Stockwell shooting: what appears to have happened

[muriel_volestrangler]

As this DU post points out, some British police are allowed to carry firearms, and these are normally kept in certain vehicles; while others are in a specialist firearms unit, called in for specific incidents.

They do sometimes shoot people; when they do, there are extensive inquiries, for instance a man carrying a replica pistol 2 years ago. Note that the officers who shot him are still suspended from firearms duty, 2 years later. A case from 2001 is still being fought over.

Claims that, since the man was shot dead at Stockwell, there will be no proper investigation of the circumstances, are very wide of the mark.

Witnesses (BBC page) agree there were several armed police who chased the man into the tube station. This would mean that they were already following him, suspecting him of being dangerous. The police say:

BBC Home affairs correspondent Margaret Gilmore said officers had challenged a known suspect they had been following.

"He ran, they followed him. They say they gave him a warning, they then shot him.
...
BBC crime correspondent Neil Bennett said the suspect was being followed as a result of CCTV footage seen by officers investigating Thursday's explosions.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706913.stm

The witness very close to the shooting says the man was wearing a heavy coat (See The Guardian). When considering the actions of the police, we ought to think what you might do if you see a man, that you suspect of being a bomber, running on to a train with passengers a few feet away, wearing a coat beneath which you cannot see.

I also think that styling this "an assassination", as has already been done on DU, or "an execution", or talking about "death squads" in London, is an over-reaction that has no basis.

[DoctorMyEyes]

1. I agree with you completely

I don't know how anyone can start blaming the police, with the few facts that we now have there's no indication at this point that there was anything else they could or should have done.

[catnhatnh]

2. While I agree with all your points,

I can understand the reaction here. For myself (and I assume many others) my perception of London Police has always been informed from a lifetime impression of unarmed, non-aggressive, "Bobbies" always behaving in a friendly and helpful manner....to see them behave in such a way EVEN when neccesary reminds us too much of New York and Los Angeles style police executions and destoys an otherwise Edenic vision of public civility....Just sayin'...

[MadHound]

3. Excuse me friend, but you're leaving out a few details

Namely that the man they were persuing tripped, stumbled, was pushed to the ground my police, one of which was on top of him, and then had five rounds pumped into him.<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4765876>


This was a very stupid manuever by the police. If you can't control a man that you're sitting on top of without killing him, then you shouldn't be a cop. This man, if he indeed was a terrorist, could have had valuable information. If he wasn't a terrorist, then the police just summarily executed an innocent man.

I understand that everybody in London is jumpy, I would be too. But I'm sorry, that is absolutely when cooler heads need to prevail.

[Village Idiot]

4. I disagree.

I think the police were well justified in their actions, given the circumstances.

This could have been a lot worse had the deceased been wearing a suicide vest and the police shown "restraint."

After the two tube bombings this month, today's (understandable) police action regarding the suspicious activity of someone who was identified as "someone of interest" in yesterday's bombing was entirely warranted on the grounds of public safety.

If all you do is sit on top of someone, he STILL may be able to trigger a detonation...

[rman]

16. Or a completely innocent person may have been shot to death.

Based on suspicion only.

That does set a nice precedent, does it not.

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. But we don't know if his hands were held

because anyone with their hands free could still set off a bomb they're wearing, even if someone's on top of them. Can you take the chance when you're in the middle of the public, with yourself and other officers also very close?

[MadHound]

9. Rationalize all you want, but the fact remains

That this was stupidity at best, and a summary execution at worst. What, a man is on the ground, prone, with at least one cop on top of him. It is much quicker to pistol whip him into unconciousness(one blow if you've had any sort of training) than to pump five rounds into him.

If the man was a terrorist, then they just killed a very valuable lead, and more innocents could very well die because the British police do not have the information this man carried.

If the man wasn't a terrorist, then they just performed a summary execution on an innocent man.

Either way, the police were completely over the top in their reaction, at a time when they needed cooler heads to prevail.

And quite frankly, if this man was carrying a bomb of some sort, I think that the police would have produced it by now as vindication for the shooting, and to give Londoners a moral boost that "Hey, we're doing our job" Instead, all we are hearing is crickets.

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. I'd disagree that would be quicker

the chances are always going to be better that shooting someone at close range will disable him faster than trying to club him with a gun you have ready to fire.

You have an idea of how the British police handle public relations. I have one as well; and, living in Britain, I would say my idea (which agrees with other British DUers you can find posting on this) is more likely to be right. The fact that they havne't produced a bomb yet doesn't mean anything.

[MadHound]

24. Let's see here

Given that the rate of fire was somewhere aprox. between 0.6 and 1.5 seconds/shot, and it only takes 2 seconds to strike a disabling blow, yeah, I think that it was slower to shoot the guy five times.

And I'll guess that we'll have to wait and see if the police produce a bomb. At this point in time, I'm highly doubtful. In fact I think that the the authorities will try to get this whole incident to fade from the public conciousness in so that they don't have to answer any embarrassing questions. We'll see.

[marions ghost]

20. exactly, a choice was made to kill...

why not just injure him rather than killing him, so you can pump him for information? He was well restrained at that point according to bystanders, so they did have a choice.

Sure, I give the police some latitude at this point, but this is just not adding up. I wish I thought the facts will come out--maybe there's more chance of that since this is in England...but these are strange times.

[moondust]

6. He could have also had

a tripwire.

[MadHound]

11. He could have also been pistol whipped into submission too

One blow, if you know anything about anything, would have rendered this down, prone man unconcious. Instead, he was summarily executed.

