That verdict again…


1 Do you consider that it is established as likely that the fatal wound to the head of Mark Saunders was caused by a shot which was lawfully fired, ie, in necessary and reasonable self-defence and/or defence of someone else? Jury Yes

2 Do you consider that it is established as likely that the fatal wound to the heart of Mark Saunders was caused by a shot which was lawfully fired, ie, in necessary and reasonable self-defence and/or defence of someone else? Jury Yes

3 Do you consider that it is established as likely that the fatal wound to the liver of Mark Saunders was caused by a shot which was lawfully fired, ie, in necessary and reasonable self-defence and/or defence of someone else? Jury Yes

4 Do you consider that it is established on the evidence so that you are sure that Mark Saunders deliberately and consciously took steps with a shotgun as shown on the film at 9.32pm with the intention of causing police officers to shoot and kill him because it was his wish that he should be killed by them? Jury Not sure

5 Do you consider that it is established as likely that more detailed consideration should have been given at an early stage to enabling contact to take place between Mr Bradley and or Mrs Saunders and the deceased? Jury Yes

If yes, do you consider that it is established as likely that this circumstance made some contribution to the cause of his death? Jury No

6 Do you consider that it is established as likely that there was a lack of clarity between the roles of the firearms tactical adviser and the firearms bronze commander? Jury Yes

If yes, do you consider that it is established as likely that this circumstance made some contribution to the cause of his death? Jury No

7 Do you consider that it is established as likely that insufficient weight was given after 9.09pm to the fact that Mr Saunders was a member of what used to be called a special population group (now “vulnerable person”) with regard to the nature, proximity and numbers in the police containment? Jury Yes

If yes, do you consider that it is established as likely that this circumstance made some contribution to the cause of his death? Jury No

What the jury or anyone for that matter, fails to say is ‘what should we have done with a drunk bloke shooting at people out of his window…’

Funny that…

Advertisements

One response to “That verdict again…

  1. Another thing the Jury were not asked “Do you think the decision of the “Gold” commander to be present on the scene – and to ‘brief’ the press – had any significance?”

    //.A senior police officer told a jury how Dizaei’s “odd” decision to turn up at the scene of the stand-off heaped extra pressure on the main commander on the ground. ….Dizaei, who is now serving a four-year prison term for corruption, was the “gold” – or most senior – commander for the police operation that night. Mr Saunders’ inquest heard that the usual procedure would be for the gold commander to oversee the operation from a distance leaving the minute-by-minute decision making to his number two, or “silver, Superintendent Mike Wise.//
    [Telegraph – 23 Sept 2010 – http://tinyurl.com/3abjhq8 ]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s