Shooting to Kill. (english)
profrv@(nospam)fuckmicrosoft.com 5:48am Sat Jan 4 '03
article#226688
Some of Arbusto's friends and predators are over in jolly auld england
getting tips on diplock courts,assassination politics and suburb supression
by military means.Learning how to lie about and sell the process from
experts with experience.Full spectrum dominence STASI-UK style.
SHOOTING TO KILL
Crime reporters are a curious breed. The majority are local hacks who
report whatever happens under their noses, and hope the more salacious the
story, the safer their job - at least for the next few months. There are a
few though, who specialise in propaganda for the police. They conjure up
folk devils like the Adamses, the Arifs, the Yardies and the Triads so that
the Police Federation can call for a recruitment drive and the Michael
Howards and Jack Straws of this world can be given cover while they further
curb our "civil liberties." Some who come to mind include TV journalist
Martin Short, The Guardian's Nick Hopkins, and former Time Out hack, now at
The Observer, Tony Thompson. Usually they just recycle what Scotland Yard
tells them - for example Thompson had a piece in The Observer on 28/11/99
"Muggers Enter the Big League" about how muggers are �??turning to armed
robbery and aggravated violence�?? because "there has been a steep decline
in the number of stop-and-searches since the publication of the report into
the Stephen Lawrence case."
Just to refresh our memories, the issues in the McPherson report were l)
racism and 2) police competence. Between the lines then, is the coded
warning that most violent crime is committed by blacks and because the
police have been accused of racism they can't tackle the real issue -
violent black crime. Hence the use of the description "mugger" in
juxtaposition to "armed robbery." On any other level, the story makes no
sense. No evidence is produced to support the contentions that 1) muggers
are turning to more violent forms of crime or 2) that "crime figures are
going up." The only point to the story is to allow Scotland Yard to smear
the Lawrence inquiry agenda as a means of getting itself off the hook.
Once in a while though, our Tony goes too far, says a little too much.
Maybe because he spends so much of his time hanging round the Old Bill he
forgets what 's in the public domain and what he 's supposed to keep to the
canteen. His article in The Observer of 3/10/ 99, "High-Tech Crime of the
Future Will Be All Mod Cons" is mostly a fantasy about "cyber-crime",
probably to prepare the way for new curbs on privacy on the Net. It does,
though, contain one very curious statement; "Increased penalties for
carrying firearms, along with an (sic) greatly increased likelihood of
being shot dead by armed police will lead to more criminals using
non-lethal weapons." Just an aside, really, nothing more. "...a greatly
increased likelihood of being shot dead by armed police..." The police, we
are told, have clear rules of engagement. They have to give a warning
before they employ their weapons. There are just over 2,000 officers
authorised to carry weapons in the London Metropolitan Police area. The
numbers haven't changed much since the early 1990s. So why should there be
an increased likelihood of being shot dead by armed police now compared to
the 60s heyday of the Great Train Robbers or the "Balaclavaed pomp" of the
70s (to quote former Guardian journalist Duncan Campbell)?
This article contends that the reason is simple: since at least the
mistaken identity shooting of Stephen Waldorf (believed by police to have
been bank robber David Martin) on 14 January 1983 the police have employed
a policy of premeditated use of lethal force in situations of armed
robbery. A shoot-to-kill policy has been in operation on the UK mainland to
rival that carried out by the British Army in the Six Counties, and the use
of such force and its wider implications should concern all of us who seek
to effect positive social change.
The use of a shoot-to-kill strategy to deliberately target and execute
Republican activists in the six counties has been identified by the
families and friends of those murdered by the British state in such
circumstances in the north of Ireland. In 1977 Lord Justice Gibson
determined that "In law you may effect an arrest in the last extreme by
shooting him (the suspect) dead. That's still an arrest. "Between 1987-1991
nineteen people were killed by under-cover SAS and RUC units in "disputed"
circumstances . In April 1988 the SAS killed 3 IRA members who had hijacked
a car in Omagh. Michael Gerard Harte, his brother Martin, and Brian Mullin,
were ambushed by an SAS team, which left by helicopter immediately after
the killings. In 1990 Desmond Grew and Martin McCaughey were killed by the
SAS at Loughall in County Armagh. In December 1990 Fergal Caraher was
killed at a checkpoint in South Armagh ,when Royal Marines opened fire
without warning. In 1982, John Stalker, former deputy chief constable of
Manchester, was dispatched to investigate six killings by an SAS trained
RUC squad .He concluded that there was, if not policy, then at least an
"inclination...to shoot suspects dead without warning rather than arrest
them." In January 1990, that "inclination" was shown to apply to "ordinary
decent criminals" as well as to Republicans.