And if this man had a bomb on him, don't you think that the police would have produced it by now, if for no other reason than to vindicate their actions? Also the production of a bomb would lift the spirits of Londoners, and show the public that the police were indeed on the job.

Instead, all we see is a dead body, accompanied by the sounds of crickets chirping.

[catnhatnh]

22. I think you have watched....

...to many people "knocked unconcious with a single blow" ala "Magnum P.I." and others....

[MadHound]

23. No, I think I have many friends and family who are cops,

And they have shown me many many little tricks. Also, having been a bouncer, and a number of street scuffles, I have a pretty fair idea of how to knock somebody out. It isn't hard, and yes, it can be done with one blow, even if you aren't carrying a weapon.

[Zynx]

10. If I think a guy is a suicide bomber, I'm blowing his head off too.

They can still detonate explosives even if they're being held down. Ask the Israelis about this.

Winter coat in July + backpack + two sets of terror attacks + running from police + running onto train = KILL.

[K-W]

12. Depending on the trigger, they can still detonate whithout a head.

But frankly all this speculation is useless. We dont know exactly what happened, we werent there. And there certainly arent enough facts out to draw a conclusion either way from what I can see.

[MadHound]

13. Glad you're not on the police force then,

For you show a distinct lack of cultural knowledge.

This man was from Southern Asia, where it is HOOOOT. I've known several people from the region, and they are continously cold all the time since they moved into northern climes. One fellow that I work with does not take off his jacket until the temp hits at least ninety five. So it could be something as simple as this man was cold.

Secondly, in the time it takes for you to pump five rounds into a prone man, you could pistol whip him, one blow if you have any sort of training, thus rendering him unconcious. Then you have somebody to question, and will possibly prevent a future attack. Dead men say nothing, and the future bomb could very well go off.

Who knows why he ran, why he wouldn't listen to the police. But to let fear and tension turn police into stone cold killers, judge, jury and executioners is simply wrong, and if this is what our society is coming to, then the terrorists have already won.

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. You appear to have unreleased knowledge of this man

Descriptions say he has southern Asian ancestry. There's no reason to assume that is the climate he's used to.

You also assume that it actually took the length of five rounds to stop him moving. I'd say the comparison to be made is the length of time it takes to shoot him once, versus the time it would take to club him into unconsciousness. I submit a bullet would be quicker, and a second bullet quicker than a second hit, and so on.

[lockdown]

17. It sounds bad, but

I think I've heard 4 or 5 eyewitness accounts and only one said they sat on him then shot, so I doubt that account and that he was restrained.

TV "experts" are saying head shots are recommended when dealing with a suicide bomber. Callous as it sounds it makes sense, the reasoning being if injured or cornered they will detonate, and shooting the torso risks detonating any explosives concealed underneath. Of course, they better be damn sure the suspect is a likely suicide bomber. I'm British, and no way would I condone such tactics unless they were based on strong evidence, not suspicion, regardless of the prevailing circumstances. Sounds like this person was already being followed before bolting into the tube station when confronted. If he was under surveillance because they had solid grounds to link him to the previous bombings or attempted bombings, and he then runs into a tube station wearing unseasonally bulky clothes, then I think their actions are justified in the current situation. But, if he was merely one of dozens or hundreds of people put under surveillance as possibly linked, or it was similarly speculative and he had no explosives, then certainly imo it should be condemned and those responsible held to account. Have to wait and see what evidence they present.

I appreciate they face high stress and difficult split second decisions, I don't envy them their task, but running away from armed police alone can't justify that response, no matter what the security situation, not without very good cause.

[warrens]

7. Heavy coat in July

I'd be plenty suspicious. There are a lot of people here who are very nearly hysterical at all times. I suspect some of them of being FRetard City trolls (go over there and read their reports; they giggle about making outrageous charges and getting "DUmmies" to agree with them; I suspect that in reality they are getting other trolls to agree with them) but there are some people here who wear tin-foil hats 24-7.

Just because we despise Smirk and Poodle does not mean we admire people who set off bombs on commuter trains. They're dangerous, hysterical people and cold-blooded murderers.

[MadHound]

14. Man from South Asia in Englan

Is probably cold, even in summer. I've known many from that region, and they are chilly until it gets well in the ninties and hundreds.

[slaveplanet]

8. nothing strange here

this is exactly what happens when a country declares WAR on a tactic.

[maxsolomon]

19. in seattle they shoot you point blank for carrying a knife & skipping.

i'm not making this up. they did this to a schizophrenic a couple years ago. killed him. never even tried to wing him.

also, they've shot & killed a crazy vet swinging a samurai sword, various crackheads, and most recently a deadbeat-dad advocate with a prop grenade at the federal courthouse. point blank, to kill.

in comparison, i feel comfortable with what the london police did. not nearly as arbitrary & capricious.

[Gormy Cuss]

21. Three officers. Five shots.

I know we can't say with any authority whether the police acted properly based on the limited press accounts but if the eyewitness is correct that the accused was shot FIVE times while pinned on the ground by three police officers it sounds like adrenalin took over from reason, which would not surprise me given the recent chain of events. If we accept this behavior without outrage we are condoning it.

Are there any reports yet of whether the police have found explosives or other nasty devices in his heavy jacket? I hope they can prove he was a terrorist and not just someone who had the dumb idea that running from the police was preferable to arrest for theft or some other minor offense.

[DiverDave]

25. Are any of you there?

Pure speculation if you weren't.
Me, I take him down, he may have a detonator in his hand.