Initial data collected “points to an excess of legitimate defence”
Very much as Expresso reported last week, the discrepancy between the official PSP statement on the fatal shooting of Odair Moniz in Cova da Moura last week, and the narrative of the two PSP agents involved, has opened a new line of inquiry.
And this line, according to Correio da Manhã today, focuses on “suspicions of an eventual adulteration of the press release that was elaborated by PSP police after the events” (the events meaning the shooting dead of 43-year-old Moniz in the early hours of Monday, October 21).
This press release was “only drawn up, in police language, on the morning of October 21” – some hours after Moniz was declared dead.
“In spite of being signed by the two agents who participated in the police operation during the early hours of the morning, the PJ investigation has doubts as to its reliability, bearing in mind the two agents were also heard during the morning of that day, and were not categoric, as stated in the official statement, about the imminent danger posed by Odair Moniz with a (bladed) weapon”.
CM says it has asked the PSP national board whether the official statement was elaborated by the two agents involved, or by a third party, leaving the two young police officers simply to sign it.
The answer was that “the statement was elaborated by the police agents who took part in the incident” albeit “as is habitual practice in more complex situations, its realisation is accompanied by the hierarchy” – the same hierarchy that has been widely criticised, with many calling for its bloc dismissal.
Lawyer Ricardo Serrano Vieira, who represents the police agents, has said in interview with journalists that the “version transmitted by the agents to the PJ was close to that which can be found in the official statement elaborated by the agents”.
Reading between the lines, one can see how ‘complicated’ this has become: the official statement was ‘elaborated’ by the two young agents involved, but ‘realised’ by the hierarchy. And the conflicting version that agents transmitted to PJ investigators was “close” to the official version – but conflicting nonetheless.
In its inimitable style, CM cuts to the case: “Initial data recovered by the investigation points to an excess of legitimate defence. Agents lost control of the situation and one of them fired”.
The result was that Lisbon neighbourhoods went on the rampage, with devastating consequences, for at least six consecutive nights.
But what does ‘an excess of legitimate defence actually mean when it is ‘unpacked’? It means legitimate defence was precipitated – which also means there was no need to shoot to kill.
As CM’s deputy editorial director general Eduardo Dâmaso explains, in today’s editorial “Legality and Decency”: if the tampering with evidence is confirmed, “we are facing a new tragedy, a blow to an idea of justice that no society can allow to deteriorate. The investigation must leave no stone unturned, not even the slightest shadow of doubt in a matter like this. And the PSP and the government must also draw conclusions, even if the doubts don’t have the criminal density required for an accusation, but reflect a reprehensible practice. This is really about defending what we believe to be the rule of law, in the Constitution and in the law. Beyond decency, honesty and integrity. ND
Source material: Correio da Manhã.
