Navtej Singh-Police Blunder ?

Forums › Off topic › Navtej Singh-Police Blunder ?

wmoore

510 posts

Ultimate Geek

#61374 15-May-2010 07:12

Over any firearms incidents, we seem to have this non-confrontational “cordon and negotiate” policy, which may work well in most scenarios but is not so crash hot when people lie wounded and their lives are in the balance.
Navtej Singh is not the only case where police have failed to get to the injured and dying.
(Aramoana massacre is one such case)
What we do need is a Armed response team as they do in the UK.
Each ART vehicle has four members. Fully trained and equipped.
They will use Speed, Aggression and Surprise elements to arrest
the offenders. maybe it's time the NZ police did the same.

"In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." -
-- Abraham lincoln

wiredr

203 posts

Master Geek

#330287 15-May-2010 07:26

wmoore,
what your saying is like "i'm late for work i need a faster car , instead of leave home a little earlier "
the police don't need more guns or changes they just need to work smarter .

one of the pieces of information not told about the Navtej sing blunder was about the vehicle delivering the arms to the scene did not have a key to unlock the boot. delay was caused by an officer having to drive back and get a set of keys . this what i mean about working smarter.

marmel

1924 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#330293 15-May-2010 08:03

I think there has been a general trend over the last 10-15 years within the police to create policy which removes as much risk as possible to officers.

I don't know all of the facts in relation to this case but I'm sure the cops on the frontline would have been willing to enter the liquor store had they been allowed by those calling the shots. It is a tough call to make though when you don't have accurate and timely information. Imagine if the gunman had still been in the store and the first police on the scene had been ordered to enter and had been shot. You then have multiple casualties to deal with and the whole thing becomes that much more difficult.

When you sign up to be a cop you have to accept you could find yourself exposed to situations you would much rather not be in but that is part of the job. However the cop on the street still has to act within operational guidelines and do what he is being told by those controlling the incident, normally from the police station untilo a forward comand centre can be established.

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#330299 15-May-2010 08:29

Police have to be cautious. They don't get the training or equipment needed to be able to handle these situations, and its about to get worse with $$ cutbacks.

Looks like its another "bash the Police whenever we can" storyline again. Damned if they do and damned if they dont. Yes I agree it seems some information did not get through, but what if they went in their guns a blazing and some innocent bystander or cop got shot or killed...what then? Just imagine the media frenzy and public outcry!

Give them all guns and teach em how to use them I say...

Its easy to critisize an incident in the cold light of day when you can get a panel to sit around and have a cuppa while they pull decisions made in a few seconds or minutes apart in great detail.

They just can't win.

DrNut

135 posts

Master Geek

#330300 15-May-2010 08:48

Speed, surprise and violence of action is a tried and true method however it's not suitable in every situation. If there is no element of surprise then that method Is useless. Negotiation is the first port of call for most agencies around the world. The last thing the police want are more casualties by being brash and trigger happy.

The AOS and STG are well trained and constently put under incredible pressure and need the support of thier country.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#330301 15-May-2010 08:50

While it's sad what happened if the story was reversed and an officer was also shot and killed entering a potentially hostile scene would we now be discusing why the Police policy was to enter a dangerous environment without adequately performing a full risk assessment?

I do agree with the concept of armed response units, however the Police in the UK do differ slightly to here. SO19/CO19 units in the MET for example existed because general duties officers were not firearms trained and had no access to weapons. That differs slightly here where all officers are firearms trained, and do have access to weapons at a scene which are typically carried in the gunsafe in the boot of many patrol cars.

You can argue however that they are not specialised officers - and that's why we also have the AOS, unfortunately they not a unit that is on the road 24/7, they are only Police staff who are called out when needed, which may be calling them back from being on duty, to kit up, have a briefing, and then proceed to a scene. This can take a significant amount of time.

wmoore

510 posts

Ultimate Geek

#330302 15-May-2010 08:50

We shouldn't be blaming the guys on the front line, but it is the policy and procedures and management
that really is to blame. Procedures never seem to take in the 'What if's'
And I agree the police do need to work smarter, but policy holds them back.

"In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." -
-- Abraham lincoln

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#330321 15-May-2010 10:14

sbiddle: While it's sad what happened if the story was reversed and an officer was also shot and killed entering a potentially hostile scene would we now be discusing why the Police policy was to enter a dangerous environment without adequately performing a full risk assessment?

No. As it would have been one of their own they would have been in there boots and all but as it was a pleb who was shot they followed the Police safety book to the letter and stopped help from arriving. Pity that the cop in charge of this doesn't get demoted back to traffic duty.

Regards,

Old3eyes

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.

Xile

155 posts

Master Geek

ID Verified

#330322 15-May-2010 10:31

wiredr: wmoore,

one of the pieces of information not told about the Navtej sing blunder was about the vehicle delivering the arms to the scene did not have a key to unlock the boot. delay was caused by an officer having to drive back and get a set of keys . this what i mean about working smarter.

Not correct. Have you actually read the IPCA report? This is not mentioned. Yes they didn't have a key but no one was sent to get one as there was already vehicles at the scene that had firearms.

corksta

2397 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#330325 15-May-2010 10:42

old3eyes:
sbiddle: While it's sad what happened if the story was reversed and an officer was also shot and killed entering a potentially hostile scene would we now be discusing why the Police policy was to enter a dangerous environment without adequately performing a full risk assessment?

