G20 officer may face manslaughter charges

A police officer has been interviewed under caution after a post-mortem showed a protester he allegedly assaulted subsequently died from an abdominal haemorrhage. An earlier post-mortem showed Ian Tomlinson had died of a heart attack shortly after being struck by an unnamed officer as he tried to make his way home during the G20 protests. But Dr Nat Cary, who conducted the second post-mortem, rejected the findings and said there had been internal bleeding.

Ian Tomlinson was not taking part in the protests of April 1st and merely trying to get home after a day of working as a newspaper seller outside Monument station.

There have been accusations that police may have been ordered to use excessive force during the G20 protests. But former commander specialist operations at Scotland Yard Roy Ramm insisted that no orders would have been given to use violence. “Every police officer is responsible for his or her actions,” he told Sky News.

Although he welcomed an investigation he said the police had a difficult job to do as they faced “80 or 90 different groups” with differing agendas. Policing such protests “was almost impossible.”

Ian Tomlinson's stepson has called for answers. “First we were told there was no contact. Then there was a heart attack. Now we’re told he died of internal bleeding following an assault,” Paul King said, “We want the truth” [Guardian / BBC / Sky News]. Tonight on Channel Four News former London mayor Ken Livingstone said the case raised many worries. "It gets murkier by the minute," he said.

Ian Tomlinson’s death has already raised concerns as to policing methods employed during the G20 protests. The possibility that a Metropolitan Police officer might be charged with manslaughter will heighten those concerns. It has already emerged that the Independent Police Complaints Commission has received more than 145 complaints [BBC]. At least 70 are connected to assault. The Metropolitan Police may well be facing further charges.

Second G20 assault spurs MetPol inquiry

The Independents Police Complaints Commission [IPCC] are to investigate an alleged assault on a young female by a police officer at G20 protests in London. The incident has prompted inquiries into police procedures as well as the behaviour of some officers.

Footage shows assault

Video footage has emerged which shows the officer striking the protester about the face before hitting her on the leg with his baton [You Tube]. During the incident the protester is heard to shout obscenities at the police apparently in anger at another demonstrator who was pushed by other officers [BBC / Sky News / This is London].

Second investigation by IPCC

The incident is the second such accusation of police brutality. The IPCC are already investigating an assault on Ian Tomlinson a newspaper seller who was pushed to the ground by a police officer as he walked through the city on 1st April. Tomlinson later died from a heart attack.

The following day many protesters had gathered in the city some expressing anger at the death of Ian Tomlinson. Many were contained by cordons of police in an procedure known as kettling. The controversial crowd control method has been criticised as being inhumane.

Police methods criticised

Speaking on Sky News recently, former Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Brian Paddock described the procedure as a “tried and tested method” of crowd control. However some believe kettling only serves to antagonise a potentially volatile gathering of protesters. There are also issues of human rights with some pointing out the problems arising after several hours without food, water or toilet facilities. The containment method also appears to be counter to Article 5 of the Human Rights Act which sets out the right not to be deprived of liberty except in five well-defined exceptions. The exceptions concern detention to effect a lawful arrest or compliance with a court order, detention of a child who is unsupervised or of a person in breach of immigration rules, or "the lawful detention of persons for the prevention of the spreading of infectious diseases, of persons of unsound mind, alcoholics or drug addicts or vagrants" [Guardian].

Containment tactics were first used over a long period of time on 1 May 2001 when an anti-capitalist protest at Oxford Circus was corralled by the police for seven hours in bad weather and with no access to toilet facilities.

On 1st April some groups of protesters were contained for more than seven hours. And it wasn’t just supposed violent or unruly protesters who were kettled in. One peaceful protester complained to Sky News that she had been prevented from leaving despite explaining she needed to return home to pick up her child from school. Even members of the press found themselves unable to escape. Journalists not holding a UK press card found themselves in the same predicament as the demonstrators. “My colleagues from China couldn’t get out,” one journalist told tvnewswatch. “I managed to get out by showing my press card but they only had Chinese press cards” Ma, who works for a news agency, said.

Tom Brake, Liberal Democrat MP for Carshalton & Wallington, writing in the Times said that even British journalists were not allowed to leave despite offering legitimate credentials and contact information [The Times].

