The Raoul Moat Incident and the Actions of Police - Essay Example

Critically discuss the Raoul Moat incident and the actions of police, giving reference to the Human Rights Act 1998 and relevant case law. [Course] [Professor’s name] [Date] The Incident A sensational police action had been carried out in North East England in 2010 where Northumbria armed police forces went to arrest a serial killer Raoul Moat. The person was absconding from the police after shooting three persons. The victims include his ex-associate Samantha Stobbart, her recent associate Chris Brown and a police officer David Rathband. Among the three, Brown was killed while the others were injured. Moat shot the police officer near the Northern Island. The officer was then in his police car. His injury was not severe. But the incident caused blindness of this officer. The 37 year old gunman had just been out of jail. He was a tree surgeon from Newcastle. It has come to know that he had sought psychiatric treatment before he had gone for the shooting. The police were after Moat after he shot two people in two days. About a day later, the police could identify Moat as the killer of Rathband. It took about seven days to capture Moat and to confine him in an open place so that they can arrest him. But, unfortunately, the gunman has shot himself and committed suicide before the police could arrest him. He committed suicide in the early morning on 10th of July 2010. After an hour he was declared dead at the hospital (BBC News, 2010). Earlier, there was a threat from Moat for his ex-girlfriend and her partner. He had also threatened the police officers and earlier he was harassed by one of them. He had also threatened the police officers because they are exposing his private life in media. He had shot Rathband randomly on for this reason. Police Actions The action of police was vital in the history of Britain. The manhunt had involved 160 police officers and several armed police forces. The Northumbria police, in this case, took help from armed police forces from other regions. The operation also used helicopters, planes; armed police vehicles that can be used for terrorist attacks and also a “Royal Air Force Jet” had been used. The stand-off between police and Moat was lasted for about six long hours after which Moat has committed suicide (Mendick et.al. , 2010). The incident was in the hands of Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). During investigation before the person was located properly, the police forces have conducted massive search of the fugitive in the local areas of Northumberland. They also traced him sometimes in these seven days. But he continuously showed his ability to hide himself from the police. There were numerous appearances of Moat in the village last week. On Thursday evening, some residents spotted him on the highway. The police rushed to capture him with their helicopter and it had met with an accident. The police were not capable to detain him. They continuously searched the area in their helicopter. But they could not detect that he could hide in the drain (Mendick et.al., 2010). Some local people informed that he hid himself in the storm drain. The drain is about three hundred miles long and is under the village. The drain was very newly repaired with new pipes and accessories. It is a few miles away from where the car used by him was found. The local Councilor of Rothbury told the police that Moat can hid in the drain. But the police did not hear him and searched elsewhere. After two days, when police inspected the drain, they found out finger and foot prints there. The fugitive was hiding just a few meters below where the police force was searching him. In this way they became able to trace him out at the riverbank (Mendick et.al., 2010). The chief constable of Northumbria told that in the evening of the previous day, the police had identified that someone was hiding in the drain at the riverbank of Rothbury. They found that he had firearms with him. Therefore, as there were chances of firing, some police officers turned into negotiators to prevent the man from doing any harm. The gunman also acted somehow peacefully to them. The police officers did not fire at him even to injure him till 1: 15 am. But at that time, when the negotiations were going on and the secret police forces were coming to confine him, he suddenly shot himself. Two taser guns were shot to him at that time, but they were of no use (Mendick et.al. , 2010). The police took a long stand-off to capture the man and to restrict him to take any suicidal attempts. There were two groups of police forces, have sneaked gently towards him without much of his knowledge. One of them hides themselves in the underground. The other force came from the riverbank. The lights of the police vehicles were directed towards him in the way that he could not see that they were coming. There were other police officers came to negotiate with him and to persuade him not to commit suicide. The police officers were only a few meters distant from him while he committed suicide. According to the IPCC, just before the suicide by Moat, the police have fired two Taser guns. One of them hit him but could not penetrate his body because of his clothing. But