Tonight:
8°c
Why did they kill him with five bullets?
Benedict Moore-Bridger, Evening Standard09.05.08
Fresh questions were raised today over the police shooting of a gun-wielding barrister at his Chelsea home.
Evidence disclosed at the opening of the inquest into the death of Mark Saunders revealed he was shot five times by at least two armed marksmen. The lawyer suffered wounds to the heart, liver, head and a major artery at the Markham Street flat on Tuesday night.
The bullets were fired by marksmen stationed outside the £2.2 million property. Other officers then stormed the building, releasing stun grenades.
The 32-year-old's father, Rodney, has asked why police considered him a lethal threat and ended the five-hour siege by killing him. Questions are set to be raised over whether the Met's specialist CO19 and royal and diplomatic protection unit were ordered to shoot to kill and whether non-lethal force was considered.
The siege and the shooting are being investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission. Eight CO19 officers and one member of the diplomatic protection squad have been suspended from armed duties.
The elite squad is the same unit which killed innocent Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes in July 2005.
CO19 are a cadre of highly trained police who are on standby to respond to any armed incident in London. The squad - whose name has changed from SO19 - has 550 members equipped with Glock pistols and Heckler and Koch MP5 carbines.
Mr Saunders, 32, died on Tuesday after the five-hour siege of his Markham Square flat, in which the former Territorial Army soldier exchanged fire with armed police.
Reports at the time suggested he had broken down after drinking heavily. But today his wife Elizabeth dismissed suggestions that their two-year marriage had been under strain.
At the inquest, coroner's officer Lynda Morris read from a report by pathologist Dr Nathaniel Carey which said: “There is no evidence of any injury caused by a shotgun.
“The multiple gunshot wounds present are associated with severe internal damage to the brain, the heart, the liver and the main vein of the lower body. The external and internal damage is consistent with a minimum of five shots hitting the deceased.
“The nature of the wounds and the projectile recovered from the wounds suggest more than one type of bullet has hit the deceased.”
Paul Craig, deputy senior investigator at the Independent Police Complaints Commission, told the hearing of the siege and police raid on the £2.2 million first-floor flat: “It would appear there were three separate exchanges of gunfire between Mr Saunders and the various police officers at the scene.
“The incident concluded following the last of these exchanges when an intervention was made to the property by officers and Mr Saunders was found to be severely injured. He was taken outside the house to the pavement where medical assistance was provided.
"Despite the best efforts of everyone concerned Mr Saunders tragically died.”
The nine officers who exchanged fire with Mr Saunders have been removed from operational firearms duties pending an IPCC inquiry.
Commander Stuart Osborne, of the Met's directorate of professional standards, said: “The death of any individual is regrettable and in circumstances such as this I am sure it makes it more traumatic for the family.”
Coroner Paul Knapman adjourned the inquest until September.
Mr Saunders, an Oxford graduate, was a divorce lawyer who worked with his wife at QEB chambers in Temple. For three years until 2002 he was a member of the Honourable Artillery Company.
Sources in the legal world had suggested he suffered depression, and family members confirmed he had “drinking issues”. But his wife — who uses her maiden name Clarke at work — said today the couple were happily married and “deeply committed to each other”.
In a statement released by QEB, Mrs Saunders, 40, who identified her husband's body yesterday, denied she was at home with him before the stand-off.
The statement said: “This is a very distressing
time for all of Mark's family, who loved him dearly, and especially for Elizabeth, who much appreciates the support she has received from
friends and family.
“Mark and Elizabeth had a strong union and were deeply committed to each other. While she grieves she would be grateful if the media could continue
to respect her privacy.
“It has been widely reported that Elizabeth was at the family home prior to the terrible events which led to Mark's death. She was in fact at work, and arrived home only after the area had
been cordoned off.”
Mrs Saunders had been pictured in tears at the scene. At one point her husband threw a cardboard box from the flat with the words “I love my wife dearly xxx” scrawled on it.
