- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Tuesday, May 08, 2012

Better work stories

Killer cop on a shooting frenzy.  Nothing to see here, move along...


The results of the investigation, published yesterday, said an officer fired 14 shots at Lachan Kelly-Tumarae but hit him only three times. Mr Kelly-Tumarae, 19, was hit in his abdomen, right thigh and right leg.

The shooting occurred at Fernhill, about 15km from Napier, after police had followed him there on March 28 last year.

He had been seen acting suspiciously in suburban Napier and, when police approached, he pointed a shotgun at them. They followed him to Fernhill, where he got out of his car and pointed the firearm at them again and did not respond to officers' warnings.

Says who? The last paragraph states the NZ Police position as fact - this is a serious journalistic error.

The NZ Police story is simply unbelievable.  Unpicking which parts are real and which are made up is the job of a good journo, but to go along with one side of a story (just because it is the view of a government security force) and present it as a fact when it is contested (and obviously flawed and mired in secrecy and delay) is poor journalism. Unfortunately the automatic, reflexive response from most people (unaccustomed to the realities of NZ Police violence, tactics and cover-ups) is to accept everything they say at face value. Even when the NZ Police have been caught out lying most reporters continue to parrot the cop line - as in this case. This is a crucial mistake.

The cop's story (and I can't find any report on their website) - changing as it does over time until all the officers involved have gotten their final version of the story to align with what evidence they are prepared to release - is a sick joke:

"The threat remained to police and the officer fired more shots that resulted in Mr Kelly-Tumarae falling to the ground. He had posed a significant threat to police, pointing his loaded shotgun at police in a car at point blank range. He was also wearing a full cartridge belt slung across his chest.

"Four police officers confirmed they saw Mr Kelly-Tumarae with the shotgun and pointing it at their colleagues."

After he fell to the ground, Mr Kelly-Tumarae continued to behave aggressively and was handcuffed.

That alone poses so many questions:
*  Cops were the ONLY witnesses - so they can make up whatever they want without fear of contradiction.
*  Did he point a gun at the officers when he was OUTSIDE the car, or only when he was INSIDE the car? If he pointed it at them INSIDE at "point blank range" (and didn't pull the trigger) then he must have got out of the car with it - was he shot at while he got out of the car?
*  After the first volley of shots (which they say did not hit him) was he still holding a gun? Still "pointing" a gun when the lethal volley was fired?
*  Was there any verbal warning given?
*  Handcuffing someone shot like that!?

And murkier:

Mr Lovelock said a bullet fragment entered his left shoe, causing a superficial wound to his foot. There were multiple holes in his clothing, but this was due to several factors, including the shirt being cut in places for forensic testing; some shots being thought to have gone through folded pieces of fabric; and pieces of shrapnel leaving holes.
She believed her son had been shot more than three times and was planning to hire a forensic specialist to study his clothing to see if that could be verified.

A police spokeswoman said the investigation had been lengthy because the large number of police who attended the incident had to be interviewed at length and there were long delays waiting for the results of some forensic tests that were sent to overseas agencies.

Oh really? Which agencies? Why would chunks of his clothing be cut out for forensics? What has the clothing to do with anything? Maybe establishes just how "point blank" the cop had fired? If so what are the RESULTS of that forensic testing? WHERE are the samples taken - WHO has custody of that evidence now?

Questions, questions, questions. And from the NZ Police: obfiscation, delay, lies. Lying for a killer. What confidence in their professionalism can there be when they continue to do this.

There are four live cops and one dead person who know what really went down, and it would be supremely naive to think the IPCA can do anything about it when they primarily rely on the same members and ex-members of the NZ Police brotherhood to investigate it.


Post a Comment

<< Home