it was not clear that whether the police had tried to stop him from suicide and so use the Taser guns or not. The Taser guns are generally made to injure the criminals and terrorists (Mendick et.al., 2010). This incident was the one of the largest event of manhunt in the history of United Kingdom. The cost of the operation was huge, as about £500,000 was spent every day. The total cost of operation was about four million pounds, which was much more than any other crime incident happened in the past. The police used “Heckler & Koch G36 assault rifles, Glock 9mm pistols, MP5 Carbines, .223 Remington rifles, M24 sniper rifles and 50,000-volt electric Taser stun guns” for the operation (Craig, 2011). Earlier, the police officers from the prison, where Moat was stayed and was just released, warned the Northumbia police about his future activities. Just hours after his release, he shot his girlfriend. He had threatened to take her life at the prison. IPCC has ordered to investigate that why the police remained idle after his threatening and did not tried to protect the victims. Even he had threatened that he will kill the police officers for making his personal life public. That is why; he had shot police officer Rathband while he was on the duty of patrolling. Mr Rathband had said he would sue the Northumbria Police for this negligence of their duty. The police afterwards stopped the media from making any news about him as he had threatened that he would kill the public if media does so. The IPCC Commissioner said that they would conduct a single investigation that would cover both the Raoul Moat death incidence and the police actions in this incident (BBC News, 2012). A Critical appraisal The incident jerks us to think about the danger of the common people and the easy availability of guns. This incident took place in July 2010, while another gun crime was held just one month back. A taxi driver abruptly killed twelve innocent men only because he was on a killing spree. This incident was held in Cumbria. Both of these incidents are categorized as the murders to take revenge to the society. In both these cases the criminals were enraged with the society and its people and committed the crime. But the question arises that whether there is an increase in use of guns by common people and whether these guns are coming in their hands easily? These two incidents have only one difference. Moat knows the persons to be killed; only he shot the police officer randomly, while the other person shot them without knowing them at all. Whatever be the case, it is indicative that the murderers are becoming more and more interested in gun crime to conduct their mission (Socialist Equality Party, 2010). These incidents also discover some changes in the trends of murder patters in Britain. The critics say that though the killers namely Raoul Moat and also the taxi driver are claiming to take revenge on people and the society, it must be judged that what their motives are. Are they simply psychiatric patients or have faced any social disorder for them. These cases must be analyzed to understand the society’s feelings, whether it is changing with time. If these cases are not analyzed properly, these patterns of crimes will occur more in the future. There has been an apparent increase of the serial killers in the country in recent times. This is indicative that the social and cultural structure is changing. These changes should be detected properly so that the society could protect themselves from any such future crimes. Therefore, it can be said that the patterns, characteristics and responses towards it are changing. The society’s views are also changing for these incidents (Socialist Equality Party, 2010). Legal Status The recent serial killing cases of Raoul Moat and of the pre-mentioned taxi driver Derrick Bird generated the question that whether there has been abrupt grant of firearms without much scrutiny. Police had arrested one people for supplying the shotgun to Moat after the miserable case had happened. Following the incidences, the U.K. government became much stricter in giving permission to the firearm licenses to the common applicants. The firearms license department of United Kingdom has augmented many in-depth questions about the applicant when interviewing the applicants for firearm license. The firearm or shotgun licenses are not renewed or new licenses are not given hastily without any serious investigation. The renewal of license or new license is given following the 1968 Firearms Act. The governing body, releasing the licenses, follows the relevant firearms law certification system following the Firearms Act minutely (Firearms Act, 1968; Rooney, 2010). In the Britain and Wales, most of the police personnel do not have the right to bear shotguns or firearms. The weapons can only be used in unusual situations. In the nineteenth century, the “Metropolitan Police Service” was established. At that time, the policemen did not hold any gun. This is because this could generate fears in the common people. The army of the United Kingdom also objected to the armed police forces. This is because then the army will lose control. Since then, right to use firearms by the police is a debating issue in the country (Northumbria