by Paul Millen
Key to this was dealing with ‘prisoners’. Now I could use the more politically correct term of ‘detained’ or ‘arrested persons’, but prisoner was the accurate term used at the time for someone in police custody. For those merely suspected of a crime the word ‘suspect’ is accurate. Defendant refers to someone who has been charged with an offence and will stand trial. I remember one prisoner being unhappy at being referred to as such by a police officer. His reply, ‘I’m not a prisoner, I’m a free man,’ is a direct quote from the Patrick McGoohan character in the TV series The Prisoner.
The prompt and full examination of prisoners was always an important priority. Firstly, clothing and samples had to be taken to stop any loss of evidence. Secondly, the prisoner would be examined before interview so that they could not use any opportunity to destroy evidence as the case against them became clear. Finally, by securing and preserving this evidence at an early stage, the chance of contamination and planting is removed. In my first few weeks on the Squad, whilst at a police station dealing with a prisoner, I overheard one officer say, ‘Boy wonder has sealed all the exhibits.’ Well, I was the boy wonder and I was going to do that every time and at the earliest opportunity. I thought that my time on the Squad might be short lived, but that was not the case. The officer who I suspected made the remarks was soon moved. It would be naïve to think that there are not corrupt officers. Discipline and professionalism, however, will thwart and expose them. Over the coming years I would demonstrate to many, if anyone was in any doubt, that by doing the job in a professional manner the result followed. Some of the hardest and most ruthless of detectives would equally champion the high standards which I proposed.
For almost four years I worked out of the back of a car. I had an office and a desk back at the Flying Squad office and I would spend a lot of time there. It was, however, the need to be mobile and work in any environment that made the nature of the job, demanding, challenging and very enjoyable. The office did have one amusing aspect. Its name was ‘the Gannetry’. It was a large room suitable for the collation of sealed exhibits. Occasionally, I might examine items (if appropriate within the conditions) on an examination bench to confirm a description or make a search. This would normally be to screen a large number of clothing items from a single location (important to avoid contamination) for traces of blood prior to submitting positive items to the lab for detailed examination. One particular operation codenamed ‘Gannet’ (the name picked randomly from a book of birds) generated a large number of exhibits which occupied my attention and that of a small number of detectives for a long time. Being a keen birdwatcher myself, I started referring to the room as the Gannetry (as a place where gannets roost) and it stuck. Some years later I returned to visit the building; all my former colleagues had long since gone. One label on the door and another on the alarm panel caught my attention. It referred to ‘Gannetry’. ‘Everyone calls the room the Gannetry but we don’t know why,’ one detective told me. I just smiled.
Examining vehicles would also prove an important part of the job. Often the way in which a vehicle was stolen, prepared and stored as a getaway car would say a lot about an armed gang. So I spent a lot of time examining vehicles. To many scene investigators this was seen as a chore. For me it was a challenge. The benefit of personally investigating most of the vehicles used in robberies over a large geographical area was that you could build up a picture based not only on obvious items but on small nuances. The way the vehicle was stolen, the way its stolen identity was disguised told a story. I would also look over the examinations made by colleagues when I was not available. However, this wasn’t too often. A vehicle once preserved could wait a day if necessary.
On a cold evening just before Christmas in 1986 two armed robbers attacked a red Post Office security van which had been collecting and delivering high-value gold to the jewellery trade in the Kings Cross area. The gang was well informed. As the van stopped at a business premises in City Road the three postmen, all approaching sixty years of age, opened the cab door and were confronted by two armed masked men. They heard violent and very loud threats and one of the robbers opened fire. Almost immediately all three postal workers had been hit and were immobile. This completely halted any hope of the robbers getting any money as it was all safely locked in the rear security compartment. The robbers fled empty handed.
The postal workers had serious gunshot injuries, but by luck all survived. Between them they thought that no more than three shots had been fired. They had just heard a maximum of three bangs around the shouts and confusion. It appeared at first that each bullet had hit and gone through at least one person, as some had entry and exit wounds.
I had information relayed to me from the hospital where they were being treated. I went to the scene and made an examination of the area around the security vehicle. It was dark, not ideal conditions. The suspects had got away in a stolen vehicle and that had yet to be found. I found one shell case from an automatic pistol. This is the part which is ejected from an automatic weapon once a shot is discharged and the gun reloaded. These shell cases had a rim which is pulled out by lever hooks to eject them. They are noticeably different from revolver shell cases, which have no such rim. Revolver cases are only removed by the user opening the revolving chamber and allowing the cases to fall out, often on the floor. It is for this reason that only when automatic pistols are used are you guaranteed to have a chance of finding spent cases.
The spent case I found was outside the cab door on the floor. There was a fair amount of blood and gunshot damage inside the cab which would take a long time to examine. I was not happy to undertake the examination in the street. I secured the vehicle and waited until it could be towed to the yard at City Road Police Station, a short distance away.
