Moat is dead. Police criticised

ART6

The UK police took some time to find him, and when they did he shot himself. A successful operation, but now the criticism has started.

The police should have found him earlier. They put the people at risk by letting him avoid them for so long. They didn't take him alive. And in the words of a retired senior police oficer, too many men were involved. Didn't need armed response units etc. Small is better.

I see parallels with our country in that whenever there is a situation like this there is an outcry afterwards. Now, I am not a member of AGS, and I have absolutely no experience of such incidents, although I have ben shot at in the past in other countries, but I wonder---

Those who criticise the loudest were not those who had to look for him when he had stated publically that he intended to shoot policemen. The "senior retired officer" wasn't there. and nobody was likely to shoot at him.

I have seen many shots on TV of Gardái in armoured vests. Do they really help if you are shot in the face?

The area in which he chose to hide out was a lot of land. I imagine that even with all of the modern technology it is not easy to find one man in a few square kilometers, particularly when he doesn't want to be found.

The man was a murderer. As far as I know there was no doubt about that. OK, the fact hadn't been established in a court-a-laaw as the American police TV documentaries say, but he was known to have taken human life and he declared that he would do so again.

If the police had been on top of their job he would have been arrested, and could then have stood trial with the possible loss of life of the occasional cop on the way. A solution that is entirely acceptable if you ain't the cop.

I accept that in any police operation that involves the loss of life, there should be a careful consideration of how it was conducted, and if there were any shortfalls, then they should be addressed. That is not at all the same thing as all the media and the civil liberties groups etc climbing on the bandwaggon and claiming police incompetence or inefficiency.

Now I have to declare my own "Joe public" point of view. If I lived in the UK, in that town, I would be quite happy to see Moat either dead or captured.

amacachi

There has to be oversight in police-involved killings. To me it seems like they made a mess of it towards the end but I'm not condemn anyone because I don't have all the facts and it's just the impression I get. An open investigation should be able to put everything to rest.

dvpower

ART6 wrote: »

The UK police took some time to find him, and when they did he shot himself. A successful operation, but now the criticism has started.

A fully sucessful operation would have ended with the capture of Moat.
(Not that the partially sucessful operation should invite criticism of the police).

Latchy

Moats brother has questioned why he was not allowed to try coax his brother into giving himself up which may , may not have made a difference .The behaviour at times of the female police chief of Northtumberland during the search leaves a lot to be desired as much as any enquiry into the handling by police of Moats final minutes .

Moat was a total control freak and by all accounts an evil man who had apparently a history of regularly beating up and raping another girl he was seeing . In all this sorry saga it's the family of the guy who was seeing moats ex whom I really feel sorry for .Nobody in moats family has apologized or said sorry to them for the cold blooded murder of their son and brother .

kippy

I dont think this was ever going to end any other way and if it had it would no doubt have involved the death of an officer or member of the public as well.......
From what little information I have, I dont see how the Police could have handled it any differently.
The guy had at least one loaded gun in his possession when cornered, had stated many times that he would kill police officers and/or members of the public, and had already shot at at least 3 people killing two. He obviously was a dangerous man with some mental issues.
I heard an interview with Moats brother, a brother who seemed to have forgotten that Moat brought this on himself to a large extent, he was blaming the police which to be honest, I suppose, being a family member who has lost a brother may be somewhat understandable but misguided.

Zambia

We live in a very silly world where a bloke puts a loaded shotgun in his mouth and someone else is blamed for his demise.

punchdrunk

if it had happened in the states,it would have been all over alot sooner than a six hour stand off

I think the police did their best to bring the situation to an end but they can't be held accountable for his actions,lets not muddy the water here

the Man decided to kill himself,simple as that

it was out of their hands

Finnbar01

I don't know why people are blaming the police. The last thing they wanted was for Moat to escape justice by killing himself. They would rather see him do a large stretch of time then take the easy way out.

Here's a couple of neandethal cavewomen defending Moat. Beggars belief really.The same numpties that wouldn't think twice about ringing the police when the latest drunk drug addled boyfriends starts beaten them up.

