IPCA Outcome of Auckland Police Shooting

Forums › Off topic › IPCA Outcome of Auckland Police Shooting

marmel

1924 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#304349 27-Apr-2023 10:51

Quite an interesting outcome this from the IPCA.

It's difficult to make a judgment call based on the limited info available but if the deceased had previously fired a shot at a neighboring house and came out the house in an agitated state holding a firearm over his shoulder which he refused to put down it's a big ask to expect Police to wait for him to point it at them before taking the action they did. It almost sounds like a 'suicide-by-police' type of situation.

I think you could probably lower a rifle and fire a shot within 1-2 seconds from a firearm resting on your shoulder, doesn't leave much reaction time for Police.

Hard call for sure but I don't want a default policy where Police can only shoot an offender once they shoot at Police first. If Police fear death or GBH to themselves or others they are justified in taking appropriate action to mitigate the threat.

Officer unjustified in fatal shooting of Auckland man, police watchdog rules | Stuff.co.nz

1 | 2 | 3

5589 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3068397 27-Apr-2023 14:19

Yeah I saw that this morning and wondered what the IPCA has been smoking.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup.

cruxis

480 posts

Ultimate Geek

#3068408 27-Apr-2023 14:43

IPCA Expecting police to be trained to the level of a SAS solider perhaps? In what 16 weeks they dreaming.

Lias

5589 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3068410 27-Apr-2023 14:53

cruxis:

IPCA Expecting police to be trained to the level of a SAS solider perhaps? In what 16 weeks they dreaming.

Of which most of it is NOT firearms training lol

marmel

1924 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3068411 27-Apr-2023 14:58

cruxis:

IPCA Expecting police to be trained to the level of a SAS solider perhaps? In what 16 weeks they dreaming.

I think the officer that fired the shot was AOS so would have had more training that most Police who get a week or so of firearms training at police college and then a few days a year.

I don't think it matters anyway, anyone from the SAS would have probably shot him as soon as he stepped out of the house.

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3068436 27-Apr-2023 15:33

marmel: Hard call for sure but I don't want a default policy where Police can only shoot an offender once they shoot at Police first. If Police fear death or GBH to themselves or others they are justified in taking appropriate action to mitigate the threat.

The IPCA is not advocating that. The finding stated in the article is:

While the officer yelled for Turia to drop his weapon, he “gave him no time at all to comply with the request”, authority chairperson Jude Colin Doherty said.

There's not much additional background in the article. It is the first time ever IPCA has found a shooting unjustified.

ezbee

2405 posts

Uber Geek

#3068438 27-Apr-2023 15:45

This is how you end up with Police having problems recruiting the right people.
Well recruiting anyone at all.

No one who is sane signs up to be a target, only comfort being your fellow officers can now shoot back.
Maybe...

Plus staff leave when they get a family who would really like you to come home.

If you want the Police to only recruit people who have no care for their own life.
I expect you will be getting entirely the wrong people and there's not enough of them.

We have push back over concerns about guns in the community from Police themselves who experience this on daily basis.

As for the more training, then they can shoot the gun out of the offenders' hands, that only happens in Hollywood.
Even with best will there are just too many places that can result in a random fatality to assure no death may result.

You roll the dice when you shoot at your neighbors, then refuse to give yourself in.
Holding your gun you can shoot again, showing you are quite willing to use it.
Thats on the person staring down the Police not the Police.

Its not like USA where cops seem to all empty their guns.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3068446 27-Apr-2023 16:17

ezbee:

You roll the dice when you shoot at your neighbors, then refuse to give yourself in.
Holding your gun you can shoot again, showing you are quite willing to use it.
Thats on the person staring down the Police not the Police.

Inclined to agree. Taken as a moment, potentially looks bad, but taken in context, where the person had previously discharged a weapon, was carrying an almost certainly loaded weapon, and had been un-cooperative, it adds up to create a different picture.

Could it have ended peacefully, maybe, could it have ended up with a police officer injured or killed, maybe. Of the two scenarios, I know which I find more acceptable for many reasons.

It's an incredibly sad situation all around. The officer will need to live with that choice for the rest of their lives.

Despite what some might believe, most police people are not looking for a reason to kill someone when they go to work each day, and should reasonably expect they will come home each day to their families.

I think it's reasonable to assume that the IPCA have considerably more evidence and information than we do, and it's all speculation and my comments aren't necessarily a criticism of the findings, just musings based on what information is available.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

marmel

1924 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3068448 27-Apr-2023 16:19

gzt:
marmel: Hard call for sure but I don't want a default policy where Police can only shoot an offender once they shoot at Police first. If Police fear death or GBH to themselves or others they are justified in taking appropriate action to mitigate the threat.

The IPCA is not advocating that. The finding stated in the article is:

While the officer yelled for Turia to drop his weapon, he “gave him no time at all to comply with the request”, authority chairperson Jude Colin Doherty said.

There's not much additional background in the article. It is the first time ever IPCA has found a shooting unjustified.

Yeah but the issue from my point of view is given how quickly a rifle could have been lowered and a round discharged how long would you expect Police to wait? I can tell you from experience yelling for someone to drop their weapon is standard in any training scenario so it's almost a muscle memory, even if the firearm was pointed at police I'm pretty sure they would have still yelled that direction even if at that point they had already made a decision to pull the trigger.

Like you said there is limited info available but it almost seems yelling a warning in this case has become a bit of an issue, remembering that Police do not have to give a warning if it means jeopardizing the safety of themselves or others.