Police, 2012). The firearms used by the police follow the acting policies and common law. These laws are “Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984” and “Human Rights Act 1998”. There are guidelines for the police to use firearms. These are “Home Office Code of Practice on Police use of Firearms and Less Lethal Weapons and the ACPO Manual of Guidance on Police Use of Firearms”. Among the police force, the AFOs are authorized to carry firearms. The authorization is done by an appropriate officer. The rank of an appropriate officer is similar or higher to that of an inspector. The policemen are authorized to carry firearms when they are visiting any airports, nuclear locations or on the defense tasks. The policemen of the Northern Island have the permission to carry their personal firearm during their routine visit. The weapons like semi-automatic carbines are not authorized at all to carry at the duty hours. These weapons are sealed in armory. These armories are placed in the bottom of the armed vehicles. These weapons are given to the fully trained police forces after authorization if there is any need of them. The AFOs are in charge of these weapons and the need of using them depends on him (Mawby and Wright, 2005; Use of Firearms, 2005, pp 1-18). According to the law of Britain and Wales, reasonable forces are used to do any arrest or any prevention from crime or any protection of somebody. Therefore, any unnecessary use of these forces may result in the discontinuation in the actions of the force. Also any unnecessary use any weapons can lead to suspension to the users. These are according to the “European Convention of Human Rights” (Tubb, 2011). . The Incident and the Human Rights Act 1998 According to the Northumbria PoliceNorthumbria Police is the Home Office police force responsible for policing the areas of Northumberland and Tyne and Wear in England. The service is the sixth largest police constabulary in England or Wales. As of April 2005, the current Chief Constable is Mike Craik. ..... Click the link for more information. Assistant Chief Constable, the operation for the hunt of the gunman Raoul Moat was not able to follow the ‘Home Office Guidance on Firearms”. Because there were dangers that he could hit any people and also himself. There were negotiations to stop the man from shooting from his firearms. The police also feared that the man could attack the policemen and can create more violence. Therefore, they planned to capture him. To do this, they needed the use of firearms and armed vehicles. Furthermore, they used helicopters and jet planes to find him out as he was absconding for the last seven days (Craig, 2011). He said that he was permitted to use the Taser gun to stop the man because they thought that the killer was not persuaded to surrender to the police. He also told that the Taser guns were unlicensed. But the previous police shotgun training instructor said to the court that for the incident they trained eight police officers of their force to use the Taser gun. He also told to the court before the jury that there were regular practices to the policemen for the general firearms. The practices each day lasted for about ten to fifteen minutes. The police officers fired about one round every day. But if the police officers are permitted to use the shotguns or similar weapons than the Taser gun, they would be more able to injure the man, he said to the court. This is because the Taser gun cannot be operated from a long distance (Craig, 2011). The chief constable said that they tried to give an electric charge and attempted not to disobey the “Association of Chief Police OfficersThe Association of Chief Police Officers or ACPO is the lead organisation for developing police policy in the United Kingdom (except Scotland in times of national need, for example terrorist attacks, ACPO coordinates the strategic operational response. ..... Click the link for more information. code of practice” while trying to capture the man. They did not want to use the non-approved firearms. This is because their act could violate the gunman’s “right to life” under “Article 2” of “Human Rights Act 1998” (Craig, 2011). But the police officers had to use the weapons without permission as they seek more and more dangers from the man. If they did not try to use the guns, the man could have killed more people, may be any policeman. The man was not persuaded at all throughout the negotiations and he had firearms in his hand. The firearms were used when they found him in the drain at the riverbank. There was a long stand-off about six hours. The man was mentally disturbed and was deliberate to take revenge on the society. Afterwards, he shot himself using his own shotgun (Craig, 2011). According to Mr. Ashman, who was the leader of the mission to confine the serial killer, they police force wanted to confine the man alive, so that he can be judged under the law and jurisdiction. They started monitoring the fugitive in helicopter from their Ponteland Head Quarter and after a prolonged search they found him at the riverside of Rothbury. Mr. Ashman said that they did not have many alternatives to capture him. Therefore, they decided to look after the location of the man and to assess