On 13/1/90 Edward Hale, John McNeill and Peter Thompson were shot dead by
undercover soldiers while robbing a bookmakers in West Belfast. The men
were "armed "with an imitation sub-machine gun and a starting pistol. No
warnings were given nor any attempt made to effect an arrest. No
explanation was offered as to why the armed undercover unit was in the area
at the time, or why the driver of the car, clearly unarmed, was killed. One
eyewitness claimed that a second unit was also involved; that a white
Renault stopped and a man and woman gave cover to the undercover unit that
killed Hale, McNeill and Thompson. The killings gave warning that the
deployment of lethal force perfected against the nationalist community
would be effected across the board, as the state saw fit.
The operation of a shoot-to-kill strategy on the mainland predates the
murder of Hale, McNeill and Thompson. The number of killings of armed
robbers carried out by the police under "disputed" circumstances is too
great to ignore. Simply put, too many have been killed to accept the
tragedy of coincidence as an adequate explanation. The evidence of strategy
is unavoidable.
In 1983 David Martin escaped from Marlborough Street magistrates court,
where he faced charges in relation to a number of robberies. A tip-off led
police to target a yellow Mini in Earls Court on 14th January 1983.
Mistaking a film technician, Stephen Waldorf for David Martin, they opened
fire on the Mini, hitting Waldorf five times before dragging him out of the
car and pistol-whipping him on the ground. Waldorf recalled no warning -
the operation was, clearly, intended to kill.
In 1985 Inspector Douglas Lovelock shot and crippled Cherry Groce at her
home in Brixton. Searching for one of her relatives, Lovelock shot "the
first black shape I saw."
In February 1987 Dennis Bergin was shot dead by police staking out a London
museum. At the inquest it was revealed that Bergin was shot by a police
marksman who had not shouted out a warning before opening fire. The
marksman claimed to have shouted out a warning after the third shot, having
"not had time" up till that point.
In July 1987 Michael Flynn and Nicholas Payne were shot dead by police
during an attempted robbery of a wages van at an abattoir in Shooters Hill.
In November 1987 Tony Ash was shot dead in a wages snatch at the Bejam
supermarket in Woolwich, south east London. Ronnie Easterbrook was shot and
wounded. A Thames Television crew was on hand, to ensure a very public
execution. Again, Easterbrook recalled no warning being given . (Ronnie
Easterbrook was given life for his part in the robbery and is clear that he
was not supposed to have survived the Flying Squad ambush. In 1997 Ronnie
Easterbrook went on hunger strike after being told he would never be
released. Ronnie tried to escape from custody by blowing up a prison van
during his trial and went on a number of dirty protests to publicise his
case. If ever anyone deserved to be called "staunch" it was Ronnie.)
On 13 April 1989 Jimmy Farrell and Terry Dewsnap were shot dead by PT17
marksmen during a post office robbery in North Harrow. John Gorman, who
survived the ambush, told the inquest that he never heard the warning
"armed police" at any stage. He was shot 4 times in the head, a foot, and
twice in the arm.
In 1990 Kenny Baker was shot dead by PT17 near Reigate in Surrey, during an
attempted raid on a Securicor van. Mehmet Arif, who was the getaway driver,
heard no warning from the police. Kenny Baker was shot in the stomach and
the face.
In a shoot out near the post office in Brockham, near Dorking, in August
1992 police injured both the robbery gang and members of the public. The
officer in charge was quoted as stating that while he was sorry for any
injuries to the public, "sometimes it was necessary to fight fire with fire."
In 1995 David Ewin, an unarmed suspected car thief was shot and killed by
PC Patrick Hodgson. He was shot twice with a 9mm Glock pistol while he
tried to drive away.
In 1998 armed police in Hastings entered the home of James Ashley. He was
naked and unarmed. He was shot in the chest and died at the scene.
So far this year, there have been 3 fatal shootings by police - Derek
Bateman in Dorking on 22/6/99, Anthony Kitts in Falmouth, Cornwall on
10/4/99 and an unarmed man in Hackney on 22/9/99.
The killings recorded above - their circumstances, the fact that in every
case those left alive had no record of any warning having been given -
point inescapably towards the conclusion that what John Stalker
euphemistically described as an "inclination... to shoot suspects dead
without warning rather than arrest them" has been practised in mainland
Britain by armed units of police. If this contention is accepted, the
question then begging is...why?
MORE ON...
http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=226688&group=webcast
