Just hearing the news that two pedestrians have been killed by a driver who was failing to stop for the police.
Thankfully the driver is in custody. But with both being pronounced dead at the scene, it certainly sounds horrific, especially on Lennard Road.
Condolences to those affected, and hope the police are able to carry out their work without being accused of causing this.
That is incredibly sad. Like you, I hope the resulting inquiry doesn’t blame the police. They have probably suffered already from the ordeal, and were just doing their job.
We’re already in a situation where police are unable to pursue kids causing mayhem on mopeds. And this just emboldens the criminals.
Some reports make the situation even worse, suggesting the chase was due to a child / baby being snatched by the car being pursued.
I know there is very little in the wording, but I far prefer “vehicle failing to stop” rather than “police chase”. The latter is always used to accuse the police of being irresponsible.
Can’'t imagine what it would have been like to be there, nor deal with it all. And thoughts are with the families.
Very near me and I can hear the helicopter circling, which usually means they are looking for someone or something.
Driver apparently detained. Police heli usually does accident scene surveys after something like this. Makes mapping the course of events much easier for the accident investigation team.
Not saying they aren’t looking for something though.
I was run over by a car mounting a pavement 4 years ago and was very lucky to only have broken bones etc. Not nice.
When you’re being pursued by police you stop the car. No ifs, no buts.
The anti-police comments are sickening. There is a growing tide of anti-police sentiment popularised by the BLM movement, which needs to be seen for what it is - thuggish and dangerous.
British police are outstanding. They don’t deserve to be vilified.
If we clip the wings of our police by preventing pursuits like this, imagine the consequences. A crim just needs to step in a car and put his foot down, and he’s away, scot-free. We will start to see strategic joyriding. It’s already happening with the moped mafia, chucking their helmets off so the police aren’t allowed to pursue them.
Indeed what happened today was tragic and I share everyone’s sympathy for the victims, their families and friends. However, I find this post quite extraordinary and really very worrying on a number of levels. You’re clearly writing this from your own middle class white male perspective. I’m a middle class white female and I would have to agree that whenever I’ve had the need to call on the police (for example when I was mugged for my phone near Honor Oak station and when my son was indecently exposed at in the changing rooms at The Glassmill), I’ve found them to be highly professional, helpful and committed and I couldn’t fault them. However, my husband is a kind, decent, law-abiding black man who served over 25 years dedicated to helping others in the fire service - and his experience of the police is very different. He’s never, ever broken the law yet the number of times he has been stopped and searched for no justifiable reason whatsoever is incredible. His similarly kind, law-abiding black male friends in caring professions have also been subject to similar experiences. So it’s very wrong of you to denigrate the BLM movement in the way you have, without a full appreciation of the black male experience. If there are any black men in this forum then I suggest you engage with them.
It’s also very wrong of you to make a sweeping statement that British police are outstanding - as in any organisation, there are “wrong uns” and the police force is no exception, in fact by its very nature it will attract those prone to corruption. I’m not saying all police are that way inclined - and as I said my own personal experience of them has been exemplary - but I’m sure the families of Stephen Lawrence, Jean Charles de Menezes and Daniel Morgan, amongst many others would have a lot to say in response to your sweeping statement.
I also think it’s very wrong to make judgments in this particular case without knowing the full facts. We don’t know why this guy was being pursued - there was talk that he’d abducted a child in initial reports, but that’s all gone very quiet - we just don’t know the facts. But in any event it’s a big jump from being a “joyrider” (which we don’t know he was) to call him “homicidal” - do you have any evidence to say that he intended to kill and injure those poor people? What if the guy had mental health issues and/or was scared - does that make him a bad person worthy of our contempt, or does it make him a troubled person who was scared and didn’t know what to donwhen pursued and needs support (and hasn’t had that support in the face of austerity)? Maybe he was a “druggie” - again, if so, does that make him a bad person or someone who’s had a troubled life through no fault of his own and who society is failing? My point is, we don’t know the facts - and it’s very dangerous to make these judgments about people based on incomplete facts. Even if the police did nothing wrong, then to judge this man in the way you have without knowing the circumstances is very disturbing, very symptomatic of current society and just not at all helpful and will solve none of the problems. Yes, it’s right at this time to extend our sympathies to the victims, but it’s very wrong and damaging to post stuff like this.
