Jump to content
Unofficial Mills

Firearms officer 'planted song titles' in evidence at shooting inquest

kyle_y

By kyle_y
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

kyle_y

kyle_y

Posted
Posted

A Metropolitan police firearms officer who may have fired the shot that killed barrister Mark Saunders has been removed from firearms duty after allegedly inserting song titles into his oral evidence at the dead man's inquest.

An examination of the transcript shows that evidence given by AZ8 contained a number of phrases which are also the titles of songs, including Enough is Enough by Donna Summer, Point of No Return by Buzzcocks, Line of Fire by Journey, Quiet Moments by Chris de Burgh, Kicking Myself by As Tall As Lions and Fuck My Old Boots by the Membranes.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/02/mark-saunders-song-titles

Personally I find this quite funny. The man has a sense of humour, but I guess it just shows lack of judgement on his part considering the environment and seriousness of the situation. Suspending him in my opinion though is a bit harsh. He just needs to be taken aside and spoken to. Unlikely but it could all be a coincidence, any one could use those choice of words. But I'd imagine it was just a bet between him and his mates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cxx666

cxx666

Posted
Posted

Its quite clever, and also rather amusing, but those titles alone might not have been spotted by anyone in a statement, he must have told someone what he had done in order for this to come to light. Telling someone while its going on is a fairly stupid thing to do :S

Not impressed with censorship

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrDoovdeHaxorz

MrDoovdeHaxorz

Posted
Posted

I daren't think how he got that last one in... but I don't see how this is a 'crime' worthy of any significant punishment. Some people are too jumpy, stuffy and jobsworthy, this saddens me in the same way it saddens me that Twitter Joke Trial went to court to waste time and taxpayer money instead of just giving him a warning and maybe some fine. :x

Seriously though, punishment fitting the scale of the crime is one thing this country f***ing fails at every time, petty crimes get overpunished while murderers and rapists etc get so many things that people who've done nothing wrong can't have and are treated relatively softly considering what scum they are and the visible, measurable harm they've caused, it's ridiculous.

Seriously, tell me what actual harm injecting a little bit of humour into something like this does. No-one noticed at the time so it didn't take away from the seriousness of the proceedings etc.

Even within the MET there are more serious offences going on, like their harrassment of photographers who are doing NOTHING wrong and are taking pictures in a public place, why don't the idiots doing THAT get suspended?

Professional eater of puppy dogs, baby heads and killer of grannies...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
E*F*4L

E*F*4L

Posted
Posted

all of them should have been locked up for murder, he was shot at least seven times by a number of different officers, not just the one he was supposed to be pointing a gun at, they didn't let his wife try to talk to him either, as for this pissing about in the court, they should be charged with perverting the course of justice & perjury.

how anyone can find this funny is beyond me.

the police are supposed to serve the public, more & more the UK police are acting like the Nazi American police.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrDoovdeHaxorz

MrDoovdeHaxorz

Posted
Posted
Well clearly his statement wouldn't have been as truthful as it should have been if he was shoe-horning lyrics into it. And he's meant to be an officer of the law. Clearly a punishable offence.

No-one's questioned the integrity and truthfullness of the actual answers, it's very possible, and most likely that he didn't actually lie?

Yes yes, why not execute him for having a sense of humour then? :rolleyes: I'd still rather see the corrupt officers that ACTUALLY lie about little things like their own application of incorrect-for-the-situation or even made up laws (Look into their harrassment/mistreatment of Jules Mattson and other innocent photographers for a start) investigated than something with no consequences like this really...

Punish him if he did kill this guy by all means, punishment for this just seems stupid to me, if he's guilty of murder, then punish THAT.

Crap like this just confirms to me why I have ZERO Confidence in the Police System in this country. Seriously, some of the things these idiots do at times make the characters in Police Squad/The Naked Gun look intelligent, competent and sane!

Professional eater of puppy dogs, baby heads and killer of grannies...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
E*F*4L

E*F*4L

Posted
Posted
No-one's questioned the integrity and truthfullness of the actual answers, it's very possible, and most likely that he didn't actually lie?

Yes yes, why not execute him then? :rolleyes:

Crap like this just confirms to me why I have ZERO Confidence in the Police System in this country. Seriously, some of the things these idiots do at times make the characters in Police Squad/The Naked Gun look intelligent, competent and sane!

a police officer that doesn't lie :hahaha:

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrDoovdeHaxorz

MrDoovdeHaxorz

Posted
Posted

Yes, but once again the punishment doesn't fit the overblown charge... this is a microcosm of our entire Police System in my experience, why don't they punish him for his REAL crime, not this petty-minded BS (that probably no-one noticed at the time anyway)?

