Police appear to have executed a terrorist suspect in cold blood. Eye witnesses say that police chased a terrorist suspect onto an underground train, pushed him to the ground, without him resisting and then shot him 5 times.
Let me start with a joke:
Copper 1 to executioner copper : “why did you shoot him 5 times as he lay unresisting and helpless?”
executioner copper: “I ran out of bullets”
Was this a bad thing to do? The hang ‘em high brigade are already saying “he did the right thing. Can’t take chances. He was only a terrorist.” And although nobody is proferring it yet I suspect the SAS Gibraltar defence will soon be offered: “he didn’t appear to be resisting but for all we know he had a detonator in his pocket”.
Much will depend on the detailed facts but if a man is prone on the ground, under your control and not able to press some phantom detonator then this is clearly murder. It may be the police panicked and were scared but that’s not an excuse: then they get extensive training so they ought to be able to cope, if they can’t cope then they shouldn’t be armed.
Is it ever acceptable to kill a suspected bomber when you are in hot pursuit? yes possibly. If the man refuses orders & if he continues moving (for real not just as an excuse) then I’d say it was fair enough. The trouble is that it will be politically expedient to whitewash this incident if it is police murder. That damages us all. The police are not supposed to act as a bunch of hot headed killers who take the law into their own hands, we are supposed to be fighting to protect the rule of law.
I’m not judging yet and I don’t say there is any shoot to kill policy but a man in a responsible position must take the rap if he fucks up. Of course with Tony Blair as a police role model you might understand if the principle has become more honoured in the breach than the observance.
No comments yet.