@Lin has also started another thread on BLM and we’re continuing the conversation there. I’ve moved that to the opt-in Politicos category.
Similarly if anyone else imagines that “austerity” or being “scared” might excuse men speeding in stolen cars and avoiding the police, we’ll continue that conversation in Politicos too.
Just for clarification, as I have just seen what comments made on my post have started off.
My comments about anti police sentiment have NOTHING to do with BLM or any other movement, that was not my point.
South London has a history of slight anti police, look after your own, don’t snitch etc. Just a minority really. But as social media allows voices to be heard, so the sentiment grows, especially with some of the tales that do the rounds.
Anyway…
Race, nationality, age nor sex really plays a part in this event. And it is sad to see such a tragedy turned into a political soap box to start touting around BLM and other causes.
Two people lost their lives in a horrible accident yesterday, details are still thin, but we know two dead, three injured, and many mentally hurt but this.
I for one would like to keep the thread on topic, and thank you all for moving the other discussions elsewhere.
So tragic and needless.
And some serious work required to stop people evading the police in future. From the article
Chris - with respect I do hope you reflect on what you wrote here might not have been your greatest post.
The guy didn’t stop, was (by age) inexperienced and driving a car he was unfamiliar with at speed under pressure with his liberty at stake. Taking rational cool decisions or ‘doing the right thing’ is a hope, a big hope and not one to rely on. The chances of him making a fatal mistake are really high.
As happened. Innocent people paid the ultimate price. Not him, not the police.
That’s why it should be a judgement by the police to pursue, how they pursue or let it go. Its a judgement itself which is going to be wrong in hindsight sometimes. Here we don’t know all the circumstances, whether the police drivers were following or breaking protocol. In other words we don’t know if they were doing the right thing by police standards or not.
That’s why I make no judgement but will come after anybody who does who is not in full command of the situation - which you were not.
Also I appear not to be the only one somewhat upset by your politicisation of this tragedy by implicating BLM. You have erroneously divided the police/BLM into good/bad when the actuality is much more complicated and we should be seeking to supporting both whilst rooting out those that have deeper and more sinister objectives in either.
Yesterday was a disaster for so many people. Support not vengence is the name of the game until we know more.
I can’t comprehend how any of those factors (age, inexperience, speeding, pressure) excuse this man from evading the police in the first place?
As Peter Kirkham says (see previous comment):
As for BLM - yes, clearly a can of worms opened there. I only mentioned that in the context of anti-police sentiment, which has undoubtedly been inflamed by the political activism of BLM. But a conversation probably best had in the Politicos topic rather than here (my bad, originally).
@StuartG - The conversation re BML and Chris’s comments here have been taken to another thread not to distract from the original topic. It’s in the Politicos section, which is an opt-in for forum users. Any and all takings-to-task welcome!
Chris - who is arguing that that anything excuses the actions of this man? Certainly not me. Only that the outcome of a high speed chase is a high risk to innocents. The decision to pursue/not to pursue should be made on the expected balance of outcomes.
This may have been done correctly here - or not. It is those with the facts that should judge. To use an analogy - a man has a gun in a busy shopping centre. Do open up with an automatic weapon with innocent people in between? I’m not saying yes or no. Its a fine judgement heavily dependent on the exact circumstances.
What I think I hear from you is to pursue (or shoot) because he is a bad man no matter what. I hope you can correct me there.