No. As it would have been one of their own they would have been in there boots and all but as it was a pleb who was shot they followed the Police safety book to the letter and stopped help from arriving. Pity that the cop in charge of this doesn't get demoted back to traffic duty.

Right just like Napier when two staff were shot they all went straight in boots and all.... every situation is different - you weren't there, I wasn't there, you can't say they would have rushed in so no point trying to raise that argument. It was a combination of errors that led to the end result, no one intentionally set out to make mistakes, so to pin it all on one person and demote them is also pointless.

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#330338 15-May-2010 11:24

corksta:
old3eyes:
sbiddle: While it's sad what happened if the story was reversed and an officer was also shot and killed entering a potentially hostile scene would we now be discusing why the Police policy was to enter a dangerous environment without adequately performing a full risk assessment?

No. As it would have been one of their own they would have been in there boots and all but as it was a pleb who was shot they followed the Police safety book to the letter and stopped help from arriving. Pity that the cop in charge of this doesn't get demoted back to traffic duty.

Right just like Napier when two staff were shot they all went straight in boots and all.... every situation is different - you weren't there, I wasn't there, you can't say they would have rushed in so no point trying to raise that argument. It was a combination of errors that led to the end result, no one intentionally set out to make mistakes, so to pin it all on one person and demote them is also pointless.

This was a robbery not a stand of. The guys who did the shooting were long gone..

Regards,

Old3eyes

DrNut

135 posts

Master Geek

#330341 15-May-2010 11:51

Yes but the scene officer was not aware that they were gone, poor communication strikes again. It was not one persons fault so he should not be made the scapegoat. Nothing is textbook these days and everyone would react differently.

The NZ police do a fantastic job and get no thanks. NZ public are only interested in their mistakes.

billgates

4705 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#330345 15-May-2010 12:02

DrNut: Yes but the scene officer was not aware that they were gone, poor communication strikes again. It was not one persons fault so he should not be made the scapegoat. Nothing is textbook these days and everyone would react differently.

The NZ police do a fantastic job and get no thanks. NZ public are only interested in their mistakes.

It was his fault. The police officer should have asked for an update from the 111 call center which he did not.

Do whatever you want to do man.

DrNut

135 posts

Master Geek

#330359 15-May-2010 12:20

I'm not denying he is partly to blame, yes he should have asked for an update but the 111 operator should have pushed the information through, the OIC was never directly told that the offenders had left but in every case he should have been getting constant sit reps from fellow officers and comms. He was taking a cautious and methodical approach which was not required.

When I say it was a comms breakdown it works both ways. He should have asked but he also should have been told. He is to blame but not totally.

itxtme

2102 posts

Uber Geek

#330440 15-May-2010 17:49

It was an unfortunate situation that lead to the death of an individual. From this case there are lessons to learn however to say it was a blunder is a ridiculous statement. Have any of you got a real idea of how long logistics take in the emergency setting?? Communication between Coms/Call Taker/Officer in Charge/Other Officers/Ambulance Coms/Ambulance are time consuming to say the least. 35 minutes seems like a long time, and it is but you cannot say the police sat on their hands to spite everyone else!!

Why are they so to blame of this mans death? You could argue that the ambulance spent too long on scene treating the patient (25-35 minutes from memory) instead of transporting him to surgery where he needed to be.

Looking at the case with only half the information and having an opinion is fine, but we just are not informed enough to have a true and just opinion!!

wmoore

510 posts

Ultimate Geek

#330575 16-May-2010 09:38

sbiddle: While it's sad what happened if the story was reversed and an officer was also shot and killed entering a potentially hostile scene would we now be discusing why the Police policy was to enter a dangerous environment without adequately performing a full risk assessment?

I do agree with the concept of armed response units, however the Police in the UK do differ slightly to here. SO19/CO19 units in the MET for example existed because general duties officers were not firearms trained and had no access to weapons. That differs slightly here where all officers are firearms trained, and do have access to weapons at a scene which are typically carried in the gunsafe in the boot of many patrol cars.

You can argue however that they are not specialised officers - and that's why we also have the AOS, unfortunately they not a unit that is on the road 24/7, they are only Police staff who are called out when needed, which may be calling them back from being on duty, to kit up, have a briefing, and then proceed to a scene. This can take a significant amount of time.

Sbiddle you do make some good points. You do mention that our officers are firearms trained, but i read
something from Greg O'Connor that the firearms training for general staff was very basic and rather
quick. I remember seeing a photo in the paper during the Napier stand off of a small women officer
with a gun over her shoulder. What was the point of her having that gun, by the time she got it off her shoulder and aimed to fire she could of been dead.
Glad you mentioned SO19/CO19 could we have that instead of the current 'I' Cars that we have.
They had a TV programme about them over here recently, And they seem to follow the Speed
aggression surprise elements. In seems over here we do the cordon and contain wait for AOS
(and in that time offender booby traps his house, gets more weapons, makes bombs etc)
I mean there is a time and place for cordon and contain, But I am sure there are times when
a S019/CO19 type unit would be better suited.

"In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." -
-- Abraham lincoln