Union defends officer over shop shooting

From ABC, May 2, 2007

UNION DEFENDS OFFICER OVER SHOP SHOOTING

The Queensland Police Union has defended the actions of an officer who shot a man dead to end a hostage drama in the state's south-east.
This morning's incident at a convenience store near Maryborough was over within minutes.
A man armed with a knife took seven people captive before stabbing a 21-year-old male employee in the neck.
The worker is recovering in hospital after surgery.
The offender, who is yet to be identified, was shot dead after running at police.
Union spokesman Denis Fitzpatrick says the officer had no choice.
"If that officer did not take that action, there would have been more people either killed or injured as a result of this man's behaviour," Mr Fitzpatrick said.
Superintendent Andy Morrow says there will be a thorough investigation.
"The full circumstances surrounding the discharge of the firearm will of course be investigated comprehensively but at this stage, the officer is being offered the full support and counselling that the service is able to provide," he said.

Click to expand...

Do-gooders, armchair interpretators of law with no time constraints, will grill split second decisions for months.

Plain pathetic.

Notice the heading?
The big powers that be are trying to influence our thinking.

Happy,

I can understand your comments, however I don't agree with your assertions.

Yes, Police sometimes have to make decisions in difficult circumstances, and sometimes this does involve the use of force - force that may cause death or grevious bodily harm to a person. The law gives them the authority in certain circumstances, such as protecting themselves or others from death or grevious bodily harm, to use such force. The law doesn't give them the authority to use such force without justification. And if there was no justification, then they are answerable to the law, just like you and me. Fair enough I say. It's a corner-stone to the rule of law. No-one, no-one is above the law.

Certainly on the face of it, from little known facts, it appears the officer was acting in self defence, and if the facts of the matter support this assumption then he was justified in using such force and all will be ok for him/her.

The Police Union need to pull their head in. Remember the comments by the Police Union president after the Deputy Coroners findings into the Palm Island death in custody, they were disgraceful. The Union takes the usual line, like a terrior with a bone, "defending the officer's actions". I dont know how they can say this, as the investigation into the circumstances has only just begun. We don't know all the facts yet, we dont know all of his actions.

The Police Union would have a lot more credibility if they came out and said, "We support the officer 100% in this difficult time. As to whether we consider his actions justifiable, it appears that he was acting in self defence. We hope a thorough investigation is speedily conducted so he can get on with his life and get back to work." On the issue of their credibility I know a lot of police officers who have the same view, unfortunately none are prepared to speak out against the union because of the culture of the police and the culture of the union. This is very sad.

And I can assure you it is not a witch hunt by the investigators.

Be critical when you look at current affairs, and be reasonable when you make a judgement.

Cheers