Yesterday the family of Jean Charles de Menezes and we, their lawyers, became aware through the press that virtually the entire body of information either placed, or allowed to remain, in the public domain since Jean Charles de Menezes was killed on July 22nd 2005, has been false.

Insofar as the claim of the existence of an official inquiry has contributed to or provided for a situation in which a blanket of secrecy has covered the true facts, and lies and scenarios have been allowed to hold good, we on behalf of the family suggest that claim has constituted a grave public disservice.

In consequence, we ask now that the nature and pace and ultimate objectives of any investigation change. The de Menezes family ask for only one outcome and that that be swift, that is that the entire truth surrounding Jean Charles death be made public now as a matter of urgency.

The public interest coincides completely with the interests of the family. From the beginning the most senior of police officers and government ministers including the Prime Minister, claimed the death of Jean Charles to be an unfortunate accident occurring in the context of an entirely legitimate, justifiable, lawful and necessary policy. In the context of the lies now revealed, that claim has become even less sustainable and even more alarming. It is inconceivable that the true facts as revealed yesterday, were not made known to senior police and ministers immediately; for any to have made comments publicly without first informing themselves of the true facts would have been entirely reckless and wrong.

From the outset the family have raised a number of obvious questions

1. How was Jean Charles de Menezes first identified as a suspect and on what basis?

2. Why was he allowed to board a bus without challenge if he was indeed a suspect?

3. Why was he allowed to continue his journey unchallenged if he was a suspect?

4. Why was he allowed to board an underground train if he was a suspect?

5. When did police identify themselves to him and how?

6. What opportunities were afforded for alternative action other than execution?

7. What alternative means of incapacitating a suspect were available on that day; if alternative means were not available why not, and if they were why were they not used?

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• The day they dropped a bomb on the banks
• Methodist minister sent herself hate mail
• Japanese insect to be used to fight knotweed