It seems to me that, when faced with it, the police did the only thing they could do, given the information that they had been given. Its a tragedy for the guy, but it must be pretty grim for the policemen too, now knowing that they have effectively carried out some sort of summary execution on an innocent man.
The question we should be asking is why is our intelligence so bad. Not only this, WMD (though that was probably more to do with political leaning upon), the downgrading of the threat level just before the bombings, the bombings, perpetually arresting people in well-publicised armed swoops, only to quietly release without charge a few days later - everything. You're always going to get some mistakes, but you should get the occasional success too.
Some people on these threads are calling for some fairly draconian rules to pre-empt terrorism, but how can we detain people on suspicion, or shoot-to-kill, when we can have no faith in the intelligence behind it.
There doesn't seem to be anything that would prevent anyone being in the frame, and we need to keep that in mind.
The question we should be asking is why is our intelligence so bad. Not only this, WMD (though that was probably more to do with political leaning upon), the downgrading of the threat level just before the bombings, the bombings, perpetually arresting people in well-publicised armed swoops, only to quietly release without charge a few days later - everything. You're always going to get some mistakes, but you should get the occasional success too.
Some people on these threads are calling for some fairly draconian rules to pre-empt terrorism, but how can we detain people on suspicion, or shoot-to-kill, when we can have no faith in the intelligence behind it.
There doesn't seem to be anything that would prevent anyone being in the frame, and we need to keep that in mind.