Page 14 of 14

Posted: Tue 23 Aug, 2005 11.43
by tillyoshea
Corin wrote:
Tilly O'shea wrote:The cameras on the train were indeed in full working order
Please correct me if I am in error,which I most probably am, but I thought on a previous occasion you claimed that there were no surveillance cameras in the interiors of the actual trains themselves.
Hmm, you are not wrong - initial reports did say that there were no cameras on the train, whereas reports now say that there are. I can only assume that the early reports and I were mistaken.
Corin wrote:Furthermore, is it not probable that the surveillance on the trains are simple cameras + recorder, and so have their output sent to cassette tape, whereas the cameras at the stations are networked and so have their output sent to hard disk?
That's quite possible, but if the cameras were networked then it would seem unlikely that they would each record on different hard disks, and that the hard disks would need removing in order to examine the footage.

Posted: Tue 23 Aug, 2005 13.10
by Corin
Tiilly O'shea wrote: I can only assume that the early reports and I were mistaken.
Do you ever get the impression that early reports are just not credible? In the case of the July 7th incidents, early reports stated that the problem was a power surge.
Tiilly O'shea wrote: but if the cameras were networked then it would seem unlikely that they would each record on different hard disks, and that the hard disks would need removing in order to examine the footage.
Whether or not the cameras are networked, it makes sense to record footage to different partitions of a disk, for performance different disks, and for reliability an array of disks (RAID).

Furthermore, in a criminal investigation, it is normal practice to take into custody the original recorded material whether it be on tape or hard disk in order to keep it safe, and of course, prevent it from being wiped or altered.

Posted: Tue 23 Aug, 2005 19.09
by rdobbie
It's hard to see Sir Ian Blair resigning, considering the immunity which seems to be afforded to those in government and high places. You only have to consider the fact that Tony Blair and Geoff Hoon are still in their jobs and have not been impeached in parliament or investigated by the UN International Criminal Court for lying to parliament and the public in order to invade Iraq. It seems there is no such thing as accountability any more. They can simply use their barrister friends to interpret the law however they want in order to get away with murder - quite literally.
Corin wrote:Of course we all know in light of the Kelly-Gilligan affair in which the Hutton inquiry revealed the BBC to be guilty of lying (why else did Gilligan, Davies, and Dyke resign if they had done nothing wrong), the BBC must practice self-censorship in this period of charter review, so as to not further bite the hand that sustains it.
I have been amazed at the bias towards the Met Police shown by BBC reporters in the last two weeks, compared to the hardline journalistic stance of ITN which has been fearless and admirable. I've heard one or two BBC correspondents appearing to passionately defend the Met with statements such as "we must remember the enormous pressure the police were under in the aftermath of 7/7 and 21/7 ... they were only trying to protect the public ... etc etc". It smacks very much of state-controlled broadcasting.

Posted: Tue 23 Aug, 2005 21.38
by johnnyboy
Tube CCTV: Was there a cover-up?
Daily Mail

Scotland Yard has been plunged into a damaging new 'cover-up' row over missing CCTV footage from the station where Jean Charles de Menezes was shot.

London Underground sources insisted that at least three of the four cameras trained on the Stockwell Tube platform were in full working order.

This appears to contradict police assertions that 'technical problems' meant no footage exists of the innocent Brazilian's final moments before he was killed by marksmen after being wrongly identified as a potential suicide bomber.

The sources also rejected suggestions that the cameras had not been fitted with new tapes after police took away footage from the previous day, July 21, when suspects in the failed bombings caught trains there.

The revelations increased calls for a full public inquiry and heaped further pressure on Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair who has faced repeated calls to resign.

The row erupted as senior Brazilian justice officials arrived in London to question the Independent Police Complaints Commission team investigating the shooting of electrician Mr de Menezes.

A senior rail industry source said yesterday: "There is absolutely nothing to suggest that the CCTV cameras were not working. If a tape is taken away to be studied, it is automatically replaced."

Another official said: "At least three of the four cameras were working. There were no reports of anything wrong with them."

Extracts from a police report, however, claimed that examination of the platform cameras had produced no footage. It said: "It has been established that there has been a technical problem with the CCTV equipment on the relevant platform and no footage exists."

It said there was no footage, either, from CCTV in the carriage where Mr de Menezes was shot eight times at point-blank range.

The report said: "Although there was on-board CCTV in the train, due to previous incidents, the hard drive had been removed and not replaced."

'Cameras in working order'

The platform CCTV system is maintained by Tube Lines - a private sector consortium in charge of maintaining the Northern Line.

Sources at the company insist that the cameras were in working order but a spokesman said last night that it could not comment officially while the investigation into the shooting continued.

