Second inquiry into terror raid

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Judge_John, Jul 10, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. A second independent inquiry will be conducted into last month's anti-terror raid in Forest Gate.
    The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) confirmed it will investigate claims by neighbours of the raided house that they were assaulted.

    One man claims he was hit with a machine gun.

    The IPCC says the new investigation is separate from an inquiry launched last month into how a man was shot in the shoulder during the east London raid.

    "The IPCC can confirm that it has received a complaint from the occupants of number 48 Lansdown Road and is conducting an independent investigation in relation to this,"

    Oh dear, did they knock his milk bottles over outside his door step too, pathetic waste of money & investigation time!.
  2. Lucky for him it wasn't off the butt of an SLR...............
  3. Don't you think that might be a little premature, JJ? Not to say harsh? A very good friend of mine (ex-plank) in Nottingham had his front door booted in at silly o'clock one morning last year, he and his missus were thrown on the deck in their jim-jams and plasticuffed, their kids were terrified while a whole swarm of Old Bill rotated the gaff.

    It turned out that they were supposed to raid 125 ********* Road as the home of a suspected dope-dealer and raided Number 25 instead.

    It was all sorted out in the end with compensation and such, but their kids still flinch when there's a knock on the door and there was no need at all for all the physical and verbal abuse they had to put up with. Quite apart from the fact that there was never any official apology, just an admission that the Old Bill had "somehow got it wrong".

    It seems that part of the Old Bill training course in the UK is watching all the series of NYPD! :D :D :D

  4. That is true, but it seems they cant get it right whatever they do.

    Withheld info (well, supposedly withheld info)on the 7/7 suspects and didnt follow it up and police got criticised for it - knock someones door in after a tip off and get criticised. They have no way of making everyone happy.
  5. Hold on don't you think thats a little harsh, several plots were foiled before the recent blunders, and probably many others we dont know about.

    The fact that 4 years or so after the 11th of september attacks it took al quida all that time to score one success on UK soil means someone somewhere has been doing a very good job, problem is we only hear about it when it goes wrong.

    Also its probably a fair bet that it wasnt just CIVPOL involved in the raid, theres probably been input by the SRR and other sqauddies and sneaky types, so lets not have a dig at the police when we still know very little facts about what happened that day.
  6. untallguy

    untallguy Old-Salt Reviewer Book Reviewer

    From what I can gather, the raid was mounted on faulty intelligence - something we can all relate to. (This is not meant as a dig at the Int types - just a statement of perceived fact). That said, the lads who mounted the raid were probably expecting some nasty types on the other side of the door and went in hard, no problem so far.

    However, what annoys me about this episode - and various others over the years - is the Met's difficulties in dealing with press/public interest in these events, ie:

    1. The Met's apparent inability to attempt a 'softly-softly' approach in cases where there will be media interest - it would appear the roughty-toughty is the way ahead when the cameras are around.

    2. The Met's consistent refusal to be able to brief the media/public properly. I am not expecting total transparency or immediate updates to the media whenever anything happens. What I would like the police to remember (and most of them do) is that they work for us and therefore, there is an expectation that they will tell us what actually happened - in headline cases, this is not always the case.

    There will always be caveats to these things. I fully appreciate that sometimes going in hard will be assessed as being the most effective and safest way of operating and that tactics, intelligence sources etc must be protected (please not that careers are not included in this list).

    I agree fully with mark1234 that we only see the headline stuff but these appear to be the events that go wrong (often that's why the make the headlines) but the Met seem to get this aspect of modern policing wrong so often.
  7. Cast your mind back to Madrid when the police raided the bombers flat and the bombers took half the building down. This is the reality of every single anti terror raid, yet still the police put themselves in harms way in order to protect the public. Due to the nature of the threat and the nature of intelligence mistakes are always going to be made and when they are, we must of course learn from them.

    What concerns me is that every error (If the Forest gate raid truly was an error) leads to certain groups trying to neuter the police. Is no one going to ask why this individual making the latest complaint is only coming forward now? I suggest he is doing it for political motives rather than a desire for the truth or justice, it is probably his own little contribution to the jihad.

    The truth is alien to our enemies and they seek a situation in which the police will hesitate in the future. This hesitation by the police will be the only opportunity they need.

    Think on the potential consequences of that.