View Full Version : Police get their stories straight after shootings.
AboveTheSalt
10-09-2008, 12:54
Last May, Mark Saunders, a 32 year old lawyer who was reported to be depressed over difficulties with his marriage and who lived in a £2m house just off the King's Road in Chelsea was shot at least five times by the Police following a five-and-a-half hour stand-off and died as a result of his injuries.
He had been heard to fire shots into a neighbour's garden, into a child's bedroom in a neighbouring house and had fired a couple of shots in the direction of the Police. Nobody was injured.
At some stage, for an unknown reason, the Police decided to shoot and kill him - it is not clear why and there appears to be no reason to believe that there was any urgency or panic.
Four months later, his sister has finally managed to get a High Court review into the circumstances surrounding his shooting. In the meantime the Police have had plenty of time to discuss the incident amongst themselves and agree their stories. (Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7607481.stm))
This case is somewhat reminiscent of Jean Charles de Menezes and of Harry Stanley who was shot by the Police whilst walking home with a table leg wrapped in a plastic bag in the middle of the afternoon nine years ago. (Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3974461.stm))
I can understand that the Police sometimes make mistakes. What I can't understand is that they are allowed to spend time working together and with lawyers to get their stories straight. This seems to be an absolute travesty of justice and accountability.
Mark Saunders, 32, was shot after a siege during which he fired at police from his £2m house in Chelsea.
Assuming this is accurate, what's the problem?
The other guy (from memory) was challenged and didn't do as he was told so he was seen as a threat so was shot. Again, I don't see a problem with this.
I know as sure as eggs are eggs that if I heard a call from armed Police telling me to do something that I'd be doing exactly as they told me and not making any moves that could be mistaken as threatening.
cleanbluesky
10-09-2008, 13:02
You're crap at conveying information.
Justsomebloke
10-09-2008, 13:06
Nobody that shoots at the Police can complain when they get shot by the Police & nor can there familys.
Always makes me laugh storys like these, If there is a Mad axe man or a knife maniac about who do you ring to come & sort them out ?
If somebody kills your friend who is it that finds out who it was then goes & captures them & then gets them locked up ?
I support the Police & whatever measures they have to take to Protect us & themselves from these Lunatics.
As for talking between each other to get the story down I would think it is important for them to discuss it & get it straight. Not to distort the story but to get the individual accounts down & work out what actually happened. All of them would have seen the situation from a different angle/location etc & would have been involved in different ways. With the heat of the moment & the fact that some will take in some things better than others during these stressful situations I can think of nothing wrong with them discussing it at Any stage throughout the enquiry other than when it is presented to a jury.
AboveTheSalt
10-09-2008, 13:12
I support the Police & whatever measures they have to take to Protect us & themselves from these Lunatics.I don't actually think that the Police were protecting anyone when they shot and killed Mark Saunders - mentally disturbed though he undoubtedly was at the time of his killing by the Police.
As for talking between each other to get the story down I would think it is important for them to discuss it & get it straight. Not to distort the story but to get the individual accounts down & work out what actually happened. All of them would have seen the situation from a different angle/location etc & would have been involved in different ways. With the heat of the moment & the fact that some will take in some things better than others during these stressful situations I can think of nothing wrong with them discussing it at Any stage throughout the enquiry other than when it is presented to a jury.Absolute rubbish. There is nothing to stop the Police writing down their recollection without agreeing it amongst themselves. Arrested suspects are not allowed to confer and get their stories straight, why should it be any different for the Police?
What they are doing is perverting the course of justice, nothing else.
Ahhh the copy and paste sessions begin.
I really dont understand this obsession with police coverups. From what I've witnessed the police force is far more likely to hang you out to dry if you **** up than help you cover it all up.
Last May, Mark Saunders, a 32 year old lawyer who was reported to be depressed over difficulties with his marriage and who lived in a £2m house just off the King's Road in Chelsea was shot at least five times by the Police following a five-and-a-half hour stand-off and died as a result of his injuries.
He had been heard to fire shots into a neighbour's garden, into a child's bedroom in a neighbouring house and had fired a couple of shots in the direction of the Police. Nobody was injured.
At what point exactly would you like the police to take action? When there is a child in the bedroom? When police get actually shot? It's only luck that meant noone else got hurt. And quite what the value or location of his house has to do with anything is beyond me.
I dont see a story that needs to be straightened. They did their job.
I don't actually think that the Police were protecting anyone when they shot and killed Mark Saunders - mentally disturbed though he undoubtedly was at the time of his killing by the Police.
