The strange strange strange eyewitnesses of de Menezes' death

John Doe II

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Aug-30-05 03:10 AM
Original message

The strange strange strange eyewitnesses of de Menezes' death

An analysis here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4495389

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

vincent_vega_lives

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Aug-30-05 12:40 PM
Response to Original message

1. So what's the point you are making by breaking this down?

Your conclusion doesn't conclude anything.

So, to conclude:
What we do have are either eyewitnesses (especially Mark Whitby) who not only got every detail completely wrong but whose accounts correspond exactly with the official storyline of the police after the shooting.
Then we have a witness that somehow not mentions the crucial detail that he must have witnessed.
Then we have a curious absence of eyewitnesses that actually saw the victim besides Mark Whitby (who describe a clearly different person than de Menezes).
And we have many accounts of people who should have seen more as they were in the carriage yet whose accounts lack any important detail.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

John Doe II

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Aug-31-05 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #1

3. I really would love to believe

that Whitby and the others weren't planted witnesses. Yet, I fail to find any other possible explanation for what was going on.
Maybe you could help me?
Any example in history where a witness not only got every detail basically completely wrong but got it exactly as wrong as the police?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

philb

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Aug-30-05 07:51 PM
Response to Original message

2. I agree there is something very strange

Was there no follow up to the strange statements?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

John Doe II

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Aug-31-05 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #2

4. I know it's hard to believe

but Whitby's explanation is even stranger than his first account:

But Mr Whitby says that man - who may have vaulted a ticket barrier - is likely to have been an undercover cop trailing Mr de Menezes.
(...)

"I think the guy I saw being bundled out of the way might have been a surveillance officer who was following him."

Mr Whitby, 47, described what he saw: "There was a mass of bodies and I saw a gun being lowered and I heard the shots.

"Mr de Menezes must have been ahead of the officers. The guy in the thick coat can't have been him."
http://icsouthlondon.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200south...

Seriously: Whitb y was in the carriage:
How can you mistake a person that was shot?
Whitby creates the impression he is talking about the scene where de Menezes was said to have jumped the barrier. But Whitby was in the carriage. He didn't see this above mentioned scene.

His sentence "Mr de Menezes must have been ahead of the officers."
makes simply no sense at all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Last Lemming

(806 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-01-05 03:06 AM
Response to Original message

5. Has anybody explored

the witnesses background? Where they work--etc?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Thu May 16th 2024, 04:16 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.