Once there, I made a detailed examination of the cab. With constant updates from the hospital it was clear that they had recovered four bullets from the injured men. My examination revealed a further two. One was a different calibre to the rest and indicated that it was from an automatic weapon. So it was clear that two weapons were used, both discharged and one was an automatic. The other could be a revolver; the fact that only one shell case had been found suggested that the other weapon was likely to be a revolver. Most revolvers hold at least six bullets. It was likely that this weapon was responsible for at least five of the bullets.
During my examination I was joined by Mark Godfree who was the SOCO 1, and my immediate line manager. He came along to see how I was doing and to assess my performance. By the time he arrived I had already begun to reconstruct the shooting, but I was not happy. The victims had only heard three shots, but we had already accounted for six, from at least two weapons. Even more confusing was the number of exit wounds on the victims and areas of damage inside the cab. I carefully reconstructed the shots and this seemed to fit a total of six shots. By now Mark had forgotten he was there to assess me and rolled up his sleeves to get involved. I wasn’t happy with a total of six shots. Looking again we managed to account for all six but there was a final piece of damage which could be a ricochet on the door and frame edge but could also be another hole. If this was the case there would be another bullet in there somewhere. With the Post Office security manager present we opened the secure door and there, in the runner of the sliding door, was a seventh bullet. Elated by the successful reconstruction, Mark and I danced a jig around in the yard to the bemusement of the security manager.
Having completed our examination, it was clear that the valuable contents of the van were intact. In fact no attempt had been made to physically remove them. Shortly before dawn I told the Post Office security manager we were finished with the van. A standby crew got in and drove off. As it disappeared with its valuable cargo Mark said to me, ‘You do know those guys, don’t you?’ Luckily for him (and for my assessment) I did. I had already obtained the authority to release the vehicle to the manager as soon as my examination was complete.
The first few months on the Squ
ad were busy and breathtaking. I was using every bit of my training and experience in everything I did. As the only specialist in my role at my Squad office, I had the opportunity to advise and influence the way investigations developed. My input concerning the evidential potential of cases and how that evidence could be secured was always welcome and quickly became expected. I never wanted to say, ‘Well, I thought of that,’ after something had gone wrong. A colleague had made that unfortunate remark at another office. He didn’t last too long. So I made sure my voice was heard clearly at the earliest opportunity. Almost always my advice was taken and acted upon. It may seem strange that it wasn’t universally accepted. Not for any unethical reason, you must understand, but because of clear investigative needs. Often after an armed robbery an item is recovered which may potentially contain some forensic evidence and need some search to evaluate where it needs to go. It may also have some recognition potential. The press are only interested in the case in the first few hours or days so the chance to show some item and appeal for witnesses who might know who owned it, or where it came from, is important. Examinations are slow and the press lose interest quickly. So the investigator might forgo the forensic evidence in favour of a quick response from potential witnesses. It is the detectives’ call, it’s their case.
The long hours I worked and the amount of overtime I built up was a source of ribbing and perhaps concern amongst my managers. When I announced that my wife was pregnant with our second child, one manager jokingly suggested that, according to my overtime sheets, I had not been home. According to him, my daughter’s conception had occurred during busy periods at work. She was born in a busy period too. I fondly remember that she was conceived in (Operation) Pisces and born in (Operation) Taurus.
Working on the Squad also meant that I could not use a marked police van, such as I had done when I was a divisional SOCO. So I was given a mileage allowance to use my own car, which was fitted with a police radio. My patch was northeast London, my boss, Mark Godfree, covered the whole of London. By rights, he claimed, he should get a higher mileage allowance than me as he should incur more miles at work. Whenever I called him to tell him I was off to some distant part of the south-east of England on an operation he remarked he would have to drive around the M25 a few times to catch up. When I eventually left the Met in 1992, I tried to present my car keys to my boss, saying that they should be given to the Commissioner. By my reckoning he had paid off the car at least once.
During my time on the Squad, I was blessed to work with a team of gifted and professional forensic scientists at the Metropolitan Police Forensic Science Laboratory and fingerprint identification experts at New Scotland Yard. Although I delivered the crime scene investigation, it was they who delivered the forensic science and fingerprint evidence. They were a part of the team and the success of the investigations.
I took a great deal of time preparing the laboratory submissions to make their job as easy as possible. The investigations were often more complicated than murder investigations. The great bulk of the laboratory work fell on the forensic biologists Ann Priston, Geoff Roe, Liz Wilson and Dave Scaysbrook who made a massive contribution. I remember one statement being received and served on the defence eleven months after the arrest. It gave twenty-four areas of independent corroboration in support of the police case. That very night two defendants decided it was too much and mounted a successful escape from their high-security prison.
In other cases, Robin Keely and Geoff Warman examined hundreds of items for firearms residues, and Pam Hamer examined footwear and the occasional tooth mark. There wasn’t a member of the Gun Room team who was not involved in Flying Squad cases. The number of cases was great and so was the quality of their examinations. Enda Ayres and his fingerprint expert colleagues at Team 9 of the Fingerprint Branch at New Scotland Yard had every right to groan when I walked in the door or they heard my voice on the phone. Long before the computerised fingerprint search facilities common today, marks had to be searched manually with what seemed unending permutations. Team 9 always rose to the challenge and, although armed robbers went out of their way not to leave finger marks, my crime scene colleagues found them and Team 9 had a sound success rate in identifying them.