Themselves perhaps?! OR do they not deserve that luxury? Who else was going to go in and get him? You? THey tried for 5 hours.
cleanbluesky
10-09-2008, 13:18
At what point exactly would you like the police to take action? When there is a child in the bedroom? When police get actually shot? It's only luck that meant noone else got hurt. And quite what the value or location of his house has to do with anything is beyond me.
I dont see a story that needs to be straightened. They did their job.
THEY COULD HAVE USED A FOAM GUN OR COAXED HIM OUT WITH HARSH, DISAPPROVING LANGUAGE
Another thing (can you tell this has wound me up? ;) )
If a police officer shoots someone he/she is immediately suspended pending investigation. Now I'm only going on what I've been told by a firearms officer in my force, but they are not allowed to talk to anyone, no colleagues, noone who was there, no-one. And this can go on for months and months and months.
Justsomebloke
10-09-2008, 13:21
I don't actually think that the Police were protecting anyone when they shot and killed Mark Saunders - mentally disturbed though he undoubtedly was at the time of his killing by the Police.
.
;D
So him letting of his gun through his neighbours houses/bedrooms don't count as a threat now :p
Maybe this is to close to home for me to comment.
cleanbluesky
10-09-2008, 13:22
http://insider.tickco.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/WindowsLiveWriter/ThePoliceReunitePolice2007tourComingthis_D216/the-police%5B4%5D.jpg
BAD MEN ARE GOING TO SHOOT YOU FOR NO REASON, FEAR THESE FACES
Justsomebloke
10-09-2008, 13:25
LOL! CBS you're a goon!
Agreed & at least His humour works :)
AboveTheSalt
10-09-2008, 13:27
Ahhh the copy and paste sessions begin.Unbelievable. If you don't cite sources; people bitch. If you just give a link without any introduction, comment or question; people bitch. If you raise a topical issue any more challenging than "What I had for elevenses" or "What are you listening to right now?", people bitch.
Incidentally, I am not particularly getting at you here Pebs ...
I dont see a story that needs to be straightened. They did their job.In which case, four months after the event, the High Court will doubtless hail the Police as heroes and say that Mark Saunders deserved to be killed, just as Jean Charles de Menezes and Harry Stanley did.
So him letting of his gun through his neighbours houses/bedrooms don't count as a threat nowSince the area is reported to have been cleared, it certainly doesn't seem to constitute an imminent threat, no.
Maybe this is to close to home for me to comment.Very possibly.
cleanbluesky
10-09-2008, 13:30
Unbelievable. If you don't cite sources; people bitch. If you just give a link without any introduction, comment or question; people bitch. If you raise a topical issue any more challenging than "What I had for elevenses" or "What are you listening to right now?", people bitch.
Incidentally, I am not particularly getting at you here Pebs ...
Actually, you're the bitch - hence it happens to you a lot. I actually think its a good idea to post news stories but I've seen Nazi propaganda and Guardian articles that are more accurate and unbiased than what you've put in the OP.
Ahhh the copy and paste sessions begin.
I really dont understand this obsession with police coverups. From what I've witnessed the police force is far more likely to hang you out to dry if you **** up than help you cover it all up.
I have seen this happen a number of times! Slightest step out of line and my Christ you know it!
All I can say is from my time with the police, all I have ever seen are people working their butts off to do everything they possibly can in their powers to help provide a service to our country.
In this case - I think it's unfair to judge what happened when you weren't present there and perhaps to take what you read with a pinch of salt. So many police "stories" are just that - a combination of information woven to depict something that barely resembles the full story or truth. Once again, I have witnessed this happen many a times and there's nothing worse for officers, who work their butts off with stretched and limited resources, to be slated again and again on stories like this for all the good that they do.
:)
*passes ATS superglue for hair* ;)
Oh and stop insulting bitches people! I have one - she's sat right next to me and is goooooooorgeous and highly intelligent! Even from an early age she realised newspaper stories were to taken lightly and pooed on ;)
Von Smallhausen
20-09-2008, 22:20
ATS, I have a simple answer for you.
Go to a police training centre, ask for a go on the response screen with a converted HK, do some scenarios then make your choice.
You cannot possibly imagine the split second choices that AFOs have to make. They do not have the time or the luxury of debate to ask if the item in the carrier bag is a table leg or if the pistol the suspect carries is a fake.
If you feel that you can do better then join up and show them how it should be done.
You think a police shooting is covered up ? Do you think that the IPCC can be bought to help with that ..... not in a million years.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.