| Wife of Mark Saunders accepts inquest verdict that he was killed lawfully Elizabeth Saunders 'respects' jury findings, while parents and siblings of barrister shot in Chelsea police siege stay silentSince her husband's death two years ago Elizabeth Saunders has been determined it should be fully investigated. Today she accepted and respected the jury's verdict after a hearing of almost three weeks, which she attended every day.In a statement, the 42-year-old barrister said: "From the day Mark died I have been committed to ensuring that the circumstances of his death should be subjected to a throrough and independent investigation. I did not approach the process with any pre-determined conclusions and I respect the verdict of the jury who have carefully considered all the evidence."I spoke at length about Mark when I gave my evidence. He was a loving and much loved husband, son, brother and friend. He is very much missed by all who knew and cared about him."In legal submissions during the inquest, Caroline Saunders's counsel, Patrick Gibbs QC, said: "Mrs Saunders, coming into this inquest, held no preconceived views of what appropriate verdicts might be. She simply wanted to hear the officers who killed her husband, and those that presided over his death, explain why it was absolutely necessary to kill him."Mark Saunders's parents, Rodney and Rosemary, and his sister, Charlotte, left the inquest without making any comment. A source close to the family said they remained "extremely upset" and were considering what to do next. One person who has supported them through the hearing said: "It is some sort of closure but the feelings are very raw."Saunders's family have been highly criticial of the police in the past, questioning why it was necessary to shoot him, and have found themselves in conflict with the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).In September 2008, five months after his death, Charlotte Saunders went to the high court seeking a judicial review in an attempt to have the IPCC inquiry declared unlawful.The family argued that the practice of allowing firearms officers to confer about their version of events gave rise to the risk of collusion. At the time Charlotte Saunders said it "went against any course of natural justice". She launched an attack on the IPCC for "viciously and falsely" accusing the family of leaking material from a police video of the shooting.They launched a high court claim that echoed concerns about police procedures in the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell tube station in July 2005. Although the Saunders family's case was dismissed by Mr Justice Underhill, he did express concerns about the practice of allowing officers to confer.Shortly afterwards the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) issued revised guidelines that stopped short of banning conferring but said officers should document any discussions.The IPCC report into the shootings is to be released in light of evidence given to the inquest.PoliceCrimeGun crimeCaroline Daviesguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Plan limits pensions tax relief The amount of tax-free income that savers can put into pensions has been sharply restricted by the government. bbc.co.uk |
7/7 inquest: doctor could offer 'only comfort' Dr Quaghebeur praised for courage by coroner, but speaks of anger at people taking photographs after bombA doctor who stayed behind to comfort those trapped in the Circle line train after the Aldgate bombing spoke yesterday of her distress at being alone and with "nothing to give" to the injured and dying .Gerardine Quaghebeur, a consultant neuro-radiologist at the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford, described her anger at seeing passengers around her taking photographs after Shehzad Tanweer set off his bomb, claiming seven lives.Quaghebeur, 50, told the inquests into the 52 people who died in the 7 July bombings how she had remained in the carriage after another survivor pleaded with her: "You're not going to leave us?"Despite requests from people she thought were London Underground staff to evacuate, she told Crystal Main, who was trapped: "No, no – I'll stay."Main, a professional dancer who was injured, told Quaghebeur she was "very concerned" that she couldn't move because she had someone over her. "She couldn't move and I couldn't see any way of moving her," said Quaghebeur.Quaghebeur, who cradled the dying Carrie Taylor in her arms for an hour, told the inquest she felt she was of little use to the injured. She said: "Yes I'm a doctor, but what can you do in a situation like that? You can't do anything. You're completely on your own. You have no first aid to give. You have no airway to give. You have nothing to give other than to comfort the people who are still alive."She said that she wasn't sure whether Taylor, 24, who was bleeding and had a "probable" head injury and internal abdominal injury, would have survived had help arrived sooner.In a poignant exchange, Taylor's father, John, told her: "It's clear to me now that the first lady you went to was Carrie, my daughter."Asked whether the main reason she stayed was to give comfort to her, she replied: "It was to comfort her and to comfort some other people in the carriage and not leave them alone."Taylor said simply: "Thank you very much for that."She replied: "Sorry about your daughter."The inquests have heard that Quaghebeur shouted while looking after Taylor, "Get me a medic. This woman has only minutes to live if I don't get a medic." Asked about this, she said: "I don't recall saying that, but it's quite possible I did. I did at one stage get a bit distressed."It's possible that if people had got off the train earlier, they may have been alive getting off the train. I still very much doubt whether the outcome would be any different."Taylor asked her: "It was your opinion that Carrie would not have survived unless she got medical aid immediately?"She answered: "Nobody would survive an injury like that without aid. I still don't know whether she would have survived if aid had come earlier."Lady Justice Hallet told her: "I know it was awful for you, but I think you underestimate the importance of what you did achieve and you offered comfort and assistance to some people in dire distress and dire circumstances. In my judgment, you behaved with great courage, determination and humanity and there are a number of people who have very great cause to be grateful to you. So thank you."Earlier, Taylor asked another survivor who helped his daughter whether she was still alive when he left the wrecked carriage. Melvin Finn told the court that her eyes were closed but she "appeared to be alive". He and Quaghebeur had tried to support her torso and neck, he said.Asked by Taylor whether his daughter had said anything or murmured, he said: "No, absolutely nothing, nothing at all."The inquests, which are expected to last five months, are looking at whether the emergency services' response was adequate and whether the security agencies could have prevented the attacks.The inquests continue.7 July London attacksLondonUK security and terrorismKaren McVeighguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Do children know the cost of Christmas? With little more than eight weeks to Christmas, the Toy Retailers' Association has come up with the 12 toys they think will be on children's wish list. bbc.co.uk |
Small business hit by "extortionate costs" of pension enrollment Small businesses will be hit by "extortionate costs" as the Government introduces its auto-enrollment pension rules, industry leaders have warned. telegraph.co.uk |