Reply #54: From what I remember

[Anarcho-Socialist]

there was little information to go on immediately when it happened. There was just the police's word for it and little else to go on. Obviously as time went on, there were huge contradictions and speculations in the media and this led to all sorts of speculations on DU.

I remember that there were posters who immediately suspected foul play (without any evidence at the time) and those who trusted the police (and were willing to give the police the benefit of the doubt). Neither of those two "camps" were starting from a vestige of ultimate knowledge. The former based their judgments on the fiasco of the Iraq War and their mistrust of Tony Blair. The latter based their judgment on the rarity of "shoot-to-kill" instances in Great Britain.

At least we're closer to the truth: that it appears De Menezes was murdered as a result of a shoot-to-kill policy and as a result of mistaken identity.

There is now more evidence to support this new hypothesis rather than the original theory supported by the lies that the police originally told to cover their backs, and also the "Rudi Guiliani/Tony Blair had a brown person killed to divert attention from Karl Rove" theory that I saw theorised on DU.