Professional eater of puppy dogs, baby heads and killer of grannies...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kyle_y

kyle_y

Posted
  • Author
Posted
all of them should have been locked up for murder, he was shot at least seven times by a number of different officers, not just the one he was supposed to be pointing a gun at, they didn't let his wife try to talk to him either, as for this pissing about in the court, they should be charged with perverting the course of justice & perjury.

how anyone can find this funny is beyond me.

the police are supposed to serve the public, more & more the UK police are acting like the Nazi American police.

So you're a firearms officer, you and all of the many other firearms officers that are with you are armed and dealing with a drunken and depressed man who's pointing a gun at your friend and colleague. You're trained to deal with these situations. You don't know if his gun is loaded. You don't know what's going on in his head. You don't know what he wants to do, or is planning to do. All you know is what you see infront of you. A crazed man pointing a gun at your friend and colleague. Do you just stand there doing f-all in hope that the person with the gun aimed at them as able to deal with the situation themselves? Or do you handle the situation in the spare and rush of the moment in the way that you've been extensively trained to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrDoovdeHaxorz

MrDoovdeHaxorz

Posted
Posted
So you're a firearms officer, you and all of the many other firearms officers that are with you are armed and dealing with a drunken and depressed man who's pointing a gun at your friend and colleague. You're trained to deal with these situations. You don't know if his gun is loaded. You don't know what's going on in his head. You don't know what he wants to do, or is planning to do. All you know is what you see infront of you. A crazed man pointing a gun at your friend and colleague. Do you just stand there doing f-all in hope that the person with the gun aimed at them as able to deal with the situation themselves? Or do you handle the situation in the spare and rush of the moment in the way that you've been extensively trained to?

Exactly. These are specialists but hindsight is giving all the answers they just didn't have at the time.

Professional eater of puppy dogs, baby heads and killer of grannies...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
E*F*4L

E*F*4L

Posted
Posted
So you're a firearms officer, you and all of the many other firearms officers that are with you are armed and dealing with a drunken and depressed man who's pointing a gun at your friend and colleague. You're trained to deal with these situations. You don't know if his gun is loaded. You don't know what's going on in his head. You don't know what he wants to do, or is planning to do. All you know is what you see infront of you. A crazed man pointing a gun at your friend and colleague. Do you just stand there doing f-all in hope that the person with the gun aimed at them as able to deal with the situation themselves? Or do you handle the situation in the spare and rush of the moment in the way that you've been extensively trained to?

they were not standing there in plain view of him for a start, furthermore he was shot at least seven times from apparently four different positions, they all fired at the same-time when he could have only been pointing his shotgun at one of them, in which case the round or rounds from a shotgun wouldn't have hit any of the officers as they were to far away or hidden so he couldn't see where they were, also Specialist Firearms Officers use guns like sniper rifles these have scopes so looking through one you wouldn't know exactly where he was pointing the gun, of course you would see if he was pointing at you, but not the other officers you would maybe know roughly their position but not exact, enough in any-case to know if he was aiming at them.

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Uk2qtCGqio?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Uk2qtCGqio?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

maybe if they had allowed his wife to talk to him like she wanted to do via the phone the police were using, this wouldn't have happened, the only person he was a threat to was himself.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kyle_y

kyle_y

Posted
  • Author
Posted
they were not standing there in plain view of him for a start, furthermore he was shot at least seven times from apparently four different positions, they all fired at the same-time when he could have only been pointing his shotgun at one of them, in which case the round or rounds from a shotgun wouldn't have hit any of the officers as they were to far away or hidden so he couldn't see where they were, also Specialist Firearms Officers use guns like sniper rifles these have scopes so looking through one you wouldn't know exactly where he was pointing the gun, of course you would see if he was pointing at you, but not the other officers you would maybe know roughly their position but not exact, enough in any-case to know if he was aiming at them.

<EMBED height=385 type=application/x-shockwave-flash width=640 src=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Uk2qtCGqio?fs=1&hl=en_US allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></EMBED>

maybe if they had allowed his wife to talk to him like she wanted to do via the phone the police were using, this wouldn't have happened, the only person he was a threat to was himself.

I do agree about the wife bit, I remember hearing about that not too long after.

And about being shot from 4 different positions at the same time - they all reacted quickly to the situation unfolding infront of them, and they all happened to be very swift and instinctive in their reaction meaning the guns were all fired at the same time. It happens, just like in a game of Snap. It's not a Charles de Menezes-esque scenario when they all just stood over him shooting continually after failing to declare themselves as police when chasing him with guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • xxladybarefootxx
      Scott v Matt and Mollie

