Policeman shot dead in Croydon custody suite.

Flowers have been left in memory of the police officerCredit: Reuters

Following from: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12764124/croydon-shooting-police-officer-shot/

One man known as MusicBox MB, 33, from Croydon told the Sun Online: “I’ve been in there a few times. Before they take you into the station they search you outside and the van you come in. 

“There is no way you can get into that station with a gun, you can't get in there with a tiny bag of weed. 100 per cent they won't have searched him properly, that's why this happened.”

And one local man, 31, who had also been detained in the custody centre, said: "It doesn't make any sense to me. I don't know how this guy has the freedom to start shooting up the place.

"They arrested me at home and still searched me and cuffed me. This guy is walking in there with arms, uncuffed, unsearched."

Asked about how someone could enter the building while armed, former Det Ch Insp Chris Phillips said: "I think police officers are probably less likely to search people now with all the furore that goes on.

"When people get arrested there is a general view that they should be searched before being transported to the police station but that doesn't always happen - and it depends on what the man was arrested for.

Both former police officers and offenders expressed surprise at the possible lack of checks, with it understood the suspect was being booked in for possession of ammunition.

The 23-year-old suspect was detained by special constables after he was seen 'acting suspiciously' and was taken by van to the custody suite in Windmill Lane just after 2am.

Commissioner Cressida Dick issued a statement this morning on the deathCredit: PA:Press Association

My initial reaction is sadness at the loss of life and the grief this causes to the immediate family  But in these very strange times we need to be very cautious in the way we approach the story. 

The twenty-three three year old unnamed man who apparently carried out the murder inside the custody suite is currently in hospital in a critical condition, having it is said, turned the gun on himself. So far no information has been forthcoming on the weapon or the circumstances of the event, other than in broad outline. Virtually all reporting has concentrated on demonstrations of respect by colleagues and public alike. The Mayor, the Commissioner and an unidentified female have been filmed attending a hastily convened religious prayer gathering led by an ordained CoE priest in red vestments, all of course keeping their social distance, though not wearing the obligatory masks. 

Is it just me that finds this sort of novel theatrics for presumably some public relations purpose - the thing was videoed and released to the media - slightly if not distasteful, inappropriate? It appears to be the 'new normal' in certain tragic events, but significantly not others. It is not disrespectful to the victim, to enquire about the mechanics of the arrangement. Who suggested it? Who organised it? Only then can can we come to a conclusion as to its genuineness or if it was a calculated public relations exercise for political or psycho/social goals.

Although we 'the public' have no idea what happened and are wholly dependent on the police and news media to tell us, those professionals investigating the murder, should already have a very clear picture. After all, it happened in a very controlled environment with at least two other officers present and subject to state of the art CCTV which will provide complete and timed coverage.  Please do not tell us the CCTV was not working on the day or my suspicions will rightly go into overdrive! 

In the circumstances, both audibly and visually, there should be absolutely no doubt as to the precise sequence of events, that in time should inform the public. Issues of policing and custody are of genuine public interest, both for the protection of the public and the officers dealing with them. However, despite our current ignorance, certain questions, so far unexplained, jump out to the casual, or not so casual, observer.

The most obvious is how in the hell did a man with a gun on him, get into the building, let alone the custody suite? Unlike a knife or sharp implement, a gun is hardly easy to conceal. Any person of a suspicious character would surely be frisked. Even in this day and age, no person is arrested lightly. What was this man arrested for? Then was the arrested person not handcuffed? No trained policeman would remove handcuffs before asking, "Have you anything on you that we should know about" and ensuring he hadn't.

What is even more extraordinary in this case, is the fact that we are told he was arrested in the early hours of the morning (approximately 2 am) for "possession of ammunition"!  What? In other words, this man was already flagged up as a potential gun owner and user. This would have been a red flag to any arresting officer, demanding extra caution. Protocol would surely demand the involvement of armed officers in such a situation, and as a very minimum a thorough body search. This would surely have occurred to the dullest civilian let alone trained officers.

But trained officers raises another question. We are told he was detained by two 'Special Constables'. Two Special Constables, at 2 am to deal with someone suspected of 'possessing ammunition'?  If true this sounds so reckless as to be almost unbelievable. Who were these 'Special Constables'?  Is it normal for two special constables to be out and about at 2 am in the absence of a properly trained conventional Constable? It is well known that 'Special Constables', i.e. people from normal life who sign up for unpaid police support work, are held in contempt by regular officers. How come these volunteers were assigned such a potentially dangerous undertaking?

