Blogging a noisy and socialistic view on politics, security, and whatever may take my fancy.
"All the world now is in the Ranting humour" - Samuel Sheppard, 1647
How can you match the statements up if you don't know the true names of the witnesses?
Elementary, my dear Watson. I'm going to assume that if, say, Cressida Dick is actually a robot, at least she is the same robot in both reports. There are plenty of names in IPCC2 and in the coroner's inquiry.
While the death of Mr de Menezes was a real tradgedy , this inquest showed thatjuries are getting wise to the fact that the police routinely lie under oath. Thistime the jury saw through the police lies.Unfortunately this is a rare exception.Over the years I have seen dozens of people innocent of the crime they have beencharged with found guilty because the jury chose to belive the police's fabricatedevidence.A good example is the muppet that was found guilty of the Jill Dandokilling.It was obvious to anyone with a little sense that he wasn't guilty.The people Iam taking about were charged with far less serious crimes than the ones mentionedabove.A lot of them had previous covictions. Despite this they were no less guiltythan the alleged Guilford Bonbers or the late Sally Clarke.So the next time you happen to be chosen for jury service please pay attention to the evidence given by the police and if it does not quite add up do not give them the benefit of doubt.Thatbenefit of doubt has seen far to many innocent people convicted firstname.lastname@example.org
Jill Dando was a special case though, routed through Special Branch and other govt agencies due to the Serb connection...Everything gets murky past Bondsteel..
Post a Comment