Eventually people were released but only after complying to “police requests” for name, address and a submission to being photographed. Amongst protesters the tactic is widely believed to dissuade people from attending future demonstrations and effectively stifle the right to democratic protest [Guardian].

Officers suspended as police launch review

Both officers involved in the two IPCC investigations have been suspended and now the Metropolitan Police has said it is to review its kettling policy. “A number of complaints have been raised in relation to the tactic of containment" Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson said today. He said that he has asked Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary to review policing tactics [BBC]. It remains to be seen what the findings might be given that the House of Lords have previously rejected claims to compensation by demonstrators kettled in during the 2001 protests. The Lords ruled that the police had behaved lawfully on that occasion.

Terror chief blunder forces early raids

Bob Quick, Britain’s head of counter terrorism, has resigned after a blunder which forced security services to bring forward an operation. Quick had been photographed entering Downing Street on Wednesday, but he had inadvertently held an important document in full view of the press. Although news organisations were contacted shortly afterwards the potential leak resulted in an anti-terrorism operation being launched earlier than expected [Sky News / BBC / CNN].

Twelve people were arrested in several areas in the north west of England late Wednesday afternoon. At least one person was arrested at Liverpool’s John Moores University in full sight of students studying in the library. Armed officers moved in swiftly to detain their suspect. There are conflicting reports as to how many people arrested at that location with students saying two men were taken away. Police say only one man had been arrested.

Across Liverpool several addresses were raided and a number of suspects were taken away by police. Five addresses in the Cheetham Hill area of Manchester, including an internet cafe were also raided in the operation. North of Manchester two men are understood to have been arrested at a Homebase DIY store in Clitheroe, where dozens of police officers carried out a raid.

The operation is said to have been connected to an imminent threat to the UK according to reports, the veracity, of which cannot be established. However the document carried by now former counter terrorism chief Bob Quick reveals some important details of Operation Pathway. Part of the document reads: “This is a Security services led investigation into suspected AQ driven attack planning within the UK”. The AQ is believed to refer to al-Qaeda. The document also mentions that there were 11 suspects at 7 addresses under investigation. Three addresses are identified as being in the Greater Manchester area while three others were in the Merseyside, or Liverpool, area. The other address was identified as being in Lancashire. All but one of the suspects are stated as being Pakistani nationals living within the UK on student visas. One is a British born national. The nationality of the twelfth person arrested in the subsequent raids remains unknown [Sky News / BBC].

IPCC to investigate G20 protest death

The Metropolitan Police will be once again attempting to defend their actions and an apparent tissue of lies after footage released tonight showed police officers pushing a man to the floor who later died of a heart attack. Ian Tomlinson had been returning from work as a newspaper vendor outside Monument station on the day of the G20 protests when he was violently pushed to the floor. Protesters at the scene attended to the man and he walked away dazed. He collapsed moments later and died of a heart attack despite a swift response from police paramedics.

Various reports emerged from the police that evening. In the Gold control room there were suggestions the man had been a vagrant or homeless, and that he had been drinking. It was also widely circulated that Mr Tomlinson had taken part in the protests.

His death was breaking news at around 10 pm on Wednesday night on both Sky News and the BBC. Both channels quoted the Metropolitan Police saying that a man had died after “collapsing in the street”. Police later said they had at no point made contact with the man. Though some of the officers may not have known the man pushed to the ground was to be the man who died.

Pictures published later however brought forward many witnesses after they recognised the man in the picture and have reported the earlier incident to the IPCC [Independent Police Complaints Commission].

Yesterday the Guardian ran a story in which they suggested that Ian Tomlinson had been assaulted. Photographer Anna Branthwaite told the paper, "I can remember seeing Ian Tomlinson. He was rushed from behind by a riot officer with a helmet and shield two or three minutes before he collapsed." Branthwaite, an experienced press photographer, has made a statement to the IPCC as have several others. A female protester, who did not want to be named but has given her testimony to the IPCC, said she saw a man she later recognised as Tomlinson being pushed aggressively from behind by officers. "I saw a man violently propelled forward, as though he'd been flung by the arm, and fall forward on his head. He hit the top front area of his head on the pavement. I noticed his fall particularly because it struck me as a horrifically forceful push by a policeman and an especially hard fall; it made me wince."

