London, July 2005: a failure of security?

Abstract

This paper is a detailed study of the group psychology of the population of London during the events of July 2005. The consideration includes analysis of the symbolic and functional roles of the security forces and governing authorities involved in these events. It concludes that the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes was a scapegoat killing. Rather than attribute this unjust killing to a failure of security, it is argued that the responsibility must be attributed to a political or appointed authority, who must be seen to be innocent of the crime. This leads us to conclude that Justice is a necessary illusion. The failure of the political and appointed authorities to accept the responsibility for the death of Menezes, indicates an unreasonable belief in the 'reasonableness' of the 'masses'. This argument is substantiated by a psychoanalytic interpretation of events in this particular case.

Keywords: trauma, anxiety, security, psychoanalysis, Justice, 2005 London Bombings The events of July 2005

On the morning of 7 July 2005, during peak hour (approximately 8:50a.m.), three bombs exploded within fifty seconds on three underground trains in the vicinities of Aldgate Station, Kings Cross and Edgware Road. Nearly an hour later, a fourth bomb exploded on a bus in Tavistock square. Fifty-two people were killed in the attacks, including the four bombers. About 700 were injured. The London Underground rail network was shut down for the remainder of the day. (1)

On 21 July 2005--two weeks later--four small explosions, later revealed to be attempted bomb attacks, disrupted the London transport system again. The first three explosions took place on trains at around 12:30p.m. within about 20 minutes--the stations attacked were: Shepherd's Bush, Warren Street and the Oval--the fourth explosion took place on a bus in the Hackney area at Bethnal Green about an hour later (1:30p.m.). The only casualty on this occasion resulted from an asthma attack. It was later discovered that in these attacks the explosive material had failed to ignite. The detonating devices were solely responsible for the explosions that did occur. (2)

The following day, on Friday 22 July just after 10a.m., a twenty-seven year-old Brazilian man, Jean Charles de Menezes, was shot and killed at Stockwell tube station by officers of the Metropolitan Police. The day after the shooting, the Metro Police publicly identified Menezes as the victim. They also revealed that he had not been carrying explosives, and was not in any way connected to the attempted bombings of the previous day. (3) Note, however, Menezes' status as an illegal resident. This detail has been integrated into the myth that has been constructed around these events. (4) The police spokesman expressed sincere regret and offered the family an apology. The Police Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, appeared on television the next day on 24 July to accept responsibility for the police error. He defended the 'shoot to kill' policy of the Metro police. By 25 July, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) had taken over investigation of the shooting, which until that time had been in the hands of Scotland Yard's, The Directorate of Professional Standards. Much of what follows in this paper is based on reports from that Commission's (the IPCC) investigation into the police killing. (5)

In this article I am going to suggest the assassination of Menezes was a necessary, rather than an accidental, consequence of the two groups of bomb attacks in London. (6) I am going argue against the logic that sees the Menezes killing as a case of mistaken identity, and as such, simply an unfortunate accident. I will argue on psychological grounds that accidents are not indeterminate events, but are conditioned by factors that can be articulated. This is a well established principle in psychoanalytic interpretation which posits that events which have typically been thought of as accidents such as slips of the tongue, instances of forgetting, dreams, etc. are produced by unconscious psychological causes. (7) I will posit that the unconscious causes of this killing can be found in the psychology of groups. But rather than apply the classical Freudian text on Group Psychology, I will make use of the psychoanalytic theory of the scapegoat, which has to date been only applied to family groups (see discussion below). (8) This psychoanalytic scapegoat theory derives from Freud's 1923 and 1926 publications on the ego and on anxiety which post-date the work on group psychology. (9) In the next section of my paper, I will portray some of the empirical data upon which my analysis is based. Following that, it will be the task of this paper to apply the analytic scapegoat thesis to the large group situation of the Menezes killing. Then we shall be in a position to examine the consequences of this psychological analysis for the political situation, especially with regard to security and justice.