I agree with the sentiment of most of your post Paddy, but 6-7 years behind the wheel is a long enough time to grasp the basics of a motor vehicle. I’m not entirely sure what can be assumed by his age. He could have driven every day since 17. And could have more experience than a 40yr old occasional driver.
As for the unfamiliar car, he may have been driving a very similar vehicle since passing his test.
Not trying to nit pick, but you say yourself we don’t have the facts, and it is wrong to assume. So just pointing that out.
I totally agree with the comment that rational decisions are out of the window at that point though. Same rules apply for everyone when put under extreme pressure.
For further info for all, the chase was approx 0.9 miles, so probably a minute to 90 seconds long. As people have asked about the control room authorising pursuit, stinger, t-pac etc, the chances are the pursuit was too short to ever got to this stage, let alone getting NPAS involved.
I will stay out of the anti police sentiment part of this convo.
This is a good analogy. Indeed - the decision to pursue is a moral dilemma, and some moral dilemmas are sadly lose-lose scenarios as someone will get hurt either way.
In any case, I have a great deal of faith in British police, who I think are highly trained, overwhelmingly good-intentioned, and under constant scrutiny. If they chose to pursue, I am confident they would have done it for the right reasons, and not just for the thrill of it, or through negligence.
Regardless of who was wrong or right in this case, we surely need to ensure our young (23??) children understand that being pursued by the police means you stop immediately.
I think you make a good point Paddy, but to take your analogy and run with it…
The level of engagement is indeed questionable, and at this time not established. Just like CO19, the RTPU have differing levels of engagement. Where CO19 have various weapons and tactics to take down a threat, RTPC also have options.
First off, given where the “pursuit” began, they would have put in a stop shortly before the fail to stop occurred and the pursuit began.
At this point they would notify control, and request permission to engage. From this point on consideration would be given to what tactics were warranted in the location.
I would hazard a guess that from the location of the start of the pursuit, most of the route would have been a safe follow distance (given the power and capability of the BMW’s vs the stolen car.
By the time it reached Parish Road, there is time to get some speed up.
During all of this, my main point is there was very little time to do anything but begin following. Let alone consider stinger, NPAS.
I would say if all has been done by the book, just as CO19, the RTPU would use the least force or pressure possible to bring the car to a stop. Sadly there was no parked car on this day, which is what these things usually end up buried in.
I have gone off on a bit of a tangent there, sorry.
Will be interesting to see if the dash cam footage is ever shown.
By definition this has already failed to occur by the time we use the word “pursued”
Under normal circumstances, with nothing to hide, ideology is fine, under extreme duress, logic goes out of the window, and instinct takes over. Fight or flight, usually flight. Speaking from experience on both sides. Same applies to an officer chasing someone with a weapon, on foot, alone. Wrong thing to go, but instinct wins.
Sorry Chris - haven’t cracked the quote system yet,
The point is this man doesn’t follow the rules or he wouldn’t presumably have driving the car. Even good kids don’t always do what their parents and teachers preach. There is inbuilt rebellion in most of us.
What he should do is not relevant. Its what you expect him to do that counts when making decisions on apprehending him. Professional police will try to do that. I hope that is what happened here and it just didn’t work out.
However your apparent faith that ALL police will do the right thing all the time is, forgive me, rather nieve. Count yourself lucky if you have yet to encounter a bad apple. Pretending they are not there and a real problem creates space for them to rot the force. That’s really bad for both of us and the rest of society. Eternal vigilance is, I’m afraid, rather necessary.
Putting those poor police drivers through a tough investigative process is a price they have to pay to retain our confidence that most of our police can be trusted most of the time. Its success is that they may be far from perfect but in a far better division than those that caused the creation of BLM.
I’m sure the families of the deceased will feel sympathy for the perpetrator when they accept that his “inbuilt rebellion” made him do it.
I was careful to qualify my statements so as not to claim that ALL police are perfect. This is a straw man argument on your part, Paddy, sorry.
