Tuesday, November 7, 2023

The Christchurch mosques inquest: what we know so far

The inquest into the Christchurch mosque massacres has unexpectedly become a source of national shame and embarrassment.

A procession of witnesses has appeared before deputy chief coroner Brigitte Windley with evidence of a confused and chaotic response from police and ambulance services. New Zealand has no reason to feel guilty about the atrocity itself, which was the act of a lone outsider, but the failings of the first responders have come as a shock.

Perhaps the most damning revelation so far is that paramedics took half an hour to enter the Al Noor mosque, apparently because it was St John’s ambulance policy not to enter unsafe scenes.

Several police witnesses told of calling for ambulances, to no avail. One member of the armed offenders squad ran out onto Deans Avenue several times to see why no ambulances were coming. He could see them parked up the road, presumably waiting for the all-clear.

When bystanders asked why no ambulances had arrived, the police officer told them to put the wounded into private cars and rush them to hospital. Think about that: amateurs had to be asked to save lives when skilled professionals were standing by, only a stone’s throw away.

The inquest heard that a wounded survivor, Zekeriya Tuyan, was on his phone to emergency services for half an hour before medical help arrived. Tuyan himself died weeks later.

Eventually a St John’s paramedic entered the mosque knowing he was acting contrary to instructions. “There were human beings inside that needed help,” Dean Brown told the inquest.

Was this an example of the precautionary principle that appears to have taken hold of the bureaucratic mind? The precautionary principle holds that all risk must be mitigated by appropriate safeguards – even, it seems, in emergencies where insistence on following the officially prescribed procedure can be the difference between life and death.

Thank God there are still situations where human initiative, courage and compassion kick in and the rulebook is set aside. Dean Brown was a shining example and so were the helicopter pilots who defied a bureaucratic edict by risking their lives rescuing survivors from Whakaari-White Island – another tragedy that showed by-the-book New Zealand officialdom in a very poor light.

Almost as shockingly, the dead, the dying and the wounded in Christchurch were abandoned altogether for 10 minutes after the police left Al Noor to respond to reports of the second massacre at the Linwood mosque. An AOS member told the survivors that help was on the way, which he assumed to be true. It’s impossible to imagine how they must have felt: dozens dead, others dying, and they were left alone with not even a reassuring voice to comfort them.  

These were the most startling revelations of the inquest so far, but there have been others.  

They included the disclosure that an inexperienced police call-taker who took a 111 call giving advance information about the shootings, from an email sent to Parliament by the perpetrator Brenton Tarrant, treated it as only priority 2. The inquest was told the call-taker may have been influenced by a suggestion from the caller, a parliamentary staff member, that the email was from a nutter.

That call obviously came too late to prevent the slaughter at Al Noor, but it might have given the police time to get to the Linwood mosque before Tarrant struck a second time. A police dispatcher seemed to think so, and that things might have turned out differently if the call had been categorised as priority 1. It will fall to the coroner to decide whether that was a missed chance.

Astonishingly, the police inspector in charge of national communications centres at the time defended the categorisation of the call as priority 2 because it was “general” in nature. In fact it wasn’t; Tarrant’s email was detailed and precise, even identifying the three mosques that he intended terrorising (the third was in Ashburton).

Of course it’s easy to be wise after the event. There was no precedent in New Zealand for the Christchurch mosque massacres. The Royal Commission of Inquiry in 2020 established that they couldn’t have been anticipated. Events unfolded with bewildering speed and police couldn’t be sure at first whether Tarrant had accomplices who might still be at the scene.

Human error in such circumstances is hardly surprising. Only those present at the carnage and its immediate aftermath could know how traumatic and confused it was.

That said, police and emergency services are supposed to be prepared for unexpected and extreme events. That’s the nature of their job. Evidence given at the inquest points to shortcomings, such as a known communication problem between police and St John’s, that were recognised and could have been obviated. The frustration of some witnesses was obvious.

On the upside, we shouldn’t forget that Tarrant was arrested only 19 minutes after the shooting started by two courageous and quick-thinking country cops who happened to be in Christchurch for a training day. Their actions, which thwarted Tarrant’s intention to attack the Ashburton mosque, served as a reminder that for all the benefits of thorough planning and training, there’s sometimes no substitute for intuitive, decisive, on-the-spot action.