On BBC Radio 4’ PM programme Tomlinson’s son Paul King called for witnesses to come forward so the family could learn the truth behind his fathers death. He said the family was “devastated” by Ian’s death and described him as a “lovely father”. The Guardian article and radio report has now brought further eyewitness reports and video evidence which not only refute police claims but may bring possible charges if the IPCC find that the apparent assault on Mr Tomlinson resulted in his subsequent heart attack [Sky News / BBC / Guardian]

Children face attempted murder charges

1. Nine-year-old boy found injured on Auburn Road
2. Critically injured 11-year-old found
3. Two boys, aged 10 and 11, arrested

Two boys will be charged of attempted murder and robbery following the assault of two others in Edlington, in south Yorkshire, England, on Saturday. One boy remains in hospital following a horrific attack which left him with serious head injuries. He was found stripped to just a T-shirt after his friend staggered away from the scene, covered in blood, and sought help.

Police were earlier given extra time to interview the 10 year old and 11 year old brothers arrested soon after the attack [BBC]. Their victims a nine year old and an eleven year old were apparently robbed of their mobile phones and trainers in what has been described as a vicious attack. People who found the nine year old child wandering along a road described his injuries as horrific saying he’d been “cut from head to toe”. Local residents told the BBC they believed the two victims had been hit with a brick, slashed with a knife and burned with cigarettes in the Brick Ponds area of Edlington on Saturday.

Lisa Meehan said "I felt sick to my stomach, You couldn't see his face, he was cut from head to toe with a gash across his head. They had slashed his arms and face and he had no trainers or socks on. His face was mashed."

The severity of the attack prompted the Prime Minister to make a statement in which he said it was “clearly a shocking incident” [Sky News].

Protests fail to rattle G20 leaders

It was billed as a potential riot in the making, but for the most part the protests against the G20 did not bring the chaos that had been much hyped in the media. The so called anti-capitalist protests brought some disruption to London’s financial centre yesterday but heavy policing kept violence to a minimum. However, what started out as a carnival ended in tragedy with several injuries and one protester dead.

Four effigies led separate processions to the financial heart of London at around midday. Amongst the crowds were protesters dressed as bankers, others as the devil and the grim reaper. A large effigy of a dead canary, representing Canary Wharf, was carried to the steps of the Bank of England as a band blasted out some music on trumpets and trombones. The voice of dissatisfaction with the government and the banking system was clear. Banners and placards spoke volumes. Amongst them were calls to “Eat the Bankers”, “Smash Capitalism” and a declaration claiming that “Capitalism Isn’t Working”.

As the numbers swelled to an estimated 4,000 people police began to create cordons, blocking several roads and trying to split off one part of the crowd from others. These became the focus fore anarchists and the more militant demonstrators who began to taunt the police. The inevitable clashes soon occurred an one police officer was struck on the head by one protester holding a large pole. Crowds eventually gathered outside a branch of the Royal Bank of Scotland, the bank which has been the subject of much criticism following the departure of Sir Fred and his £700,000 a year pension.

It wasn’t long before windows were smashed and several protesters entered the building. As the half a dozen of so members of the crowd attacked the bank surrounding them were dozens of others recording the event with cameras. There were camera phones, compact digital cameras and video cameras held aloft all trying to capture the action. This wasn’t so much a riot than a piece of street theatre. The BBC’s Ben Brown broadcasting Live pictures from a nearby vantage point said that it seemed those perpetrating the attack were a small minority and that around a third seemed to be only interested in taking pictures which another third were merely gathering to watch the spectacle.

Indeed this is what the much talked about ‘riot had become. There was nor riot to speak of. Any attempt of revolution had dissolved into a few sporadic incidents filmed by a thousand cameras.

