Officer interviewing Kauhajoki gunman could face fines

Gunman's Internet messages being examined very closely

print this

The police officer who interviewed the Kauhajoki gunman Matti Juhani Saari without revoking his firearms licence, in spite of some material relating to the suspect that was found from the Internet, could face a pecuniary penalty for neglecting his official duties, if the matter is taken to the district court.
      Preliminary investigations were handled by Prosecutor Timo Luosma, who left the matter for consideration of charges on Thursday.
      The report on preliminary investigations will be submitted to Deputy Prosecutor General Jorma Kalske within the next few days.
     
Kalske is likely to decide in the course of January whether or not the officer will be charged with neglect of duty, which is one of the milder forms of malfeasance.
      ”Neglect of duty” is different from ”wilful neglect of duty”, and could lead to a mere warning.
      The suspected officer denies having committed any offence.
      Regardless of the mild term ”neglecting official duties”, the preliminary investigation was comprehensive, and for example the number of witnesses questioned was 25.
      One of the key matters to clarify is whether the police in Kauhajoki were aware or should have been aware of all the material relating to the suspected gunman that was subsequently found from the Internet.
     
Police interviewed Saari on Monday September 22nd, because they had been made aware by a member of the public of videos Saari had placed on the YouTube website.
      The questioning did not lead to any further action, as Saari obviously filmed three of the more "damaging" and threatening images of himself - pointing a gun at the camera - only after his interview with the police, on Monday evening. They were posted up on the Net shortly before the killing spree started.
      The following day - Tuesday, Saari caused a bloodbath at a vocational college in Kauhajoki that left ten others dead before he shot himself in the head. Saari later died of his injuries in hospital in Tampere.
     
”The starting point is whether or not the police officer acted correctly when he allowed Saari to keep the gun which he later used to carry out the massacre. The key question is whether or not it would have been the officer’s duty to confiscate the gun”, Kalske concludes.


Previously in HS International Edition:
  Police actions to be examined in detail (24.9.2008)

Helsingin Sanomat