his trend of changing his hidings. In this situation, the police officer constantly tried to evaluate their current positions and actions. They only motto was to capture the man and to prevent them from doing any harm. He said that he, as the head of the operation, always tried to protect his life, by any means. There is only an opportunity to restrict him by the use of the firearms. To do this, it was difficult to abide the firearms rules. He said that the general Taser guns have the capacity to fire as long as thirty meters. But the standard taser guns handled by the police have the capacity only of seven meters. It was not required to fire the man within the seven meters (Craig, 2011). But he also confessed that they have not followed the ACPO code. And this was done with their full knowledge and awareness. He also had the idea of its aftereffects and criticisms. He supposed that that was an extreme condition and nothing could be done without using the firearms (Craig, 2011). Therefore, the judgment, which was expected to end in a few days, is still pending. The investigation is still continuing. The jury is yet to decide about the police actions in the usage of Taser guns. All aspects will be checked according to the Human Rights Act 1998, Firearms Act 1968 and ACPO Code. By that time, the U.K. government suspended the licenses of the Taser gun supplying companies that regularly supplies Taser guns to the police forces (Craig, 2011). Concluding Remarks The history of crime in Britain has experienced such a case that is important in many aspects. It is a case of a personal exposure of sentiments of a person not only towards his closed ones, but towards the society and the administrative system itself. There were incidents of law breaking by the law abiders and protectors; breaking of Human Rights towards a common people and also negligence towards their duty. The pattern of crime is also frightening and indicates danger for the future times. The common people are observed to be more prone to use firearms in any of their sentimental devastating actions. It is required that the government must look after the matter and implement necessary actions in the case of granting firearms to common people. The case also indicates some important proceedings by the police. To catch a fugitive, who previously shot three people, they used several firearms, armed forces and armed vehicles, including helicopters, planes as well as a “Royal Jet”. They used Taser guns whose usage is not permitted. The question arises whether these arrangements were so essential or the police tried to cover their initial negligence with them? Whatever be the reasons, the case is of utmost importance in the subject of criminology. REFERENCES Craig, A. (2011). Use of Tasers was only chance of bringing in killer Moat alive; Inquest hears of choice on non-approved weapons. The Journal (Newcastle, England), available at: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Use+of+Tasers+was+only+chance+of+bringing+in+killer+Moat+alive%3B...-a0266400938 (accessed on May 8, 2012) Firearms Act (1968). Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27/pdfs/ukpga_19680027_en.pdf (accessed on May 8, 2012) Gunman Raoul Moat kills himself after police stand-off, (2010) BBC News UK. available at: www.bbc.co.uk/news/10583839 (accessed on May 8, 2012) Human Rights Act (1998) available at: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents (accessed on May 8, 2012) Mawby R. and Wright A. (2005), Police Accountability in the United Kingdom, Written for Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative available at: http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/programs/aj/police/res_mat/police_accountability_in_uk.pdf (accessed on May 8, 2012) Mendick R., Sawer P. and Leach B. (2010). Raoul Moat: Pictures of his last stand, The Telegraph available at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7883740/Raoul-Moat-Pictures-of-his-last-stand.html (accessed on May 8, 2012) Northumbria Police, (2012), Raoul Moat - 405/10, available at: http://www.northumbria.police.uk/faq/other/answer.asp?id=46538 (accessed on May 8, 2012) Raoul Moat threat not acted upon by police or prison, (2012), BBC News UK, available at: from: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-17840610 (accessed on May 8, 2012) Rooney P. (2010). What is the law regarding the granting of a Firearm License and can you appeal should your application be refused?, QEB Hollis Whiteman Chambers, retrieved on May 3, 2012 from: http://www.qebholliswhiteman.co.uk/articles-pdfs/what-is-the-law-regarding-the-granting-of-a-firearm---paul-rooney.pdf (accessed on May 8, 2012) Socialist Equality Party (2010), Britain: Why did the police man-hunt of Raoul Moat end in death? Available at: http://www.socialequality.org.uk/~sepuk/content/britain-why-did-police-man-hunt-raoul-moat-end-death (accessed on May 8, 2012) Tubb G. (2011), Police Exonerated Over Raoul Moat Death, SkyNews HD. available at http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16078225 (accessed on May 8, 2012) Use of Firearms, (2005), Association of Chief Police Officers, pp.1-18, available at www.statewatch.org/news/2005/jul/acpo-firearms-2003.pdf (accessed on May 8, 2012)Similar Read More