French Marxist theorist and Situationist once wrote that modern life had become an event that was merely observed rather than experienced. In his book Society of the Spectacle he claimed that life had become “an immense accumulation of spectacles” and that “everything that was directly lived” had “moved away into representation”. Nothing was more true than the scenes that could be seen unfolding in the streets of London yesterday. Direct action had been replaced by so-called ‘Blackberry revolutionaries’ who were spending much of their time Twittering and blogging. It was perhaps epitomised by the arrival of celebrity comedian Russell Brand who told a throng of photographers and news media that he had come to “see what was going on”. It was a far cry from the protests seen in 1984 when more than 2,000 anarchists descended on the financial heart of London to Stop the City or the so called Poll Tax Riot in the early 1990s.
Having made their point the majority of demonstrators drifted away from the city by late afternoon. But some remained, hemmed in by cordons of police. Many complained that they weren’t being allowed to leave. Tired and frustrated several hundred protestors remained outside the Bank of England as hundreds more police gathered around them.

There had throughout the day been several reports of injuries with both police and demonstrators being hospitalised. But at around 10 pm it emerged that one demonstrator had died. The circumstances where unclear, but it is reported that the man has collapsed and fallen unconscious in St Michael’s Alley, close to the Bank of England. Police paramedics, who say they were pelted with missiles while they treated the individual, placed him in the hands of Ambulance personnel who conveyed him to hospital. However the man was pronounced dead upon arrival.

A Climate Change camp outside Liverpool Street station was relatively peaceful throughout the day. But as darkness fell it became a gathering point for demonstrators who had left the city. There were tense stand-offs between protesters and police which continued until the early hours.

There had been intense media coverage throughout the day with almost constant live broadcasting from the city protests and the climate change camp. But there was minimal coverage of the anti-war coalition march which trailed through the streets from the US Embassy to London’s Trafalgar Square. There were speeches from former mining trade union leader Arthur Scargill, CND’s Bruce Kent and veteran politician Tony Benn. But there were no voices heard on television. During a morning interview Tony Benn had called on Sky News to air the views of protesters and speakers. But other than a sound bites from a few demonstrators on the ground, the only message conveyed was one of a large crowd determined to cause disruption.
Despite the protest and the damage to RBS, the effect on the markets was minimal. Although some city workers had ‘dressed down’ and others inconvenienced as they were unable to exit their building for a cigarette or a lunchtime sandwich, the markets actually rose and it was pretty much business as usual. CNN’s business correspondent said that the protestors had affected the smaller businesses who were “just trying to eek out a living”, the types of people whom they claimed to be representing. “This is a side show” Todd Benjamin said.

The sideshow has today moved to London’s Docklands. But the protest today is far smaller than that seen in London yesterday. Only around 200 protesters were present by lunchtime. “Well anarchists don’t wake up early do they?” one police officer told reporters. Many may stay at home given that the protest area is being kept more than half a kilometre away from where the G20 leaders are gathering to “save the world”.

Terrorism and protests threaten G20

More than 30,000 protesters took to London’s streets on Saturday ahead of the G20 Summit scheduled for next week. Numbers were far fewer than expected with many being put off by cold, wet and windy conditions. Those that did join the procession were vocal in their protest which took them past Parliament to a rally in Hyde Park.

Dozens of different groups were represented under the banner of “Put People First”. Environmental groups were joined by anti-capitalists and anarchists. There were also church groups and those opposed to nuclear proliferation. The mixed messages were reflected by the sea of differing placards suggesting that “capitalism isn’t working” to a call for “Jobs not Bombs”.
The protest was the top story on both the BBC and Sky News though coverage remained scant. Policing was low profile and there was no sign of violence which some media reports suggested might occur.

The picture may well change next week when hundreds of anti-capitalist protestors are expected to descend on the City. With calls to “storm the banks” and “eat the bankers” anarchists and other groups are expected to try and create widespread disruption. However, some anarchists have claimed that while they want to disrupt the G20 Summit and the workings of the City, it was not their intention to be violent. Daisy, 19, an anarchist behind some of the literature told the Guardian, "This is politics. We're using symbols of oppression in an artistic way. It doesn't make us terrorists."

But the police are treating the threats of violence far more seriously. City workers have been told to “dress down” and even to leave expensive cars at home [Daily Mail / City of London Police]. The Metropolitan Police are also well prepared. Plans have been drawn up, police overtime has been cancelled and 3,000 extra police have been drafted in from other forces. All this is costing the British tax payer an estimated £7 million [Guardian].

