With a sub-heading "My life as the Met's most
controversial marksman" you know this book isn't going to pull any
punches. And it doesn't. In part this is because the author is quite clearly
angry. He's angry with how he's been treated by the Met, how he's been treated
by prosecutors such as the IPCC and the CPS, and how he's been portrayed in
sections of the press. But that only tells half the story. If Lethal Force was
merely an angry screed, a chance for an embittered man to rant at those he
perceived to have wronged him, then it wouldn't be half the book that it is. It
would be tiresome and tedious rather than compelling and, a frankly
uncomfortable read. For what lies at the heart of this manuscript is a
brilliantly honest account of what it is to serve as a firearms officer in
Britain's biggest police force.
Tony Long joined London's Metropolitan Police in the
1970's. After Hendon, a short time in uniform, a shorter spell in CID, and
finally time in the Special Patrol Group (the forerunner to today’s Territorial
Support Group, and like the TSG, the closest the Met has to a full-time riot
squad) he found a home in what was then D11. This was the Met's nascent
firearms command, and the author vividly paints a picture of a group of
dedicated men (at that time it was primarily men) under-resourced and lacking
sufficient training, having to make do in the face of official intransigence.
The Met hierarchy looked upon the firearm's unit as a necessary evil and thus
Tony and his colleagues had to organise their own training, beg, borrow and
steal kit.
D11 eventually turned into PT17, then SO19, through CO19,
to finally its current designation, SCO19. If these frequent name changes
appear confusing, it's worth bearing in mind that each signaled a further step in
the unit's professionalism. While no one doubts the dedication of those early
efforts, SCO19 is now unrecognisable from its earlier incarnation and again the
author describes this journey well. In many ways it mirrors his own and it is
no surprise that he helped draft many of the training programmes and advised on
the sourcing of much of the unit's kit.
This is all very well but anyone who follows the news will
know of Tony Long and why indeed he has become "the Met's most
controversial Marksman." Notably his shooting of Azelle Rodney in 2005.
Police shootings in the UK are actually exceedingly rare. In the year of
Rodney's shooting, the Met's firearms unit carried out 938 pre-planned
operations. Shots were fired on only four of these. And in total, across the
four of the operations where shots were fired, just thirteen rounds were
discharged. The contrast with say, the US, is stark. 2005 however was a bad
year for the Met, both Azelle Rodney and the innocent Jean Charles De Menezes
being gunned down. It was Tony Long's misfortune to be responsible for the
first of these incidents.
Unlike De Menezes however, Azelle Rodney was not shot on
the basis of mistaken identity. Nor was he an innocent bystander mistaken for
the operation's target. Rather he was a known criminal who at the time was
wanted by police for an earlier assault. The official inquiry into the
shooting, it's report still available online, makes clear that police
intelligence pointed to his participation in an organised crime group and that
he was a "mid-level career criminal".
There were a number of reasons why the author's shooting
of Rodney was to prove so controversial. For a starter this wasn't Tony long's
first shooting. Indeed, he had fatally shot two armed robbers in a Plumsted
abattoir in 1987. That operation had again followed police intelligence that
the men were planning on stealing the wages and both were indeed armed when
Tony engaged them. The description of this shooting is visceral and Tony
explains in great detail the threat he perceived and why he felt he had no
choice but to fire. Justified though this may well have been, it lay the
foundations for a reputation that was to hang from his neck like an albatross
for years to come. The Met hierarchy, tetchy about its firearm's command,
preferring the Dixon of Dock Green image of the unarmed Bobby to the
paramilitary paraphernalia of a SWAT team, were never likely to be his greatest
fans.
Fast forward to 2005 and Tony Long was once again put in a
frightfully difficult position. Intelligence assessed that Rodney and his
associates were planning to rob a Colombian cocaine gang of their drugs, that
they had got hold of MAC-10 sub-machine guns to do the robbery with. The
decision was made to make a hard stop of the suspect's vehicle. Once again Tony
takes us through the minutiae of his decision making in forensic detail. He
describes how Rodney had rumbled the police presence, how he had been speaking
animatedly to those in the front seats (he was seated on a back seat), how as
their police car pulled alongside the suspect vehicle Rodney appeared to duck
down and come back up. Concluding that Rodney had picked up a MAC-10 from the
footwell of the car, Tony opened fire.
As it happens Rodney did not have a MAC-10, though he did
have a pistol. Other members of the gang were also armed. Eventually the
controversy surrounding this shooting led to an inquiry where the shooting of
Azelle Rodney was deemed to be unlawful. Tony's arrest and trial for murder
were to follow. But in a court of law he proved his innocence and left the Met
with his reputation intact. The last few chapters take us through this
denouement and demonstrate just why it is one should read news reports with
more than a little degree of skepticism. The reports surrounding Azelle
Rodney's shooting in the months and years after his death gave a very partial
picture of events. It was only with the full airing of the facts at his trial
that they could be put in the proper context. Reading all the evidence, it is
little surprise the jury found him innocent.
None of this stopped the Met from viewing Tony as an
embarrassing inconvenience however. One of the most shocking tales in this book
is of a senior officer saying upon introduction to Tony that she had always
wanted to meet the Met's very own serial killer. While this was the most
blatant example, others abound. After he was found innocent the Met
Commissioner expressed a desire to meet with Tony in person to congratulate
him. He quickly changed his mind. A further senior officer was to express
disquiet at the thought of Tony writing a book. It quickly became apparent that
they just wanted him gone.
Tony Long has now left the Met and despite the displeasure
of the police force he once served, he has written his book. The result is one
of the finest examples of its genre. He's clearly a tough, no nonsense kind of
man. That shines through the text. But unlike some former police/soldiers who
have penned memoirs, there's very little macho posturing in this book. Plain
speaking is perhaps a cliché but in this case it's apt. Tony tells his story
forcefully and passionately. Sometimes the anger he feels to those who
persecuted him lifts off the page. But this never gets the better of him and he
doesn't descend into acrimony. Rather, like the evidence presented at his
trial, he gives a solid account of his career and actions.
5 out 5 stars
No comments:
Post a Comment