Handle9

11386 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3068460 27-Apr-2023 16:39

gzt:
marmel: Hard call for sure but I don't want a default policy where Police can only shoot an offender once they shoot at Police first. If Police fear death or GBH to themselves or others they are justified in taking appropriate action to mitigate the threat.

The IPCA is not advocating that. The finding stated in the article is:

While the officer yelled for Turia to drop his weapon, he “gave him no time at all to comply with the request”, authority chairperson Jude Colin Doherty said.

There's not much additional background in the article. It is the first time ever IPCA has found a shooting unjustified.

Don't come in here with your facts and wanting more information. These threads are for "common sense."

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#3068480 27-Apr-2023 17:30

cruxis:

IPCA Expecting police to be trained to the level of a SAS solider perhaps? In what 16 weeks they dreaming.

The question then becomes, why would or should we be ok with giving such a poorly trained individual a deadly weapon, and putting them in a situation where they are required to make important decisions on using that weapon?

16 weeks is not enough training for someone who can wield the full power of the law to begin with, and you would apparently agree certainly not enough time for them to be adequately trained on deadly weapons.

gzt: The finding stated in the article is:

While the officer yelled for Turia to drop his weapon, he “gave him no time at all to comply with the request”, authority chairperson Jude Colin Doherty said.

There's not much additional background in the article. It is the first time ever IPCA has found a shooting unjustified.

Correct, and accurate. Both you, and the IPCA. I am fully in support of the IPCA here - the slaying of this man was unjustified.

We are very lucky that the Police in New Zealand are largely reasonable and behave themselves. We should not ever let that get out of hand in the way it has in the US, and the only way to prevent that is to set incredibly high standards for Police, and hold them to account on those standards.

Handle9

11386 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3068482 27-Apr-2023 17:34

The IPCA decision is worth reading. The officer had fairly significant inconsistencies with his recollection and what actually happened.

It's also worth noting that the shooting was ruled unjustified not criminal - it was a tragedy for all concerned caused by a severely troubled person .

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#3068507 27-Apr-2023 18:57

Handle9:

The IPCA decision is worth reading. The officer had fairly significant inconsistencies with his recollection and what actually happened.

Definitely worth reading the decision.

That's a kind interpretation, the IPCA all but outright accuse Officer A of lying:

"...we do not accept that Officer A honestly believed..." and "We accept that people have mistaken recollections after a traumatic event. However, an assertion that someone in their decision-making was relying on facts that are shown to be false recollections lacks credibility.

The real issue here, and the reason why they ultimately found it unjustified, is that Officer A had essentially decided he was going to shoot Turia no matter what the circumstances were. That's not reasonable or acceptable, although it is still consistent with the self defence argument Officer A is using to defend themselves.

Handle9

11386 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3068509 27-Apr-2023 19:08

antonknee:

Handle9:

The IPCA decision is worth reading. The officer had fairly significant inconsistencies with his recollection and what actually happened.

Definitely worth reading the decision.

That's a kind interpretation, the IPCA all but outright accuse Officer A of lying:

"...we do not accept that Officer A honestly believed..." and "We accept that people have mistaken recollections after a traumatic event. However, an assertion that someone in their decision-making was relying on facts that are shown to be false recollections lacks credibility.

The real issue here, and the reason why they ultimately found it unjustified, is that Officer A had essentially decided he was going to shoot Turia no matter what the circumstances were. That's not reasonable or acceptable, although it is still consistent with the self defence argument Officer A is using to defend themselves.

I think it's more likely that the officer was absolutely terrified and reacted poorly rather than having any intent. Unfortunately when guns are involved the consequences of getting it wrong are terrible.

In the end we will never know.

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#3068537 27-Apr-2023 20:59

Interesting reading related to this - NZ Police kill at the rate of 11 times England and Wales.

As mentioned upthread, this is the first time the IPCA has found a fatal shooting unjustified. However, if you read the article and all the further reading - it appears neither the IPCA nor Police do a great job of investigating Police homicides.

Astoundingly, this includes letting the officers view the evidence against themselves before making a statement about what happened, questionable conflicts of interest, and a policy position that the shooting officer cannot be made to recount what happened in an interview.

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#3068539 27-Apr-2023 21:07

Handle9:

I think it's more likely that the officer was absolutely terrified and reacted poorly rather than having any intent. Unfortunately when guns are involved the consequences of getting it wrong are terrible.

In the end we will never know.

Just to be clear - I'm not alleging intent. I am however paraphrasing the IPCA, where they directly say the officer had made up his mind and was going to shoot:

IPCA:

74. However, we do not believe Officer A could have thought the risk was as imminent and likely to eventuate as he portrayed in his interviews with us and Police. Officer A had already decided to shoot Mr Turia if he emerged armed, meaning concern that he had exposed himself through his verbal challenge could not have formed part of his threat assessment.

86. Officer A had earlier considered other tactical options and had also had a conversation with Officer J about the possibility of using a dog. While Officer A stated to Police that if Mr Turia came out of the house armed, “we’d make a [threat assessment] and use a minimal force to effect the arrest”, he told us:

“It all depended on MrTuria’s actions, whether he was compliant, non- compliant, if he was still armed with a shotgun. The only option really if he was still armed with the shotgun would be to use my – to use firearms against him."

Officer A himself therefore acknowledges that he had formed a view that if Mr Turia emerged from the house carrying his shotgun, his only option would be to shoot him, so that it is apparent he had closed his mind to other options.

1 | 2 | 3