Top police 'clear' Met chief over Menezes

There is a story in this Sunday's Observer newspaper (read the article here) concerning the upcoming Police report into the shooting by the Met of Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian killed after being mistaken for a suicide bomber.

The report, which appears on the surface to back Sir Ian Blair's claim that he didn't know an innocent man had been shot until 24 hours after the event, nevertheless contains some disturbing anomalies.

It says that, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Alan Given, one of the officers in command of the Met's firearms unit, also reveals that the officers were initially 'buoyant' after the shooting, thinking they had 'protected Londoners' from a dangerous assailant.

I find that quote quite astonishing. I first heard of this incident on my car radio and was struck by the fact that the police were said to have killed "a suspected suicide bomber". Now the fact that they used the word "suspected" told me they had probably killed an innocent man, as I have no doubt that they quickly lifted his shirt and realised that the dead man in front of them was not wearing a suicide belt.

Later reports that his private office knew that de Menezes was innocent by the afternoon of 22 July were denied. Together with other senior officers, Given insisted that Sir Ian had become the target of a 'grossly unjustified' campaign.

Is it "grossly unjustified" to expect the head of the Metropolitan Police to have asked his officers if the man was, indeed, a suicide bomber? Leaving aside the man's identity, that fact alone should have been very easy to ascertain.

How can the police have believed they had 'protected Londoners' from a dangerous assailant when they surely by that point knew the man had been unarmed?