an officer accessed the memory of Mr de Menezes\u2019s phone. The phone revealed names of Latin origin, rather than Arabic or Asian, while a photograph of the Brazilian was also found in the phone\u2019s memory.<\/p>\n

Then, at 2.47pm, police found the Brazilian\u2019s documentation in the wallet, giving the identity of Jean Charles de Menezes born in Sao Paulo on January 7 1978. Stockwell Two reveals that the information was immediately phoned through to Scotland Yard, with a senior officer being informed as early as 3.08pm.<\/p>\n

Within minutes Sir Ian\u2019s own office, including his chief of staff Caroline Murdoch, were aware of the contents of the wallet but did not tell the Met chief.<\/p>\n

Then just before Sir Ian attended the key press conference, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Brian Paddick claims he was told by another officer: \u201cWe\u2019ve shot a Brazilian tourist\u201d.<\/p>\n

Rumours of the dead man\u2019s true identity began to fly around – even reaching other police stations.<\/p>\n

At 5pm a detective at Marylebone Police Station in the north west of the capital was told by a senior officer that there had been a \u201cmassive cock-up\u201d at Stockwell.<\/p>\n

Despite the widespread rumours, the Met continued to assume that Mr de Menezes’s identity had not been firmly established. Officers claim this was in part due to the mobile phone having a past link to crime – something Mr de Menezes may not have known – and a Pakistani business card recovered from the scene.<\/p>\n

But throughout the evening of July 22 more evidence emerged of the Brazilian\u2019s true identity.<\/p>\n

At 7pm, a detective was informed that a trace of a bank card found on Mr de Menezes confirmed his name and placed his address as 17 Scotia Road. This was slightly different from the flat that police had under surveillance.<\/p>\n

A senior officer then recorded in a log at 8.21pm that a letter discovered under the Brazilian\u2019s body also confirmed his address as No 17. This effectively cut any link to the anti-terror operation into the July 21 attacks, but despite this it was still many hours before the Met confirmed it had made a mistake.<\/p>\n

Responding to the report today, Sir Ian says that it had criticised him for being “almost totally uninformed” – but that exonerated him.<\/p>\n

\u201cSpeaking personally, I have always made it clear that it was never my intention to mislead and, that if I had lied, I would not be fit to hold this office,” he said, over accusations that he misled the public. “I did not lie.\u201d<\/p>\n