Reader views (11)
The track record of C019 in recent high profile preplanned operations (Forest Gate and the de Menezes debacle being two) is abysmal.
The actions of some of the SFOs (making a cut throat gesture knowing full well media coverage was extensive) after Mark's killing is ridiculous - and it is indicative of the regime in the unit.
It's time there was a massive shakeup inside Specialist Command, and the Met Management now need to address the issues, rather than stick their heads in the sand.
- Ian, London UK
I know it's fashionable to take pot-shots at the police, so to speak, but the fact that they showed restraint all afternoon and evening actually worries me more. How was an armed gunman allowed to have free rein for so long?
If one of his rounds had injured someone even slightly, there would be a totally different enquiry in progress.
- Martin H. Watson, Teddington
Knockout gas? It's not like setting a phaser on Stun. Knockout agents and tranquillizers are unreliable. The first time "knockout" gas kills someone because of allergies, or they got too much and OD'd, the same people who called for its use will call for the heads of the officers who used it.
An entire house full of tear gas is trivial, it's barely an inconvenience if you have two brain cells to rub together.
If someone's shooting, officers are to return fire until the aggressor is unable or unwilling to continue shooting. If they'd rather die than put down the gun that's unfortunate but it's on them. CO19 handled this properly.
As for the SAS guy on the TV, the military frequently look at the police as lightweights. Just because he said it, doesn't make it true.
- David, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
A phenomenon in recent years in America is something known as "suicide by police". Some poor shlub who doesn't have the guts to shoot himself will pick a fight with cops and fire a few shots in their general direction so that they will return fire and kill him. In gun-crazy America, this is not an uncommon occurrence, but I suspect it's little known in the U.K. However, it might help explain what happened in this case.
- Jeff, London, Ontario, Canada
The question should be why did he an intelligent man start taking pot shot out of a window? He must have known armed police would be called. And he was given the chance to throw down his weapons but still carried on. There could only be one outcome.
- Dave, Croydon
Rubbish James, they aren't trigger happy Tear gas would have had to be thrown into every room in the apartment to ensure it would work by which time he'd have been able to continue taking pot shots at police and innocent members of the public. Don't forget, he didn't care who or what he shot - he even shot into a child's bedroom. I'm sorry for this man, but as has already been stated, if you pick up a gun and start shooting at people, be prepared for them to shoot back...
- Daizy, N England
I'm sorry but this wasn't another Jean Charles de Menezes case. Mark Saunders had fired at one of his neighbours in the back garden, at another neighbour's house (and a police officer who looked out of the window at that house) as well as at other police officers. He wasn't exactly harmless, whatever his father may say, nor was he firing blanks. He may well have had a large stock of ammunition at the house as the weapon was lawfully kept at that address.
While it's tragic that there has been a loss of life, I really can't see that the police had any option in this case but to return fire with live ammunition to protect themselves and members of the public.
- Sarah W, London
They took 5 shots to kill him because they are incompetent trigger happy goons. Several tear gas grenades would have smoked him out without a shot being required. Shotguns are useless after 40 yards and cannot even break windscreen glass at 20 yards... goons with guns!
- James, New Malden, Surrey
If you point a weapon at Police, they will put you down!
- Mike, London, UK
what all the do-gooders seem to forget is the fundamental rule - you should not point a weapon at anyone regardless if it is loaded or not... If you are stupid to point it at an armed Police Officer or a member of the Armed Forces, you will be shot and they will put you down so you don't harm any member of the public or their colleagues!
- Mike, london UK
Isn't it long past time these police officers were given the command to use knock-out gas in such circumstances? Sounds like yet another case of "overkill" as with JC Menedes, have they learned nothing? If this is the best the "elite" C019 can do when someone is alone in a room then God help us all. It seems yet again the SAS guy they had on TV a few months ago who used to train police officers has been proved correct. He said "the last people you want carrying firearms are the police officers I have had to train as the vast majority of them were obsessed with guns", his words not mine.
- John, Dundee, UK