If we’re choosing sides here, I choose the side of the law, versus the side of the person who just killed two innocent people through his own sheer wilfulness. What am I missing here?
Forgive me in a moment of haste saying ALL . I was countering your ‘overwhelmingly’. So not really a straw man but one of us has a more realistic view of our police service than the other. It is for others to judge on their experience or evidence which of us it is.
Which is not to say I value the police and their importance to a civil society any less than you.
You comment about sympathy for the perpetrator is, I think, ill judged. This has nothing to do with sympathy, ideal worlds and stuff like that. Its a real messy world we have to live in and we have to take the world as it is warts an’ all before we can begin to think how we can make it a little better.
I’m having to sign off now - so best wishes for a quieter evening.
OK one last fling. Who is choosing sides? Not me - are you? We can reasonably say:
The 23 year old appears to be mighty in the wrong and has been charged for it and probably will be convicted for it. Who has a problem with that?
The pursuit drivers may have been following protocol or not. If they were then they have no case to answer and should be applauded for attempting to uphold the law plus our sympathy for their terrible experience when it all went wrong. If not then they will have to answer for it. The law or internal disciplinary procedures should do that.
Is there anything I missed?
I honestly don’t understand how London isn’t one enormous, lawless cauldron of crime. I think we are extremely lucky to live in a society where the majority of us not only abide by the law, but do so out of choice and not fear. However, there are many people in this city who don’t see things the same way, and as a result, we need a police force, who through limited budgets and limited permissions (e.g. not allowed to chase moped riders with no helmet) are doing the best job they can.
To me it makes no sense to say anything negative about this police force without specific evidence. This police force is the only thing that is protecting the very thin line we live every day between law and chaos. I’m not saying the police are perfect; undoubtedly they are not. But I, for one, am extremely grateful for the job that they thanklessly perform.
Couldn’t agree more.
They are accountable and will be investigated fully for their actions. Car data, camera footage, radio transmissions.
We just have to wait now.
[comment removed, see @Sandinista’s advice below]
This is worth a read - advice on the sort of comment online that can affect criminal trials.
I’ve redacted my comments. Thanks for pointing this out.
Spotlight is truly on the Police and such incidents right now.
Update on the legal process.
I know what you mean but I don’t think that’s entirely true. I’m a fan of the police and all out emergency services, but there are plenty of occasions people step where the police cannot or do not.
I think we should of course be generally supportive of the police, we and our families may all need them at some point, however gone are the days for me when you’d take the police version as gospel, or assume they will do their best for people always.
Maybe police now wearing body cameras can reassure you.
Oof. Can we not, guys? Plenty said last time this topic was live.
Oh completely agree with you miss @RachaelDunlop
Bedtime I think 
I think they are a great idea but I shall comment no more in view of the comments above re this
Just seen this news bite, and have to wonder if this is related.
IPCC asks CPS to consider charging two police officers over deaths during chase of stolen car in south east London last year
Confirmed this is the incident.
It is rare to see the IPCC recommend such a course of action.
It will be interesting to understand the alleged criminal offences relating to the actions of the two officers both during and following the pursuit. And whether this may have any relation to the tragic outcome for the innocent family caught up in the situation.
It is not for us to judge the actions of the officers, and nothing can excuse the behaviour of the nasty person who refused to stop for the police, preferring instead to take a course of action that resulted in the deaths of two pedestrians, but it is good that lessons might be learned from any possible inappropriate action on the part of the police.
Agree totally, would not encourage any online judgements to be passed.
Indeed it all stemmed from the actions of another. That other who is now serving a sentence for his part.
As you say for the IPCC to make recommendations to the CPS, there must be something which needs further scrutiny, this time by the justice system.
I know that a recent judgement clarified that police officers in pursuits or response drives are as accountable as the next person, and the phrase “highly trained driver” counts for nothing. A breach of the road traffic act is a breach. No matter who is driving.