View Full Version : Police admit shooting innocent 17-year-old
Pixie
5th February 2009, 08:21
I have a very good friend in the UK who happened to be a police officer and a target pistol shooter. He applied to join the UK eqivalent of the AOS in the UK and was turned down. The reason being that he "liked guns too much". When pistols were made illegal in the UK for civilians he applied again. As he couldnt put down pistol shooter on his application he was accepted.
This attitude is also that of the NZ Police.
I believe that the AOS do not have individual firearms allocated to each officer,they take the first one that comes to hand,and do not get familiar with a specific weapon.
Mr Merde
5th February 2009, 08:34
This attitude is also that of the NZ Police.
I believe that the AOS do not have individual firearms allocated to each officer,they take the first one that comes to hand,and do not get familiar with a specific weapon.
This again contrasts with the armed forces.
We were issued with our rifles. We were encouraged to get to know our rifles. They were sighted in for yourself.
Yes you can pick up almost any rifle or pistol and be near enough on target but for accurate work it the firearm needs to be sighted in for the individual using it. Every one is physically different and every one holds a firearm differently. This impacts on accuracy.
I hate doing it but compare this with the US where each officer is issued with a fiream. The serial is recorded to that officer. He qualifies and trains with that firearm (even the SWAT teams). They know their weapons.
This takes a lot of time and a lot of training.
The average NZ police officer doesnt seem to get this and the AOS seems to meet political guidelines for training.
ghost
5th February 2009, 12:38
Its not the case. BUt if life is at risk, as the truck drivers was, action needed to be taken.
It is his words that I believe, more than any other. He was there. He saw it actually occur and isn't relying on the Harold or any other Media beat up.
His words were to the effect of, "I have no problem with the Polices actions. If they didn't act, I would be dead too." (Not an exact quote, mind, but definitely along those lines).
Thats another way of saying "I'm just glad it wasn't may arse that got shot"
Patrick
5th February 2009, 15:44
I don't smoke anything except perhaps the odd tyre and, with all due respect, that is only your opinion which is based on hearsay.
And good for you too.... (the non smoking bit...:niceone:)
Which part is my opinion and which is hearsay? (Granted, it can be hearsay about the "through shot" or "ricochet," as that is yet to be confirmed or ruled out, but remains very much a possibility... otherwise it will be a seriously bad miss with absolutely terrible consequences...:blank:)
It is fact, not hearsay or opinion, that the kid was a passer by who had absolutely nothing to do with any of the thefts, purse snatching, shooting at the cops or offender... which is the opposite of what you seem to think/claim...???
He was an innocent bystander.
This attitude is also that of the NZ Police.
I believe that the AOS do not have individual firearms allocated to each officer,they take the first one that comes to hand,and do not get familiar with a specific weapon.
Wrong there Pixie... AOS firearms are individually issued, sighed in for that one and only member only. Different specialists have different weapons. Scoped rifles for the snipers, some shotguns, scoped bushmasters, some un-scoped.... and glocks for all.
Thats another way of saying "I'm just glad it wasn't may arse that got shot"
True... but he was there. He knows what happened, got to see it all up close and personal... way better than everyone in KB land, me included.
Glad it wasn't my arse that shot the kid.....
Condolences to the family just doesn't seem enough........
spudchucka
5th February 2009, 16:07
I don't smoke anything except perhaps the odd tyre and, with all due respect, that is only your opinion which is based on hearsay.
Unless you were there and witnessed everything that took place, your opinions are also based on hearsay.
ManDownUnder
5th February 2009, 16:14
Unless you were there and witnessed everything that took place, your opinions are also based on hearsay.
Oh stop it - you'll ask us to stop making up the facts next... there's a really good story here... and after a few drinks it get's even better! We're right! What actually happened is wrong, and most likely irrelevant
Skyryder
5th February 2009, 20:19
Beat me to it Scummy. "Former" often means leaving under a cloud. I'll take it back if he retired coz he got old.
Sorta look forward to your jibes. But to use SD's to have a go at me...............just not cricket ol' son...................unless you are that Aussie wicket keeper.
Skyryder
Patrick
9th February 2009, 18:15
Sorta look forward to your jibes. But to use SD's to have a go at me...............just not cricket ol' son...................unless you are that Aussie wicket keeper.
Skyryder
Ditto...
Having a go??? Say what???? Just a fact that those who were ex's who like to speak out, are inevitably ones who left under some sort of cloud, itching for something to have a bitch and moan about....
Me Mrs is half Ozzie....; that is bad enough. Call me an Ozzie... now that is just plain rude!
