Bombings again?

[undercovers]

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1189920,00.html

[jno]

they shouldn't have killed him. Would have been useful to have had a chat with him, invite him to say who his friends were and so on. Wasted opportunity?

[MargeB]

Very heartening news, one easily forgets just how decisive the UK protection services are in this kind of situation.

They probably have really good intel on the guys from yesterday, but I think this may have been a foiled suicide attempt? Possibly. Eyewitnesses say he was chased into tube, tripped, was shot 5 times (dead), and was wearing an unusually large and padded overcoat.

The coat and running to the tube suggest bomber. However I'm sure that if anyone fails to stop, and is getting on the tube, they will just shoot to kill. Sounds like they shot him in the body though, which is an odd thing to do to a suicide bomber.

[nedflanders]

What kind of uproar will there be if it was just some asian guy who was cold (so he had a big jacket on) and panicked and ran? More fuel to the fire!

[MargeB]

Pretty simple, police officers would be up on a murder charge. I'm sure they had good intel on this guy. If the police call on you to stop, and you don't stop, but jump onto a tube, you will be shot dead. Quite right.

[nedflanders]

I agree with you Marge but I just hope he IS someone related to yesterdays events. The Muslim council of Britain have already made a statement "The Muslim Council of Britain calls for the police to explain why the man at Stockwell Station - described as Asian in appearance - was shot dead.

A spokesman says Muslims are concerned police may have a "shoot to kill" policy in force."

[littleoldme]

I don't think trying to capture him would have been practical. If this was someone hell bent on destruction, he would have detonated the bomb before the police could have stopped him. As it was, he was shot just as he was getting on to a tube train, so it probably would have only been a matter of seconds, minutes at most, until he set the bomb off if he had one.

Even if this guy was an innocent panicker (how unused to the British climate would he have to be to consider today to be worthy of a big coat, particularly if he's a British citizen?), I'd hope the courts would consider the incredibly difficult position of the police. The day after an attempted attack, two weeks after a successful one that killed 55 people, what are they supposed to do when a panicky looking, overdressed man refuses to stop when challenged and runs onto a tube train? Take the risk of shooting one innocent person, or run the risk of letting him blow up dozens of commuters?

In response to the end of MargeB's first post, shooting in the body does risk him still being able to detonate a bomb, even in spasms of death, but attempted shooting in the head is extremely risky, particularly in such a crowded environment.

[MargeB]

Mmm, did consider that, but he was on the ground, and they were on top of him. I would be surprised if policy in that situation was not shot to head. Shot to body if body stuffed with explosives is v risky.

[MargeB]

I would be very very concerned if when asked to stop on the underground by police anyone ran away and the police did not shoot to kill.

The idea of someone asking the police of an explanation in this instance is really quite preposterous. I hope the reply involved at least one swear word. And maybe 'off'.

[nedflanders]

Standard proceedure for armed officers is to shoot throught the heart. but i think in this case they would have went for the chest or the upper back IMO.

[MargeB]

Maybe if you're on top of him you know what you're shooting.

[undercovers]

these were plain clothes officers - so it could easily turn out to be an innocent paniced individual - running from people he saw pulling guns. But i guess we will have to wait and see - hope it was one of the terrorist responsible... and the police do have to have a shoot to kill policy at the moment, just would be tragic is a mistake was made

[Gef]

The shoot to kill policy is only for suspected bombers. According to SkyNews the one on the train was held on the ground by three men and shot five times in the head - no chance of him detonating a bomb. "Normal policy" is to shoot to stop - ie in the legs. I think (and hope) they knew what they were doing this morning.

[jno]

it's starting to look as though they thought he was one of yesterday's bombers but he wasn't. None of the police actually had a photo of the guy they were looking for. They still say he was connected to their anti-terrorist investigations; but he appears not to have had a bomb, or even a table leg (which can also get you shot by the police). I'll be interested to hear the explanations, but one possible one, at this stage, is that they killed the wrong man. If that's the case, it won't please Muslims much, and doesn't please me either.

[londondave]

Probably a new way to deal with fare evaders on the tube, and quite right too.