The jury has returned an open verdict at the inquest into the death of Jean Charles de Menezes, whom police mistook for a suicide bomber.
It rejected the police account Mr de Menezes was killed lawfully by two officers who shot him seven times at Stockwell Tube in south London.
Earlier in the inquest the jury was instructed not to return a verdict of unlawful killing.
I remember watching the drama unfold on television.
This is what I was thinking:
I thought the police must have shot a muslim; someone who was going to be of dark appearance.
I remember hearing the remarks of a male witness live on the air.
The witness was saying how he saw '3 guys' jumped on a passenger, pinned him to the floor on his face, so that he couldn't move a muscle ... then drew a gun and fired lots of shots to his head. According to him, no warnings were given, because he thought they were a criminal gang. I never saw, or read about this witness again. He dissapeared.
I remember thinking "The bastards have just murdered him, in cold blood".
I remember thinking "In this climate of war on terror
, I bet the bastards feel elevated to a level where they can do anything they want to any muslim, knowing that no questions will be asked, and they will probably get a medal and a knighthood for being so heroic."
As the events started to progress, I thought there will now be a cover-up. There was.
I heard all sorts of bullshit from the masters of decieving.
They didn't rule half the world for nothing.
We gave warning = No
He was wearing a padded jacket = T shirt
He had electric wires hanging down from his coat = No (They must of thought of that, when they realised he was an electrician).
He was behaving suspiciously = No
He was running = No
He jumped over the barriers = No
He doubled back to throw us off = No
All the camera's were not working = No (The bastards have destroyed all the tapes)
Members of the jury ... you can choose any verdict, as long as it's lawful killing