The Crown Prosecution Service has reached a decision on charges relating to the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes at a London Tube station.
Stephen O'Doherty, senior lawyer from the CPS Special Crime Division, made this statement:
I wish first to take this opportunity to express my condolences to the family and friends of Jean Charles de Menezes, and my gratitude to them for the patience and understanding they have shown whilst I have considered the evidence in this tragic case.
I have now completed my review into the circumstances surrounding the death of Jean Charles de Menezes.
Following the investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, their report and supporting evidence was sent to me.
I asked them to carry out some additional enquiries, which they have done, and I am now satisfied that I have sufficient evidence to reach a decision in this matter.
The offences I considered included murder, manslaughter, forgery, and breaches of health and safety legislation.
All cases are considered in accordance with the principles in the Code for Crown Prosecutors, which states that before a prosecution can commence, there must be a realistic prospect of conviction.
If there is not sufficient evidence then a case cannot proceed, no matter how important or serious it may be.
After the most careful consideration I have concluded that there is insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against any individual police officer.
But I am satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to prosecute the Office of Commissioner of Police for an offence under sections 3 and 33 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 of failing to provide for the health, safety and welfare of Jean Charles de Menezes on 22 July 2005.
The two officers who fired the fatal shots did so because they thought that Mr de Menezes had been identified to them as a suicide bomber and that if they did not shoot him, he would blow up the train, killing many people.
In order to prosecute those officers, we would have to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that they did not honestly and genuinely hold those beliefs.
In fact, the evidence supports their claim that they genuinely believed that Mr de Menezes was a suicide bomber and therefore, as we cannot disprove that claim, we cannot prosecute them for murder or any other related offence.
Mr de Menezes was not a suicide bomber. I therefore considered the actions of all those involved in the operation to see how it was that an innocent man came to be mistaken for a suicide bomber.
I concluded that while a number of individuals had made errors in planning and communication, and the cumulative result was the tragic death of Mr de Menezes, no individual had been culpable to the degree necessary for a criminal offence.
A log book of events was submitted for forensic examination to see if it had been altered and, if so, by whom.
Two experts examined the relevant passage but they could not agree to the required standard whether there had been an alteration or, if there had been one, who may have done it.
This meant there could be no prosecution of any individual in relation to the log book.
However I have concluded that the operational errors indicate that there had been a breach of the duties owed to non-employees under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, by the Office of Commissioner of Police and I have authorised a prosecution under that act.
I must stress that this is not a prosecution of Sir Ian Blair in his personal capacity, but will be a prosecution of the Office of Commissioner, as the deemed employer of the Metropolitan Police officers involved in the death of Mr de Menezes.
I have today provided a detailed explanation to those representing the de Menezes family and I have offered to meet with them to answer their questions.