I agree with David Garrett that the failure to lay charges against the police officer who shot and killed Halatau Naitoko seems utterly incomprehensible:
"While not charging the officer concerned with manslaughter is probably justifiable, it seems incomprehensible that the officer is not facing charges under the Arms Act for failing to properly identify his target," Mr Garrett said.Excuse me while I die of shock."There are only two explanations as to how this tragic situation arose: either the bullet ricocheted and killed Mr Naitoko, or the officer aimed at and shot the wrong person by mistake. If the explanation is the latter then it is difficult to justify the announcement not to prosecute.
"In a country where hunting remains a popular pastime, target misidentification unfortunately has frequently resulted in many deaths - often the death of one friend at the hands of another. Regardless of the tragedy of such a situation in most cases - a prosecution goes ahead, and more often than not results in a conviction.
"So what happened to one law for all? Are there different laws for police using firearms? Why should hunters be held to a higher standard of care than the police? If there is any justification for different standards being applied, surely it is armed policemen who should be required to meet a higher standard of care?