Most of the concern in the build up to the G20 surrounds the potentially violent protests. There has been little or no discussion as to a potential terrorist attack. According to the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, there is no specific terrorist threat aimed at disrupting the G20 Summit. However, the terror threat remains “severe” and she has conceded that the Summit would be a prime target for terrorists. Large scale demonstrations would act as perfect cover for a terrorist intending to launch a much talked about Chemical, Biological, Radiological or Nuclear attack. Such an incident would also create a logistical nightmare for the authorities and security services [BBC / Sky News / CNN].

Britain becoming a 'police state'

Britain is edging ever closer to a police state. This isn’t the assessment from Human Rights Watch or Liberty but from the former head of MI5. Stella Rimington has made headlines in much of Britain’s press today saying that Britain is in danger of giving terrorists just what they want. She warns that the erosion of our freedoms as a result of a legislative blitz leaves us all with a feeling that we live "in fear and under a police state". It is not the first time Dame Stella has spoken out against the undermining of our freedoms. She has warned that ID cards would be "absolutely useless" unless they could be made impossible to forge, while also arguing forcefully against the proposal to allow detention without charge for 42 days [BBC / Daily Telegraph]. Her warning comes as new laws threaten photographers’ rights.

Photography has been under threat for some time following the terrorist attacks in the US on 9/11. Authorities have even passed laws that prevent photography citing that such acts could pose a risk of terrorist attacks. This week in Britain a new law came into force that effectively makes the photographing of police officers illegal. Section 76 of the Counter Terrorism Act states that anyone found "eliciting, publishing or communicating information" relating to members of the armed forces, intelligence services and police officers, which is "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism" may be arrested. A conviction could lead to 10 years imprisonment and a fine. Number 10 released a statement in which it said, “there may be situations in which the taking of photographs may cause or lead to public order situations, inflame an already tense situation, or raise security considerations”. But professional and amateur photographers alike are questioning the motives of the new laws. Leo Murray, a spokesman for climate change campaign group Plane Stupid, raised his concern at a recent protest outside Scotland Yard. “If we couldn't film they [the police] could act with impunity, they could just mete out violence with the confidence that nobody would find out” he told the BBC. Professional news photographers have been the most outspoken at the new law which many say will make their job all the more difficult.

Train spotters have been questioned and those photographing trains have even been arrested. In New York this week Robert Taylor was arrest by police citing “unauthorized photography, disorderly conduct/unreasonable voice and impeding traffic”. The “unauthorized photography” charge, which does not even exist on the statute books, was subsequently dropped, but the case highlights how normal everyday activities can lead the ordinary citizen into a serious brush with the law [pdnonline].

Many ordinary citizens have been harassed for taking photographs even at public events where taking pictures is common. Amateur photographer Phil Smith was challenged by police while taking pictures during a Christmas lights turning on event in Ipswich last year. He was subject to a stop and search and told to delete pictures from his camera [BBC]. It is a situation that has concerned some Members of Parliament. Austin Mitchell MP has tabled a motion in the Commons that has drawn on cross-party support from 150 other MPs, calling on the Home Office and the police to educate officers about photographers' rights [amateur photographer]. But the passing of Section 76 of the Counter Terrorism Act has effectively quashed any effort to protect any rights photographers might have.

Last year the the Metropolitan Police launched a poster campaign asking members of the public to report photographers that “seem odd” [BBC]. Stewart Gibson of the Bureau of Freelance Photographers says the concern surrounding photography has increased over many years. "There's a great deal of paranoia around but the police are on alert for anything that vaguely resembles terrorism. It's difficult because the more professional a photographer, paradoxically, the more likely they are to be stopped or questioned. If people were using photos for terrorism purposes they would be using the smallest camera possible."

The threat cited by authorities is that photographs may be useful to someone planning a terrorist attack. But while there may be some logic to this argument, the facts simply do not stand up to scrutiny. While photography may be carried out by terrorists in movie plots, in the real world there are few recorded instances. The 9/11 terrorists didn't photograph anything. Nor did the London transport bombers, the Madrid bombers, or the liquid bombers arrested in 2006. Timothy McVeigh didn't photograph the Oklahoma City Federal Building. The Unabomber did not photograph anything. Neither did shoe-bomber Richard Reid. Photographs are not being found amongst the papers of Palestinian suicide bombers. Even the IRA was not known for its photography.