EJK
9th February 2009, 18:19
Sorry if this is irrelevant however it's irony how the boy who assaulted an officer in Christchurch is 17?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4840755a11.html
Patrick
9th February 2009, 18:24
Sorry if this is irrelevant however it's irony how the boy who assaulted an officer in Christchurch is 17?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4840755a11.html
Huh? There is another 17 year old in NZ???? Isn't that ironic....
scumdog
9th February 2009, 18:32
Sorry if this is irrelevant however it's irony how the boy who assaulted an officer in Christchurch is 17?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4840755a11.html
ANOTHER unemployed lazy lackwit....great, like we ain't got enough of THEM!!
Hitcher
9th February 2009, 19:29
Sorry if this is irrelevant however it's irony how the boy who assaulted an officer in Christchurch is 17?
Ironic? Hardly.
doc
9th February 2009, 19:39
Sorry if this is irrelevant however it's irony how the boy who assaulted an officer in Christchurch is 17?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4840755a11.html
Bit sad that to some he will be a role model, yet the 17 yr old this thread is about had attempts of character assasination made against him cos he didn't fit the profile.
Indiana_Jones
10th February 2009, 06:58
Ironic? Hardly.
I think Alanis Morissette confused everyone what the meaning of ironic is lol
-Indy
EJK
10th February 2009, 16:40
Apology if the post was inconsequential
Toffee
26th August 2013, 20:16
I see that the family of Halatau Naitoko has received compensation of $225 000
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9087918/225k-compensation-for-Naitoko-death
This seems a bit stingy to me considering the police have admitted the chase that led to his shooting should have been handled better.
This young guy had a child and maybe 40 - 50 years of working life ahead of him so would have earned over a million in that time.
Contrast this with the payout for ex Secretary for Education who was paid out a $425 000 severance package after 15 months of stuffing things up at the Ministry of Education.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10869354
IMHO those payouts should've been the other way round!
Smifffy
29th August 2013, 15:46
I see that the family of Halatau Naitoko has received compensation of $225 000
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9087918/225k-compensation-for-Naitoko-death
...and the popo even fucked that bit up:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11114772
scumdog
29th August 2013, 16:58
...and the popo even fucked that bit up:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11114772
I guess they hadn't thought it through:pinch:
"Here's $100,000, don't tell anybody"
Later:
"Here's another $125,000, it's OK, you can tell that to everybody"
Everybody: "A $125,000, is that all they're getting.?? - they should least got $225,000..."
Smifffy
29th August 2013, 17:03
I guess they hadn't thought it through:pinch:
"Here's $100,000, don't tell anybody"
Later:
"Here's another $125,000, it's OK, you can tell that to everybody"
Everybody: "A $125,000, is that all they're getting.?? - they should least got $225,000..."
Pretty much. Although given she supposedly did keep shtum about the first payment, they could have got her to keep shtum about the rest and simply release that a confidential settlement had been reached. Then that would probably have put undue media pressure on her to reveal the sum also.
Probably should have not worried so much about all the secrecy in the first place.
Doesn't do much for trust & confidence and all that though.
nzspokes
29th August 2013, 18:58
Yet the guy that caused just gets a little time inside. Maybe he should be paying as well.
Winston001
29th August 2013, 22:30
Just curious: how much is Stephen Hohepa McDonald paying the family?
Banditbandit
30th August 2013, 09:24
Just curious: how much is Stephen Hohepa McDonald paying the family?
For dead cows and some damage to a new house ???
Winston001
30th August 2013, 14:06
From the sentencing report:
"McDonald led police on a high-speed chase throughout Auckland in stolen cars, shooting a sawn-off shotgun along the way.
McDonald admitted charges including firing at police, possessing a firearm, aggravated robbery, and unlawfully getting into a motor vehicle.
Justice Harrison on Tuesday imposed a minimum non-parole period of eight years.
He says the facts of the case speak for themselves, and McDonald - not police - is responsible for Naitoko's death."
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/thirteen-years-fatal-police-chase-3006692
Banditbandit
30th August 2013, 15:09
Oh .. sorry - I was thinking of the wrong McDonald .. My mistake ..
Winston001
31st August 2013, 01:25
Kewl. :D
The crucial issue is the offender (McDonald) endangered the public, and fired at police. In law that makes him liable for reasonably foreseeable consequences which in this case, not to put too fine a point on it, includes police shooting back. Who knew?!
In other jurisdictions unhampered by ACC McDonald would have been sued by the family.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.