| Mark Saunders coroner: police firearms guidelines should be simplified Senior officers must use common sense instead of relying on protocols, home secretary is toldComplex police guidelines on the use of firearms should be simplified, a coroner has told the home secretary, Theresa May, in the wake of the Mark Saunders inquest.Dr Paul Knapman, who oversaw the three-week inquiry into the death of the 32-year-old family lawyer, said reams of paperwork detailing firearms protocol left police marksmen unable "to see the wood for the trees".Police should also consider bringing in a "very senior" and experienced officer, from any force, and give them "huge authority" to take overall charge of difficult and prolonged incidents such as that which led to the death of Saunders.That officer could review tactics, take a fresh look, and have the confidence not to be too "risk averse", he said.His recommendations come after a jury at Westminster coroner's court found that Saunders was "lawfully killed" when shot by Metropolitan police snipers as he waved his shotgun from a window of his London home.The talented lawyer, who struggled with alcoholism and was drunk, had fired his legally-held shotgun out of his window several times after an afternoon drinking binge. Seven officers fired on him, with five bullets hitting and three causing fatal wounds to his head, heart and liver.The jury highlighted major failings in the police operation during the five-hour siege in Chelsea on 6 May 2008, including confusion among senior police ranks and a lack of consideration for the barrister's vulnerable state.Writing today to May, Knapman outlined six manuals detailing protocol for firearms officers. "My perception is that 'not being able to see the wood for the trees' may be a problem", he said. Senior officers must encourage "more common sense rather than slavish adherence to written documents and protocols".He said the home secretary might take the view that these documents, which run to hundreds of pages in total, could be "amalgamated, simplified or dispensed with"."It may be that there is merit in encouraging one or two shorter documents and all documents set out in simple and unsophisticated language minimising jargon."Knapman's exasperation over the length of police manuals and complicated language used was evident during the inquest as an Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) expert tried to explain firearms tactics and guidelines to the 11 jury members.The inquest heard that Acpo guidelines to deal with vulnerable people, including drunk people such as Saunders, were not employed on the night he died. These guidelines suggest that officers could take effective cover, back off (if safe), seek early negotiation and allow "time and space" to the subject. This could encourage "tension to diffuse", the effects of alcohol or drugs to wear off, and the subject's mental or emotional state to stabilise.Saunders's home was surrounded by 59 armed officers with more than 100 guns. A police helicopter was hovering overhead and powerful halogen lights were turned on, flooding his flat with light in the minutes before he was shot.Knapman also wrote to the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, underlining the jury's verdict that there was "confusion" in police ranks during the operation and that "insufficient weight" was given to Saunders's vulnerable state, although these factors were not found likely to have contributed to his cause of death.Drawing Stephenson's attention to the "blurring" of the distinction between the key roles of firearms tactical adviser and firearms bronze commander on the night, he said: "I do so for any action you may think appropriate."Stephenson had initially denied any confusion, but after evidence at the inquest acknowledged there was confusion on this point.Of the police's failure to fully consider Saunders's drunken state with regard to the "nature, proximity and numbers" in the police's containment positions around his home, Knapman said: "I bring this to your attention realising it is a very difficult area for whatever action you may think fit."The Acpo president, Sir Hugh Orde, and the chief inspector of constabulary, Sir Denis O'Connor, have in the past highlighted the issue of unnecessary and often confusing police guidelines, and said they must be cut. Senior members of the coalition government have also campaigned on giving police discretion to make decisions away from rigid guidelines.Mark SaundersPoliceCrimeCaroline Daviesguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Scotland 'can't afford the Union' The UK coalition government's approach to public spending is strongly criticised at the SNP conference. bbc.co.uk |
Peers suspended from House of Lords over expenses claims Labour peers Lady Uddin and Lord Paul, and crossbencher Lord Bhatia, suspended after upper chamber approves damning judgments of its privileges and conduct committeeThree peers were given lengthy suspensions from the House of Lords today after wrongly claiming thousands of pounds in expenses.Labour peers Lady Uddin and Lord Paul and crossbencher Lord Bhatia were suspended after the upper chamber approved the damning judgments of its privileges and conduct committee.Uddin was suspended until the end of the parliamentary session in 2012 and told to repay £125,349.10.Bhatia was sidelined for eight months and has already repaid more than £27,000.Paul was suspended for four months and has already returned £41,982.The sanctions are the toughest imposed on misbehaving members for more than 300 years.Uddin and Bhatia were found to have acted "not in good faith" by incorrectly declaring their main homes in order to claim generous overnight allowances.An initial investigation decided that Paul had also acted "not in good faith" in his home designations.However, the committee rejected this finding on appeal, accepting that although "utterly unreasonable" and "negligent", he had not been "dishonest" and had already returned £41,982 last year.In Uddin and Bhatia's cases, the sanctions are significantly heavier than those meted out to Labour members Lord Truscott and Lord Taylor of Blackburn after a political lobbying scandal last year.The pair were excluded for around six months and became the first to be suspended from the upper house since the 17th century.The expenses abuses centre around the allowance of £174 a day that was, until recently, available to peers whose main home was outside the M25.Uddin claimed more than £100,000 between 2005 and 2010 by stating that her main residence was a small flat in Maidstone, Kent, rather than her family home in east London.Bhatia had claimed £27,446 in expenses on the basis that his main home was a small flat occupied by his brother in Reigate, Surrey, even though he and his wife were listed on the electoral roll at their long-standing address in Hampton, south-west London.Paul, a steel magnate and one of Britain's wealthiest men, lived in London but designated a one-bedroom flat in an Oxfordshire hotel that he owned as his main home.All three also claimed travel expenses.A Labour spokesman confirmed that Paul had resigned his membership, while Uddin had been suspended amid moves to expel her.Before the upper house unanimously agreed to approve the suspensions, a prominent Labour peer raised the issue of racial bias.Lord Alli said he was not accusing Lords authorities of racism, but added: "It cannot have escaped your attention that the only three members of the house who were referred to the committee for privileges and conduct and subsequently investigated under these procedures were all Asian."The multi-millionaire media entrepreneur called for the leader of the house, Lord Strathclyde, to look at the issue and "if there has been inconsistency on the basis of race or otherwise" to allow peers to reconsider the sanctions.But Lord Brabazon of Tara, who chairs the conduct committee, told Alli that Uddin and Paul had been referred to the committee rather than being cleared by the clerk of the parliaments because they had been subject to formal police investigation, while Bhatia had failed to provide a written assurance so his case was also elevated."It wasn't because the three peers were Asians in the least bit, and I don't think there's anyone on the committee or sub-committee who would not endorse that completely," he said.Meanwhile, a former close aide to David Cameron was today ordered to apologise after claiming for both his homes on parliamentary expenses.Andrew MacKay made a "serious misjudgment" in claiming allowances so that the taxpayer was in effect funding two properties where he lived with wife, Julie Kirkbride, when they were MPs.The Commons standards and privileges committee said MacKay, who stepped down from his Bracknell seat at the election, should apologise in writing. The committee did not consider whether Kirkbride had breached the rules. However, it separately cleared the ex-Bromsgrove MP of wrongdoing in increasing her mortgage claims to build an extension to accommodate her brother.House of LordsMPs' expensesHouse of Commonsguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Northumberland: 'The worst I've ever seen it' Drivers in Scotland have faced long delays and road closures as snow continues to fall across the country. bbc.co.uk |
British Students Protest Education Cuts It was the second such action this month to protest a drop in education spending and an increase in university costs. nytimes.com |