If the letter of the law was rigorously followed, with regards ‘materials’ likely to be ‘useful to a terrorists’, it would not be photographs that should be seized. Instead it would by maps, from the humble tube map of the London underground to the Ordinance Survey maps that show far more detail than some photographs ever could. The internet would of course need to be shut down since there is far too much information ‘likely to be useful to a terrorist’ available online. Libraries would need to dispense of their encyclopaedias and science and chemistry education classes in schools and colleges would need to be halted for the fear of teaching any budding terrorist bomb making skills [schneier.com / The Guardian].

It is not just photography and civil liberties that are under threat; it is reason and common sense itself. Meanwhile instead of defeating terrorism, the authorities are playing into the terrorists’ hands by disposing of the freedoms they say they’re trying to protect.

Greek riots continue for 7th day

Riots have continued for a seventh day in Athens following the death of Alexandros Grigoropoulos [pictured above] who was shot dead by police last Saturday. Live pictures relayed by the BBC, Sky News and CNN showed continuing clashes between police and demonstrators with rocks, paint bombs and Molotov cocktails being thrown at police lines. Police responded by launching volleys of tear gas into the crowds in an attempt to disperse them.

The Greek Prime Minister Kostas Karamanlis has rejected calls to stand down after the week of violence that has disrupted several cities across the country and caused millions of pounds worth of damage. The Prime Minister told reporters that the violence had been instigated by extremists. “The compassion with which all of us ought to treat the distress of young people cannot be confused with blind violence, with the activities of extreme elements” he said. The continuing violence is beginning to test the patience of many ordinary citizens and business owners. Hundreds of shops and cars have been destroyed in the riots and some are calling on authorities to clamp down harder on the rioters. Some have even attempted to defend their property from the mobs with reports of shopkeepers even fighting with the masked youths. The police are also said to be running out of tear gas according to some reports.

Open verdict in De Menezes inquest

Jean Charles de Menezes was shot 8 times, 7 of which were to the head

The jury in the inquest of Jean Charles De Menezes, mistakenly shot by anti-terror police on 22nd July 2006, has returned an open verdict. The verdict has disappointed the family who had hoped that an unlawful killing verdict would have been given. The family have already condemned the inquest as a “complete whitewash” and last week there were angry scenes in court before the jury retired. Last Thursday there had been dramatic scenes in court after protest by family supporters some of who disrupted proceedings prior to the jury being sent out for deliberation. Some of the protesters wore T-shirts proclaiming the jury should have had a right to decide a verdict of unlawful killing. The coroner had disallowed an unlawful killing verdict and “the result has left the jury with little choice other than to give an open verdict”, Jenny Jones, a Green member of the Metropolitan Police Association, told the BBC. She also called for a full public inquiry adding that the open verdict left many issues unanswered and a “cloud hanging over the police”.

Along with an open verdict the jury were also asked to answer a number of other questions relating to the shooting. The jury rejected the police account that Menezes had moved towards them in an aggressive manner. However passengers did back up the police version of events saying that Menezes stood from his seat. The witnesses and jury also rejected police assertions that they had shouted warnings of “armed police”. However a former CO19 officer, who spoke to Sky News, said it was “unrealistic” for people to remember such detail in light of the chaos of events that had been taking place. Roy Ramm, another former officer at Scotland Yard, said that it was “inconceivable” that officers would not shout warnings after hours of anti-terror training. Their procedures he said were “hammered into them”. The jury said there were several contributory factors leading to the death of Jean Charles de Menezes. In particular the jury agreed with the assertion that there had been failures in the communication system between teams on the ground and the command centre. There were also questions over poor intelligence being given to officers. Police were given a poor quality photograph of terror suspect Osman Hussain. Thirty clearer pictures were not distributed which may have prevented the false identification of Menezes as being the terror suspect.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Paul Stephenson speaking to reporters after the inquest said the Metropolitan Police accepted “full responsibility” for the death of the young Brazilian, an event the police service “deeply regrets”.