Armed robbers are, by their very nature, hardened criminals. Unlike those who assault or murder out of plain evil or malice, their goal is serious financial gain. This focus they share with terrorists (who commit crime for political gain), and they plan, often well. Unlike terrorists, those who commit armed robbery have often been through the criminal justice mill. They may have served apprenticeships committing lesser crime, learning how to avoid detection, although that is never totally possible. Even when they think they are ahead of the game, there is always the ability of the police to be yet one step ahead of them. One team of robbers under surveillance were noticeable by their clothing, plain and common. They had been caught by valuable fibres evidence in a previous case some years before and so they tried to limit the chance of detection by wearing clothes with low amounts of transfer and low evidential value. The Flying Squad detectives got to hear about this and told me. I contacted the Traps and Markers section of the Metropolitan Police Laboratory. They had a range of markers developed for other uses. With the help of two dedicated scientists, Brian Gibbins and Anne Welch, we adapted these markers to invisibly stain the getaway car the suspects had hidden away. Its whereabouts were known to the police. The use of markers is extremely delicate as it is effectively a method of positive contamination. The marker itself is specifically prepared and formulated for the case. It is unique. Once deployed, the source must be returned to the laboratory so no trace exists except on the target vehicle and whatever it comes into contact with. So as a team we developed the marker and decided where it was to be applied to show the most evidential contact between suspects and stolen vehicle. The presence of the marker and other characteristics of it would be incriminating, provided there was discipline in how the vehicle and potential suspects were handled. On the first occasion I had used this technology the lab supplied me with a white one-piece suit, crime-scene style, to avoid contamination. When I explained that I was going to enter a stolen car, parked in a quiet but still public east London street within sight of the suspect’s house, the penny dropped. With their help I used suitable dark disposable overalls. I was protected by armed officers whilst I marked the car. Once a stolen car is found by the police it is no longer considered stolen. The Squad had the authority not to recover this vehicle because of the serious offence for which the officers believed it was going to be used. This was an ideal opportunity for the police to be one step ahead in a potentially major crime. Once I had completed my marking, the residual marker and all the other materials which I had used were taken straight to the laboratory.
On a later occasion I had to mark another vehicle, this time parked up in a small lock-up garage overlooked by a block of flats. Again with the authority of a chief police officer and with armed officers covering me, I entered the small garage to mark the stolen vehicle inside. The marking was not a problem. However, once inside I noticed a bag in one of the foot wells. Looking carefully inside in low lighting, I could see a sawnoff shotgun (a prohibited weapon) and automatic pistol. This was a ‘Happy Bag’, the tool kit of the armed robber. Radioing this information, I got the next question, which I was dreading. Are they loaded? Well, there was only one way to find out. Taking each in turn I unloaded and then reloaded them with as little handling as possible. I noted what information I could about the weapons before placing them back as I had found them. I then set about marking the vehicle. Once outside and away from the garage I made my notes. Firstly, there was my scene investigation report, a copy of which would go to the laboratory. I also made a second set of notes which I referred to and cross-referenced in my report. This was in my pocket book and gave details of the weapons and their finding, information which was too sensitive, and not relevant to the information which the laboratory was to receive.
All these notes would help me give my evidence whenever I was asked later. With this information, the detectives knew they were dealing with a dangerous team. Hasty discussions were held at chief officer level to determine whether the suspects should be arrested as soon as they went to the car or allowed to run, with the full resources of the Flying Squad following their every move. They were allowed to run and they were arrested as they committed their robbery. The marker evidence helped prove the charges made against them.
During the long hours and regular late nights I was often confronted with problems which required novel solutions. One night I had to examine a vehicle recovered in an area on the other side of London. I recovered a large number or items including a large quantity of cash left by the robbers in the car. At the completion of my examination I went to the local police station and made sure all the property was listed there. Having counted the cash once during my examination, I was made to count it again with the station sergeant. As I sealed it for a second time it was now the early hours of the morning. I had to be back at the Flying Squad office with the bags at nine am and I still had an hour’s drive home. I elected to take the items, including the cash, to the police station near to my home and deposit the sealed bag there for safekeeping until the morning. The bags, forensically sealed now, also had police property security seals on them. When I arrived at my local police station I expected the station officer to accept the sealed bags as just that, sealed bags, and place the cash in the safe. He was just signing for a sealed bag, I was guaranteeing the contents. However he insisted that the cash be counted again. This would take at least another hour and made the exercise futile as I would get no sleep at all before needing to return. So I took the bags home, put them under my bed and went to sleep. The items, I could honestly say, remained in my possession the whole time and within a few hours were lodged in property office at the Flying Squad office.
