Public prosecution clears policeman in shooting caseNawaf Abdullah Hamza, Head of Public Prosecution, and the Special Investigations Unit of the Public Prosecution, released a statement on the findings of the investigation into the death of a citizen Hossam Mohammed Al-Haddad.
Al-Haddad was killed on August 17, 2012 when he attempted an assault on a police officer with a petrol bomb, during a coordinated assault on a police patrol car parked on Khalifa Road in Muharraq, forcing the patrol to deal with the attackers.
The medical examiner’s report confirms that the incident occurred as described by witnesses. The Public Prosecution has concluded, based on the outcome of its investigation and the action of the parties involved in the incident that the action of the police officer was inevitable to ward off imminent danger, which could have resulted in the loss of his own life. Public Prosecution ordered the case closed, determining it as legally justifiable self-defense.
The Public Prosecution’s Special Investigations Unit conducted an investigation upon receiving notification of the incident, and directed the medical examiner to examine the body of the deceased and determine the cause of death. The forensic medical report shows round shaped pellet wounds on the right side of the face and concentrated mostly in the area of the right waist; extending vertically between the armpit and the upper side of the right thigh, with pellet wounds on the back side of the right arm and hand. The cause of death is the birdshot pellets and the damage they caused to the deceased’s internal organs.
Inspection also showed traces of petrol bombs scattered throughout the scene, as well as burn marks on the police patrol car, and on the boundary wall of a nearby restaurant and a shop. Rubber bullet marks were also found on the scene. The forensic lab report showed that swabs of the hand of the deceased showed traces of gasoline (petrol).
The video recording taken by the camera on the scene shows a group throwing petrol bombs in the direction of the police patrol car and on the road at random, endangering lives and property. This was agreed upon by all witnesses of the incident.
Therefore, based on the preceding evidence, and as evidenced by inspection, photographs and witnesses, the Public Prosecution concluded that the deceased was masked, and participated with a group in attacking the police patrol car with the intention of burning the car and its occupants. This forced the patrol officers to deal with the group in self-defense, firing warning shots and rubber bullets to no avail, as the deceased continued to advance towards them holding a flaming bottle with the intention of throwing it on one of the officers of the patrol, and ignoring repeated warnings. The distance between the deceased and the police officer was around 10 meters, when the deceased proceeded to throw the bottle on the police officer with the intention of burning and killing him. The police officer had no means to defend himself and ward off imminent danger other than the birdshot gun, which was the only weapon he was carrying at the time. He fired one shot, hitting the deceased.
Short URL: http://www.twentyfoursevennews.com/?p=25775