But in other respects the response appears to have been almost scandalously shambolic, which may shake New Zealanders’ confidence in the people we rely on to protect human life. Only two weeks into the inquest and with another four to go, it’s already obvious that Windley will have a lot to chew on.

Update (6.15pm): In News First's report of the inquest tonight, the acting paramedic in charge at the scene said police were concerned about the possibility there was an IED (improvised explosive device) at the mosque. He appeared to acknowledge that waiting for the scene to be made safe could have cost lives, but he disputed that the ambulances were "simply stopped" a block from the mosque. He said they were treating victims there. 

10 comments:

Sponge said...

I can't agree with you here Karl.

Much like looking at the ultra slow motion replay of the Sam Cane tackle it is easy to criticise with the benefit of hindsight what was happening in split seconds at the time. The absence of information that the Police and others had to work under and evolving nature of what was (or could have been) occurring resulted in actions being taken that, with hindsight, could have been better but I have no doubt whatsoever that everyone did their absolute best with the knowledge they had at the time.

And for what it is worth I agree that Cane should have got the red card and even more importantly I agree with your premise that this country has become bogged down with bureaucracy. I just feel in this case the criticism is unfair due to its unique nature.

As better example of the insane ass covering that has become the hallmark of this country I witnessed at my office a couple of years ago. We have a Saint Johns training centre next door they would not help when there was a car accident on Moorhouse Ave as they said that they had to wait for the Fire Service and Ambulance to arrive. If they were not trained enough to help with an accident how on earth could they train people to deal with one?

Karl du Fresne said...

I did say that it was easy to be wise after the event and that only those who were there could really know what it was like.

rouppe said...

I'm pretty disgusted the way this inquest is going.

It is clear the families of those killed are looking for a way to blame the nz government so they can launch into years of compensation claims.

Given the dynamic way this played out, I think the police did an awesome job bringing this under control.

The families looking to blame us all for the acts of an Australian makes me pretty angry

Russell Parkinson said...

The problem is that in response to an inquery identifying issue our repsonse will be to....

Create more checklists and procedures of course.

That means backsides are covered and we dont need to let people use their initiative and risk getting it wrong and get a telling off.

Trev1 said...

Thank goodness for the two country cops who displayed initiative and brought the gunman's rampage to a stop. Initiative is rare in today's public service. During my four decades there I saw the ethos change from getting results to having "appropriate processes in place". Following the Rogernomics reforms, public servants were subjected to endless workshops run by highly paid consultants on how to tick the right boxes and how not to rock the boat. This was reinforced by the performance appraisal and reward system. Duck-shoving and passing the buck are the two main skills required of today's public servants. The evidence emerging through the Inquest is a wake-up call.

Alex said...

With sympathy to the bereaved we should spare a thought for the 269 Christian
people killed in Sri Lanka the following month by muslim terrorists seeking revenge for the Christchurch tragedy .

We should also thank all of the kiwi heroes who went above and beyond in Christchurch.

Hilary Taylor said...

I was sitting at the PC when the first news snippets reached me about this rampage. Newsroom had a clip from Tarrant's bodycam that showed him arriving at the Al Noor mosque, selecting weapons, entering the mosque and then they clipped it off after the 1st shots were fired.This clip disappeared afterwards.
In the unrelenting & saturation media cover that followed, radio, tv, we became quite depressed by it all and we turned it all off for, not really returning to NatRad since, having retreated to Concert. The cover post-quake was 'bad' enough, clearly we were now so sensitised as to be 'triggered' pretty quickly.
So I'm only skimming the coronial enquiry reports in the Press, if I look at all.

Jonathan Rigg said...

The whole disaster would not have happened if the police had done the proper job of vetting the criminal involved.
if they had done their job properly, he would not have given his gun license.
It would have been a nonevent if the Police had done their job.

Rod Lawrence said...

I feel it is well justified that the bureaucrats and management are blamed for the policies that do not allow the immediate assistance to victims through perceived safety issues. They are normally immune to this sort of criticism as they sit in their offices in their shiny suits and air conditioning.
This exact same scenario played out with the Christchurch Earthquake and the CTV building, except in this case it was the police that stopped rescuers from entering the site. No doubt the police hierarchy learnt a very valuable lesson and it seems St Johns needs to do the same. Thank God there are still a few people around prepared to buck the system.

Anonymous said...

Why did the Australian media repeatedly comment on the (then) Prime Minister’s role in easing access to firearms only months before but our own media was silent?