Why jurors were told to reject 'unlawful' verdict

The coroner, Sir Michael Wright, infuriated the family of Jean Charles de Menezes when he denied the jury the option of returning an unlawful killing verdict. He did this, he said, because, after hearing submissions from legal counsel, he decided that the weight of evidence would not be enough to support a criminal trial for murder or manslaughter.

However, the De Menezes family and their lawyers disagree, and are seeking a judicial review of his decision. They argue that, in theory, the jury was free to bring any verdict it wished, including a so-called "perverse" verdict, which disobeys the coroner's direction. But without a legal expert among the jurors they would have been unaware of this, as the only person allowed to address the jury is the coroner.

Related articles

• De Menezes family wants commanding officer sacked
• Crispin Black: Let us hope the Met can do better than Cressida Dick
• Search the news archive for more stories

They are also dismayed with the way Sir Michael handled the inquest. During his career, Sir Michael specialised in major personal injury, professional and clinical negligence actions and insurance cases, and oversaw the convictions of the Iraqis who hijacked a plane in 1996 in order to seek asylum.

The family claim he was not experienced enough in inquests, but senior coroners have called his handling of the De Menezes case as "unimpeachable".

On the issue of murder, regarding charges levelled against the two officers who fired the fatal shots, the family's lawyers argue it is up to a jury to decide if there is enough evidence for a conviction. There is fierce resistance to any firearms officer being charged within the Metropolitan Police. Firearms officers refused to use their weapons in 2004 until the end of the suspension of two officers who mistakenly shot dead a man who brandished a chair leg . And one of the first acts by the former Met Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, in 2005 was to seek immunity of prosecution for police marksmen who mistakenly shoot dead innocent people.

On the issue of manslaughter or gross negligence, the family believe "specific acts by some of the commanders were negligent and met the criminal standard".

They point to the confusion in the police command on the day of the shooting, arguing that there were several opportunities for officers to stop Mr De Menezes before he entered Stockwell Tube station, but none of these were taken.