Shield

punchdrunk wrote: »

I think the police did their best to bring the situation to an end but they can't be held accountable for his actions,lets not muddy the water here

the Man decided to kill himself,simple as that

it was out of their hands

What is being suggested now is that the police first fired the tazer, and this caused a muscle spasm in Moat's arms which led to his fingers involuntarily closing, one of which was still on the trigger.

It's now being reported that the officers who used the tazer only received 10 minutes' training at the scene with the firearm used. It will be interesting to see if that stands up to scrutiny by the IPCC.

We don't know if he decided to kill himself and we never will. We can debate that to death and we'll still never know. All we know is he threatened to do it, and put the gun to his neck. There are many cases where people have been talked out of it by police negotiators.

One thing is certain is that this will go on for a while. Some are reporting it might take 2 years for the report to be complete.

Locust

I dunno. I think after 6 hours in the spitting rain in the same miserable position, i still think the negotiators had a good chance of talking him out of it. If not giving himself up, even just taking the gun off his head to let police have the option of tazering him (perhaps they thought they had that option i don't know).

Sources say a group of police were sneaking up behind him from the river? Its alleged that Moat shouted 'bastards' just before he shot himself. Not to over analyse but, don't you think they could have held off on the sneaky approach, - surely the new taser shotguns had the range and could have taken him out either way rather than the risk of freakin/scaring him with twigs snapping behind him? They deployed anyhow but perhaps negotiation could have continued or a few other options could have been tried? A few more friends/family, promises, fave food, anythingh to give him hope/future, slow release of cs gas around him to get him to wipe his eyes/cough? anything to take the gun off his head to taser and apprehend him?

psni

psni wrote: »

What is being suggested now is that the police first fired the tazer, and this caused a muscle spasm in Moat's arms which led to his fingers involuntarily closing, one of which was still on the trigger.

It's now being reported that the officers who used the tazer only received 10 minutes' training at the scene with the firearm used. It will be interesting to see if that stands up to scrutiny by the IPCC.

Maybe they were checking if the X10 fired differently to a shotgun which they may have been trained in? Everything is speculation until the IPCC delivers it's report. The only info that we have is from local people who saw snippets of what the police did over the day. The police are not talking because of the investigation.

Zambia

Locust wrote: »

Not to over analyse but, don't you think they could have held off on the sneaky approach, - surely the new taser shotguns had the range and could have taken him out either way rather than the risk of freakin/scaring him with twigs snapping behind him?

A taser is not 100% effective it is far risker than a firearm if one probe fails to connect the offender just feels a prick. Not to mention the person on the other end :-)

Locust wrote: »

They deployed anyhow but perhaps negotiation could have continued or a few other options could have been tried?

True but at some piont you have to take the offender at their word.

Locust wrote: »

A few more friends/family, promises,

I would not be in favour of really involving more parties they are an unknown quantity

Locust wrote: »

fave food,

Fire a Burger king at him , might be more lethal than anything SO19 had.

Locust wrote: »

anythingh to give him hope/future,

He had murdered someone and shot a cop he knew he was never going to see daylight for a very long time. Very hard sell

Locust wrote: »

slow release of cs gas around him to get him to wipe his eyes/cough?

Possible but I still reckon he could have pulled the trigger or aimed the weapon at others on realising.

Locust wrote: »

anything to take the gun off his head to taser and apprehend him?

Well all the men on the ground felt the snatch squad was the way to go, so I would have to say I would trust their call on it. This was what they felt was the best way to remove the gun from his head and apprehend him. They probably did consider the options above and this came first.

Fair play to you for being the devils advocate on this.

ART6

This was a large and strong man, accustomed to violence and heavily armed. He had already killed one man and seriously injured a woman and a police officer. He openly stated that he intended to kill other policemen if he got the chance. Meanwhile, a certain crazy footballer we are told could have talked "Moaty" out of it, as could Moat's brother.

If the police had allowed either of them to attempt that and Moat had shot them, who would be blamed? The media and the human rights brigade would have had an orgasm. There has been sympathy expressed for Moat's family, and that is understandable, but the policemen had families too.

