Colm Horkan

[dahamsta]

Out of curiosity, because I couldn't find an explanation, why was Horkan carrying a pistol? I understand that some detectives carry pistols, but I assumed it wasn't standard. Also, Wikipedia says he was "on an anti-crime patrol" and responded to an incident, do detectives actually patrol?

Again, just curiosity, I haven't really followed the case very closely but saw an article about the sentencing last night and decided to have a look. However Google is crowded with articles thin on details so it's hard to find out what actually happened.

[John83]

Aberdonian Stu asked a lawyer friend who said:
All detectives are firearms trained and allowed wear plain clothes and carry a firearm when on duty (and sometimes off duty). It's been criticised, and there are proposals to restrict it, but a lot of it goes back to when detectives would have been the lads investigating the lads in flat caps from the border (and Passage West)

[John83]

And on the question of patrolling:
"They do if they're trying to be inconspicuous or if there's a manpower issue or if they've ****ed off the Inspector"

"Mainly the first tbf"

"Marked cars are for deterrence. Unmarked for catching lads at it"

[the 12 th man]

I believe he'd been recently been promoted to the "Armed Division" and was probably a bit green about what to do in this situation and was probably reluctant to pull the trigger when attacked,the other guy was not so shy about using it though and shot him 13 times which is what he was hoping would get him off on a guilty but "Insane" verdict.

[dahamsta]

Thanks lads. They should all be firearms trained, but I don't think they should be carrying pistols unless they're at risk. Horkan would almost certainly be alive if he hadn't been carrying one.