      By xxladybarefootxx · Posted

      I quite quickly gave up on Scott’s show on R2 as I realised it wasn’t my kind of vibe. I do listen to the Scott Mills weekly to catch up, because I still think Scott is great, but there is just something missing (for example, he played out some clips recently of the old sleep recording app from the R1 days, and didn’t play ‘go and open the window Garry’ - or if he did, it didn’t make it to the podcast.) I don’t see them changing it now or making it any ‘younger’ than it is.   Matt & Mollie in the afternoon is something that I’m really looking forward to. They are such an interesting and funny listen. It has given me a different dilemma though, as 1pm has been the perfect time for me to catch up on the Capital breakfast show and takes me perfectly to the end of my working day, so now I’ll probably have to forego listening to that and stick with R1 for Matt & Mollie. These shows need podcasts because it’s already giving me fomo. 
    • AndyK77
      Scott v Matt and Mollie

      By AndyK77 · Posted

      Even for the older Radio 1 listeners (of which there are still quite a few) Scott’s show doesn’t feel quite right.  (That’s nothing on Scott who sounds good but more the station sound and content). Since moving to Capital Breakfast I haven’t been listening to much Radio 1.  I always found the shows outside of Breakfast and Drive more wallpaper due to my working day and the show content of RMC and Dean and Vicky so Capital is just background noise to me after enjoying Breakfast.
    • onlyME
      Scott v Matt and Mollie

      By onlyME · Posted

      I love Scott but if you're a 20 or 30 something that enjoyed his last few years of Radio 1 the Radio 2 show just doesn't translate. Stars from Neighbours or 90s singers just aren't my cup of tea and I can't get enthused about some has been at Radio 2 in the Park or some country music countdown.  Until that changes I will probably more likely listen to Matt and Mollie.  The Steve Wright fans think Radio 2 has turned into Radio 1 but it has a long way to go to win over the older R1 audience. 
    • radio247
      Scott v Matt and Mollie

      By radio247 · Posted

      Radio 2 brought in Scott to bring the afternoon audience age down, but I feel with Matt and Mollie replacing Dean and Vicky they're going to be competing for a similar audience. Will Scott's show evolve to bring in more listeners or do you think they will be comfortable with the audience they currently have?
    • Jono
      Radio 1 cinema advert

      By Jono · Posted

      Yes I'm the same with 6Music. Huw Stephens offers something different. 
    • BBCAaron
      Radio 1 cinema advert

      By BBCAaron · Posted

      They are an answer. I do listen to 6 Music quite a bit but kind of feel like it isn’t for me unlike the New Music Fix Daily, Huw Stephens who I’d happily listen to. Think it’s a generational thing and music preference. But it’s like how 1 Xtra cut down Snoochie Shy’s nightly show to just Monday and with Wednesday and Thursday with just playlist programme. I just miss the days of having more choice of that time of night.
    • Old Codger Fan
      Radio 1 cinema advert

      By Old Codger Fan · Posted

      Practically speaking, Riley & Coe on 6Music is the answer to that problem - but I get your overall point.
    • BBCAaron
      Radio 1 cinema advert

      By BBCAaron · Posted

      Yes and thats the huge selling point after 6pm as always has been in the evening. As when I started listening to radio 1 about eleven twelve years ago its the station that got me into music new and familiar artists and bands. I think the issue with a lot of the new music shows being crammed in length of the shows and not all is live there’s less chance for a presenter to tell you about the band or artist or have the impression of chatting to the listener by reading out texts and emails or including voice notes. I’m really enjoying Jack Saunders’ new music show as thats how you do a show like that on Radio 1 good mix of genres but from 10pm onwards you don’t have the presenter chatting to the listener or that live feel as sometimes you need at that time.
    • R1Fan1
      Jordan North's first Capital Radio breakfast show

      By R1Fan1 · Posted

      Given one of yesterday’s ‘bangers’ was Noah Kahan’s Stick Season, I doubt it.
    • R1Fan1
      Radio 1 Schedule Changes

      By R1Fan1 · Posted

      No chart show on the 24th May because of Big Weekend.
    • radio247
      Ask Chris and Jordan

      By radio247 · Posted

      How has it been working early mornings as a parent, Chris? Is it harder to juggle than the 1-4 slot?
    • radio247
      Radio 1's Big Weekend 2024

      By radio247 · Posted

      I still think Dua Lipa could make the line-up. She's in the Live Lounge soon. Would be a scoop if they had two of the key Glastonbury performers.
    • radio247
      Jordan North's first Capital Radio breakfast show

      By radio247 · Posted

      Is the three bangers after nine idea meant to compete with Ten Minute Takeover? 
    • Lily Georgia
      Radio 1 Schedule Changes

      By Lily Georgia · Posted

      Connor Coates is in for Charlie Hedges on Saturday 18th May. Kerrie Cosh is in for Jess on Sunday 19th May.
    • radio247
      Radio 1 cinema advert

      By radio247 · Posted

      But if Radio 1's big selling point is new music it's strange. Clara fell a bit flat in comparison to her predecessors because she wasn't shaped in the same way as Annie or Zane.
×
×
  • Create New...