From: "Martyn", [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here's some interesting reading from http://www.polfed.org/main_frame.htm Police Magazine July 2000 NOW THEY WANT BLOOD! By Colin Johnson The police service will select authorised firearms officers (AFO) and train them to use firearms in the hope that they will never use them. They give them the equipment, resources and backing until the day they actually go out and do what is asked of them. As a result of any police-shooting incident an investigation will commence. It will be carried out by a PCA appointed investigating officer (IO) from an outside force who will have little experience of investigating police-shootings, if any. A head of Complaints and Discipline or the head of CID may be involved in the investigation and will bring with them their experiences in those fields. The investigating team may have little understanding of police firearms training operations and tactics when they take over the investigation. Picture this, your police service has selected one of your best officers to be authorised to carry a firearm. One day after a number of years of performing firearm duty, that officer responds to a call from other officers to a firearms incident. Members of the public and police are in immediate danger. Later you are called to attend a police station because that officer has discharged their firearm. What would you expect to see? Now let me paint a hypothetical situation. There is the officer standing on a piece of brown paper only wearing their underwear and socks their uniform or clothes along with their shoes or boots have been taken for forensic examination. Their firearms and all other police equipment also been seized. Standing next to them are two people, both wearing surgical breathing masks and protective gloves, one is stabbing your officers hands, the other one is a doctor with a syringe removing blood from the officers arm. The room is full of people investigating the shooting. You turn to your officer and ask them what is going on and they reply �I thought he was going to kill me so I shot him.� You ask one of the investigating officers �Why are you taking blood from the officer?�. The reply you receive is: �I�ve asked the officer if they would give blood and he/she consented�. You repeat the question �But why?� You then hear the reply �Because in two years time if someone suggests that the officer had been drinking we can answer that question. Besides it�s in their interest to do so and I have a duty to investigate all aspects of the shooting incident�. It may be that the investigating officer has heard or been told about something about firearms and alcohol written in the ACPO manual of guidance (ACPO manual is subject to public interest immunity). One thing is for sure, if they follow the fictional case I have already illustrated the investigating officers have not read or understood the content of it. If the blood is being taken to check the officers� sobriety then does this not mean that it is being taken for a possible discipline offence? Where in the discipline code or Home Office guidelines does it allow for this? If it is being taken to prove or disprove a criminal offence then what power under law does the Investigating officer have to even request blood. Then the IO must comply with the terms of PACE. Even more importantly, what is the legal status of the officer who fired the shots? Is he/she a suspect for a criminal offence? If the IO has any suspicions then they should at the earliest stage issue a regulation 9 notice. The officers will know that their actions are subject to an investigation. Should the service of regulation 9 notices be a matter of course? Some people may suggest that we do not want to go down the route of treating police officers that discharge firearms as criminals. My experience of representing dozens of officers who have fired operationally is that in some cases they are treated as suspects, the procedures are disguised to obtain evidence by consent. Make no mistake, any evidence obtained at that stage would be admissible in a court should the officer face any criminal charges. I would advise any officer finding him or herself in this situation to ask the investigating officer making a request for blood why do they need it. If it is a matter of sobriety then why can�t it be dealt with like any other allegation of that nature? If no one is making the allegation at the time why is the investigating officer concerning him or herself with it. Surely calling a doctor to examine the officer is the common sense approach. If the IO believes that the police officer has been drinking alcohol then they must deal with it by using the discipline regulation at the time not wait two years for some to make a spurious allegation. If it is a matter that the officer has consumed alcohol that has had an effect on their judgement then I am sorry to say that after a shooting it�s far to late a stage to be concerned about it. Procedures are laid down for the issue of firearms to police officers; and safe guards are in place; perhaps the blood test should be taken at that point? I know of cases where all the AFOs near to the scene of a police-shooting incident were required to give blood even though they hadn�t fired shots. Some AFOs that were not in the same street when the shots were fired and took no part in the incident, others had not even taken firearms out of their holsters. The only reason that blood was taken from them was because they were carrying firearms at the time. Why wasn�t the same request made of the unarmed officers at the scene? So what is consent? A police officer has just shot someone maybe the person has died or is likely to die as a result of the injuries; this will have an effect on the officer. Telling officers if they want to carry a firearm you will submit to blood tests or I am investigating the shooting of a man and I want to take blood from you, will you give blood? Is not putting the officer in a position of being able to unequivocal consent. It has been said to me that lawyers or barristers would draw inference from the fact that an officer refused to give blood. Police officers have no legal obligation to supply blood in such circumstances in the first place, what lawyer is going to draw inference from someone complying with the law. If the IO is investigating all aspects of the shooting incident then why is it only the officers carrying firearms were asked to give blood what about the officers first at the scene, what about the tactical advisor or the bronze and silver commanders? What about the officer�s religion or domestic situation or whether the officer had drunk too much coffee that day effecting his judgement? Where will the line be drawn? My point is simple; I believe that police officers consent to give blood because they feel it is easier than questioning the actions of an IO. Investigating officers should explain why they want blood and what legal power they have to make such requests also that the officer has the right to refuse to give blood and no inference can be taken from their decision. If you trust someone to carry a firearm with all of the operational restrictions, guidelines and orders that go with it, why do officers have to prove after a police firearm has been discharged that they were fit to do their extremely difficult duty. I am teetotal and carry a firearm, convince me I need a blood test! - end - There is also the Federation's view on the "Gun Culture" of the UK noting the increase in an article "FEDERATION CALLS FOR GUNLAW CHANGES" Attempts by gun enthusiasts to get around current laws and the trend for some to be increasingly militaristic suggests the time has come for Parliament to bring in an entirely new Firearms Act, the first since 1968, the Police Federation has told the Home Affairs Select Committee inquiries into the control of firearms. - end - Just go to the Police Federation page and search "firearms" Who's is watching the watchers????? Keep the faith Martyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________________________________ T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