We expect them to tackle a murderer with a loaded gun in such a way that he can't hurt himself, and if one of them gets killed in the process we salute his heroism and then forget about him and his family. I am not a police officer -- just Joe Public, but I know what I'd do. I would seek to disable him from a safe distance by whatever means available and if that resulted in his early demise, tough s**t.

someday2010

The police should be praised for not shooting him on the spot not to mention gazza the looper arriving on the scene with his hot chicken and cans of lager!. The nutter murdered one person shot another at point blank range, threaten to kill ever police officer he saw and his man hunt cost over £5 million. I think a more common sense american approach should be adopted that is if you choose to go on a murderous rampage then expect to be shot on the spot not get a 7 hour counselling session at the side of a river!

ART6

someday2010 wrote: »

The police should be praised for not shooting him on the spot not to mention gazza the looper arriving on the scene with his hot chicken and cans of lager!. The nutter murdered one person shot another at point blank range, threaten to kill ever police officer he saw and his man hunt cost over £5 million. I think a more common sense american approach should be adopted that is if you choose to go on a murderous rampage then expect to be shot on the spot not get a 7 hour counselling session at the side of a river!

You want to shoot Gazza and his hot chicken? :eek:

someday2010

No No. but can you imagine having to listen to him considering all that was going on

ART6

someday2010 wrote: »

No No. but can you imagine having to listen to him considering all that was going on

You'd probably get more sense out of the cooked chicken. I imagine it must be very irritating for the police, after risking their lived to try to take the man alive, to be told in the press that Gazza could have done it easily.

kensey

There was a time when having a Moat around your village was a GOOD thing!

All joking aside, well done to Police for their professional handling of a difficult situation. It could have been alot worse if the situation had escalated. His death was his own decision and fortunately, no police officer or member of the public was harmed

Shield

A very interesting development that is sure to have a huge impact on the findings of the IPCC investigation:

Moat Taser boss kills himself

A FORMER cop whose company supplied the controversial Tasers fired at killer Raoul Moat committed suicide yesterday.

Peter Boatman, 57, a boss at Pro-Tect Systems, had been "destroyed" after the firm's licence was removed by Home Secretary Theresa May on Tuesday, his business partner revealed last night.

Mrs May acted after it emerged the stun-guns had not been approved for use.

It is believed Mr Boatman may have handed the Tasers to former colleagues from Northamptonshire Police in a bid to take Moat alive.

Losing the Government contract was a huge blow for the business.

The Home Office was also considering prosecuting the firm.

And accounts filed at Companies House last year showed Pro-Tect had creditors totalling nearly £600,000.

Kevin Coles, Pro-Tect's managing director, said: "He was a proud man and he felt ashamed at developments.

"He spent all his life involved in officer safety and what happened was a result of him being worried about the welfare of officers.

"He knew there was something there that would offer the officers protection and that was what his motive was. The furore over it destroyed him."

Mr Boatman worked as an inspector for Northamptonshire Police before leaving in 2002 to become a 50 per cent partner in Pro-Tect.

The firm gained the Government contract, making it the only legal supplier of Tasers in Britain and selling more than 4,000 to police and military forces.

But the licence was revoked after it emerged the firm gave four X-12 Taser guns to Northamptonshire cops after officers cornered Moat.

The electric shock stun-guns, which fire a lightweight shell over a long range, were being trialled by Home Office scientists and had yet to be formally approved.

They should only have been supplied to the Home Office.

The firm was also accused of breaching rules governing the secure transport of the devices.

Cops fired two Tasers at Moat as he threatened to take his life in Rothbury, Northumberland, in the early hours of July 10.

Moat, 37, then shot himself.

Yesterday five police vans were outside Mr Boatman's home in Kingsthorpe, Northampton.

He shared the property with wife Stephanie, also a director of Pro-Tect, daughter Chloe, 30, and son Kiel.

A police spokesman said: "We are not treating the death as suspicious and will be preparing a report for the coroner."

Source

jugger0

Good riddance to a scumbag, police should have shot him on the spot.

Whitewater-AGS

jugger0 wrote: »

Good riddance to a scumbag, police should have shot him on the spot.

I'd be alot clearer as to whom your speaking of moat or Mr Boatman???

jugger0

Whitewater-AGS wrote: »

I'd be alot clearer as to whom your speaking of moat or Mr Boatman???

Moat, poor boatman was only trying to do a good deed.