“We made a most terrible mistake and we are sorry”, Sir Paul said, but he insisted that the events leading up to the shooting were “unique”. There had been two attacks on London’s transport system and “there were four suicide bombers on the run”. It had not been the intention of his officer to shoot an innocent man, Sir Paul said. They had set out with the intention to protect. But he conceded the family had suffered “the most terrible of losses”. The Metropolitan Police would learn from the events to “minimise the risk” that it ever happens again. He said it is “my duty that lessons are learnt and acted on”. His officers would “continue to protect Londoners” from such events that occurred on 7th of July which killed 52 and injured 977.

However, the jury were unable to decide whether the suicide attacks of 7th July and the failed suicide attacks of 21st July had been a contributory factor to the events in Stockwell Station.

Nick Hardwick of the IPCC described the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes as a “truly shocking event” adding that there was “nothing in his [Menezes] actions that justified his death”. He said the jury had supported the IPCC’s recommendations said the verdict highlighted the need to review operational procedures in anti-terror operations.

Besides the unanswered questions highlighted in the inquest, there remains other unexplained issues particularly the missing CCTV footage, both from the train and the platform which has never been satisfactorily explained.

However speaking after the verdict, the solicitor for the family said it was the “best verdict possible” under the circumstances [BBC / Sky News].

Security breached in airport protest

Protesters who breached secure areas of Stansted airport have disrupted air travel for hundreds of travellers. Essex police made 57 arrests following the demonstration which was described by airport operator BAA as “unlawful”. The action was mounted by climate change action group Plane Stupid, but with concerns that Britain’s airports might be under threat of terrorist attacks the demonstration could be regarded as plain stupid. In 2006 a threat of attacks

Ryanair has criticised the security at the airport after many of its flights were cancelled and there will no doubt be questions as to how the protesters were able to breach the secure area so easily.

Protesters, using bolt cutters, cut through fences at around 03:15 GMT and made their way onto an area near but not actually on the main runway. The airport does not become operational until around 06:00 GMT, but the action forced the closing of the runway until 08:10 GMT. At least 56 flights were cancelled and delays persisted throughout the day. Delays were also expected to continue into Tuesday, though Ryanair said there was likely to be disruption for the next three days. The disruption has left many passengers feeling angry.

One of the activists said that that while she was “incredibly apologetic” that passengers had been affected, the threat to the planet from airport expansion needed to be highlighted. Lily Kember, 21, told the BBC that "The effects of climate change are going to be monumental". Another protester said, "We're afraid of what the police might do to us, we're afraid of going to jail but nothing scares us as much as the threat of runaway climate change."

But the arguments failed to wash with passengers. Stuart Meacock, from Peterborough, told BBC Radio 5 Live, "It's disgusting. I mean, it's not only breaking all of the safety rules, but it's disrupting everybody's lives”. Another delayed passenger told the BBC Jorg Tittel told the BBC, "I am all for fighting for our environment, but these kids have failed already. They are making thousands of travellers angry". Many people also called into London’s radio station LBC to vent their anger over the events. For those waiting for flights the situation was uncertain with many passengers telling Sky News channel that they had found it difficult to get information.
The anger towards the protesters also filled bulletin boards and comments pages on the Internet. One Sky News viewer said, “They are all plain stupid and self-centred”. Some were even demanding the protest group should pay for their actions. One man writing under the name of Scott on Sky’s website said, “The police should beat them with nightsticks and then put them in jail for an illegal protest. The fine should be the total cost of clearing the runways, the additional fuel, overtime, etc divided evenly amongst all the members of the organisation, even if they were not there”.

A spokeswoman for Essex Police said 50 people had been accused of aggravated trespass, three of attempting to gain access to a restricted area, and four of conspiracy to commit a public nuisance. Ch Supt Ian Gruneberg told BBC News the demonstrators, who were chained together, were "committing a criminal act" and would be dealt with by the courts.

The irony about today’s protest was that amongst those delayed at Stansted was a delegation heading to the climate change summit at Poznan in Poland [BBC / Sky News].