The Daily Mail revealed earlier this month that, while there was CCTV footage of Mr de Menezes entering the South London station, there appeared to be nothing capturing his final moments as he ran for the Northern Line train on which he was shot.

He had been trailed from his home in Tulse Hill, South London, after he emerged from a block of flats that had been linked to a July 21 suspect.

Former Cabinet minister Clare Short joined relatives of the dead man and members of the Metropolitan Police Authority yesterday to say that a public inquiry into the death was inevitable.

She said it had to establish who had been 'telling lies'. She told ITV: "We've been lied to. This should be bigger than just calling for Sir Ian Blair to go. We need to find out exactly what happened. Who was telling the lies?"

The dead man's cousin, Alessandro Pereira, repeated his demands for a public inquiry.

He said: "Every day we discover more and more lies. We have heard too many. We simply demand truth and justice."

'The shot my son'

Mr de Menezes's mother Maria said: "They took my son's life. I am suffering because of that. I want the policeman who did that punished. They ended not only my son's life, but mine as well."

The continued revelations have already forced Tony Blair and Home Secretary Charles Clarke to give Sir Ian a public vote of confidence. The Commissioner himself has urged people to focus on the wider terror inquiry - but has admitted that he did not know for at least 24 hours that his marksmen had killed an innocent man.

Sir Ian has also been criticised over the way Scotland Yard offered an initial £15,000 compensation payment to the dead man's family shortly after the shooting. Brazilians Wagner Goncalves of the Federal Prosecutor's Office and Marcio Pereira Pinto Garcia, of the Ministry of Justice, went to Scotland Yard straight from Heathrow and met Sir Ian and Deputy Assistant Commissioner John Yates.

In its account of the meeting, the Metropolitan Police said last night it had told members of Mr de Menezes's family in the UK two days after his death that many of the initial reports were wrong.

The force said they were told he did not run into the station, that he did not vault the barrier but used a ticket, and that he was not wearing a heavy jacket or carrying a bag. The police hope the statement shows they were upfront with the family at an early stage.

Well, the sleuthers of MP247 seem to have it on the nail about this sham. Makes you wonder what else the authorities are hiding about the events in July...

Posted: Wed 24 Aug, 2005 11.41
by Corin
Now something which is very, very surprising, is that a man who used to stand up for the underdog, and the victims of injustices and atrocities, is now publically endorsing the leadership of the Chief Constable of the Metropolitan Police.

From <http://www.dailymail.co.UK/pages/live/a ... ge_id=1770>
London mayor Ken Livingstone has expressed full confidence in Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir Ian Blair and blamed "disgruntled" colleagues for trying to undermine him.

Sir Ian has been under pressure over conflicting accounts about the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, who was wrongly suspected by police of being a suicide bomber.

But Mr Livingstone said of Sir Ian: "There are few people I have had to deal with in 30 years in public life I trust as totally as I do him. He not only has my confidence, he is the best news that London policing has got."
Can anybody explain this phenomenal transformation from maverick to model stakeholder?

Could the mayor of Greater London be "under pressure" on account of his past personal and political faux pas to unreservedly toe the Establishmentarian line?

Posted: Wed 24 Aug, 2005 12.39
by marksi
The circumstances surrounding the fatal shooting by police need a full and open public inquiry... however there is a danger that in the reporting of events surrounding this man's death, the many victims of the bombings of the 7th of July are somewhat forgotten, and I can understand the fact that their families are annoyed by this.

Posted: Wed 28 Sep, 2005 19.18
by Pete
is anyone else finding John Menzies' family immensly tedious and publicity seeking?

Posted: Wed 28 Sep, 2005 19.26
by Nick Harvey
Hymagumba wrote:is anyone else finding John Menzies' family immensly tedious and publicity seeking?
Yes. Very much so.

I can't help feeling that the Beeb are giving them far more airtime than they warrant.

Posted: Thu 29 Sep, 2005 00.54
by iSon
nodnirG kraM wrote:
Hymagumba wrote:is anyone else finding John Menzies' family immensly tedious and publicity seeking?
Sara Payne anyone?

I was wondering why Stockwell station was closed earlier. Did Max Clifford train her to perfect that fixed-grief-stricken expression?
They're hear for one reason and one reason only - money. But fair play to them...I can't help but feel for the family who had a relative gunned down in what seems like a botched operation from the start.

Climate of fear yes - but he was the only one! Fatal errors were made and the family are here to remind Sir Ian Blair and Co of this.

But of course, as mark said over a month again - the danger is it overshadows the actual bombings that took place on the tube. But I always thought the best way forward and what Britain does best is to shrugs shoulders, say "shit happens" and get on with things.