However what if the term 'Special Constable' was in fact used to cover a different breed of 'Special' entirely?  

We have seen in previous events how non-traditional policemen have appeared to confront terrorists or terrorist events. It is becoming a bit of a habit. 

At the Westminster attack when PC Palmer was stabbed to death, two armed individuals appeared at just the right moment to shoot the attacker, Khalid Masood. The identity of them has of course never been revealed, though the explanation of who and why they were there has never seemed credible. At London Bridge it just happened to be a retired British Transport policeman who was available to take a leading role. (In fact BRP keep popping up inexplicably at terror events) In the Streatham Road, Richmond stabbing event, it was an MI5 Officer on the scene following the terrorist who shot him dead, the police arriving only subsequently.  

So it is reasonable to ask, who and what were these 'Special Constables' and the exact circumstances of the said 'detention'? Did they come across the 23 year old by accident or were they tasked to find him? Were they on foot or in a police vehicle? How did they transfer the man to the holding centre and what precautions were taken to ensure he wasn't in possession of an offensive weapon - even a firearm?

One final question arises in my mind: why did the man shoot only the Custody Sergeant? How many shots were fired before he turned the gun, allegedly, on himself?  Why were the 'Special Constables' not injured if they were in the same confined space?  These are all valid questions that of course the media do not pursue, and the authorities do not answer, preferring instead to deflect the attention to the sentimental and emotional. We should not be surprised. It has become the norm. Investigative, sceptical journalism has been replaced with celebrity soap.

It of course comes at a time when Julian Assange is fighting an extradition charge and the police have come under considerable criticism for its enforcement of the unprecedented Covid lock-down. 

LATEST! (23:30 25.9.2020)

Saturday's Times reports the gun was 'hidden in suspect's jacket'.

 

Whereas the Mail states he 'produced a revolver he had stuffed down his trousers'. 

There is obviously a direct conflict there.

Then we are told the man was on the terrorist list which makes the lax precautions even more incredible. At the time of the shooting it is reported he was still handcuffed, with his hands behind his back. How in this condition he retrieved the pistol either from his coat pocket or underpants, and managed to aim a shot, and to shoot himself, is not explained.

Then another strange feature is the statement that the Custody Sergeant now named as Matiu Ratana (54) was about to carry out a search in a Covid screening cell. All previous experience suggests this would not be a task for the Custody Sergeant but for other officers. The Custody Sergeant usually remains behind the reception desk to ensure protocols are followed, before a person is taken to the cells. All possessions and risk items are removed at that stage. To be hit several times in the heart, at point blank range, as is reported, raises questions as to why Sergeant Ratana wasn't behind his protective counter.

The Commissioner, Cressida Dick, has now stated that the suspect was arrested by regular police officers on patrol. This conflicts with earlier report that they were 'Special Constables'.  Her update here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i45UVGk-kRQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i45UVGk-kRQ

Met Police Commissioner speaks on 'shocking' death of Croydon police officer

8,859 views

•25 Sep 2020

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aidPUN2nIWA

Croydon police shooting: "Police have been taken for granted for too long, we are paying the price"

3,650 views

•25 Sep 2020

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rHu-sBu8Cw

Croydon police shooting: "One of Sadiq Khan's biggest failures has been to tackle crime"

Then as extraordinary co-incidence would have it in Paris....

Paris attack: Stabbing near Charlie Hebdo office 'an act of terror'  

See: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54302337

French Prime Minister Jean Castex visited the scene flanked by Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin and Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo
Reuters

The attack came as a high-profile trial was under way of 14 people accused of helping two jihadists carry out the 2015 attack on Charlie Hebdo, in which 12 people were killed.

In an interview with broadcaster France 2, Mr Darmanin described the stabbing as "a new bloody attack against our country, against journalists".

"It's the street where Charlie Hebdo used to be. This is the way the Islamist terrorists operate," the interior minister said.

He said he had ordered security to be stepped up around synagogues this weekend for Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar.

UPDATE:  BBC NEWS. (with video)  Still leaves many unanswered questions!  Can the police account be trusted is one of them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn06S-FFA24