The verdict of unlawful killing at the second inquest into the killing of Harry Stanley created uproar in police ranks and a frenzy of lies, half-truths and spin from senior police officers and Home Secretary David Blunkett. Harry Stanley was killed by armed response unit officers Inspector Neil Sharman and Sergeant Devin Fagan on 22 September 1999 while he was walking home carrying a table leg in a plastic carrier bag.
Over 120 police officers refused to carry arms for 36 hours on 2-3 November following the jury’s verdict. The press called this a strike, but the correct term was mutiny. There were no armed response units on London’s streets during this period, but armed anarchy did not break out. The populace did not take up armed robbery, settle old scores with guns or massacre police officers. In fact the streets were arguably safer without 120 armed thugs on the loose.
On 3 November The Sun published an article by Metropolitan Police Deputy Commissioner Sir Ian Blair, headlined ‘We must stand by our hero gun cops’, calling for the law to be changed to give killer gun cops immunity. Blunkett echoed this throughout the media. Stanley family solicitor, Daniel Machover, said that putting armed police beyond the law is the hallmark of military dictatorship.
Meanwhile, scant regard was given to the basis of the inquest verdict. The police officers claimed that they challenged Harry Stanley, who turned around, grasping the contents of the bag in one hand and pointing what they believed to be a gun at Fagan. Yet the forensic evidence showed Harry had only just begun to turn towards Sharman, not Fagan, and that the fatal entry wound was at the back left side of Harry’s skull. In fact, because Fagan was standing to Sharman’s right, he was out of range of any pointed ‘weapon’. For the police account to be true, the fatal bullet would have had to enter the front right of his skull, not the rear left.
It took two inquests to reach this verdict because the forensic evidence was ruled out at the first. Meanwhile the two officers were not suspended; indeed Sharman was promoted to Chief Inspector, in charge of community policing in Colindale. They have now been suspended pending a decision by the Crown Prosecution Service on whether they will be charged. Even this small drop of justice for Harry Stanley has been turned into a discussion of the terms and conditions of his killers.
More deaths
There has been another imbroglio – this time between the coroner at the inquest into the death of Derek Bennett and Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stephens. Derek Bennett was shot by four bullets into his back when armed police were called because he was seen carrying a gun – actually a cigarette lighter. The police successfully appealed against the coroner’s order that their identities should be revealed. Stephens then tried to introduce new witnesses from the ‘mental health authorities’ to give evidence about Bennett’s medical history. Presumably he thinks that evidence of mental illness would justify shooting Derek Bennett in the back.
In an outrageous High Court judgment the verdict of unlawful killing was overturned in the case of Roger Sylvester who died after being attacked by eight police officers outside his home. The police involved have now been reinstated. The Sylvester family announced outside the court that they would no longer be participating in the farce that passes for British justice.
An inquest jury gave a verdict of accidental death for David Campbell, a 31-year-old Jamaican who died during a police raid. Campbell had overstayed his visa and died after falling from a third floor window during a police drugs raid. There was no evidence of his taking or dealing in drugs. Police raids are deliberately intended to terrify both the targets and the entire neighbourhood. David Campbell was running in fear for his life when he died. Another victim of a police state.
Jim Wills, friend of Harry Stanley
Queen anounces more repression
The Queen’s Speech at the opening of Parliament on 26 November demonstrated once again the priorities of her majesty’s loyal Labour government: social control, repression and further entrenching inequality.
The 30 bills and draft bills to be introduced in the coming year include:
• Civil Contingencies Bill – unprecedented power in ‘an emergency’ to ban people from leaving or entering any area, deploy troops, ban gatherings, requisition property and disregard existing legislation. Described by Liberty as ‘giving the government a blank cheque to define anything it wants as a civil emergency’.
• Higher Education Bill – introducing £3,000 top-up fees.
• Immigration and Asylum Bill – asylum seekers to get only one chance to appeal; families to have benefits stopped if their claim fails; children from these families to be taken into care; asylum seekers to be returned to ‘safe’ countries if they have already lodged claims there.
• Draft Criminal Defence Service Bill – will cut legal aid spending and reduce defendants’ access to legal representation
• Draft Identity Cards Bill – will create a national register and powers for compulsory ID cards; passports and driving licences to include fingerprints within five years.
In addition, the Queen announced the setting up of the Serious Organised Crime Agency, a sort of British FBI, compulsory drug testing of people arrested and ‘further legislation to tackle anti-social behaviour’.
Nicki Jameson
FRFI 182 December 2004 / January 2005
