Barrister's shooting considered by CPS

[Jonone]

I just don't think they're poorly paid. It's not in anyone's interest to pay them poorly otherwise they would be greater temptation in terms of corruption/ backhanders etc. They tend to get looked after, overtime and a decent pension so where do you get the idea that they're poorly paid ?

[jj]

Jonone wrote:
> I just don't think

For me, that just about sums it up.

[Jonone]

Are you a journalist ?

[Robches]

JRPornstar wrote:

> Not ignorant, and yes I am comfortable with their actions.
> What were they supposed to do given the circumstances? The
> matter of warnings given is a matter of debate if you have read
> the court transcripts.

You are still repeating the lie (and it was a lie) that De Menezes was running away and the police shot him. We now know he walked quite normally onto the train, sat down, and was then shot. The cops said they warned him, but the other passengers said they did not hear anything. Anyway, even if they did shout a warning, what was Menezes meant to do? They shot him where he sat, they were always going to shoot him. He was dead from the moment a shambolic police operation misidentified him as a terrorist.

At least have the grace to admit that you were wrong to say Menezes was running from the police when he was shot. That was a bit of black propaganda put out by the Met, and we now know it was untrue.

[Robches]

JRPornstar wrote:

> I'm repeating no lie. And you're not reading all my posts. I've
> nothing to admit.

You said De Menezes was running away when the police shot him. Are you still saying that?

[jj]

JRPornstar wrote:
> The officers who shot him were only carrying out
> orders from a higher source...


OK, then; the Nazi defence.
Poor stuff.......

[jj]

A masterful summary.
OF THE FACTS of the case.

[jj]

JRPornstar wrote:

> I've nothing to admit.
REALLY ????

[jj]

I suspect
[img]http://bgafd.co.uk/forum/smileys/deadhorse.gif[/img]