Mumbai photographer: I wish I'd had a gun, not a camera. Armed police would not fire back

Belfast Telegraph ^ | 29 November 2008 | Jerome Taylor

[Leisler]

It is the photograph that has dominated the world's front pages, casting an astonishing light on the fresh-faced killers who brought terror to the heart of India's most vibrant city. Now it can be revealed how the astonishing picture came to be taken by a newspaper photographer who hid inside a train carriage as gunfire erupted all around him.

Sebastian D'Souza, a picture editor at the Mumbai Mirror, whose offices are just opposite the city's Chhatrapati Shivaji station, heard the gunfire erupt and ran towards the terminus. "I ran into the first carriage of one of the trains on the platform to try and get a shot but couldn't get a good angle, so I moved to the second carriage and waited for the gunmen to walk by," he said. "They were shooting from waist height and fired at anything that moved. I briefly had time to take a couple of frames using a telephoto lens. I think they saw me taking photographs but theydidn't seem to care."

The gunmen were terrifyingly professional, making sure at least one of them was able to fire their rifle while the other reloaded. By the time he managed to capture the killer on camera, Mr D'Souza had already seen two gunmen calmly stroll across the station concourse shooting both civilians and policemen, many of whom, he said, were armed but did not fire back. "I first saw the gunmen outside the station," Mr D'Souza said. "With their rucksacks and Western clothes they looked like backpackers, not terrorists, but they were very heavily armed and clearly knew how to use their rifles.

"Towards the station entrance, there are a number of bookshops and one of the bookstore owners was trying to close his shop," he recalled. "The gunmen opened fire and the shopkeeper fell down."

But what angered Mr D'Souza almost as much were the masses of armed police hiding in the area who simply refused to shoot back. "There were armed policemen hiding all around the station but none of them did anything," he said. "At one point, I ran up to them and told them to use their weapons. I said, 'Shoot them, they're sitting ducks!' but they just didn't shoot back."

As the gunmen fired at policemen taking cover across the street, Mr D'Souza realised a train was pulling into the station unaware of the horror within. "I couldn't believe it. We rushed to the platform and told everyone to head towards the back of the station. Those who were older and couldn't run, we told them to stay put."

The militants returned inside the station and headed towards a rear exit towards Chowpatty Beach. Mr D'Souza added: "I told some policemen the gunmen had moved towards the rear of the station but they refused to follow them. What is the point if having policemen with guns if they refuse to use them? I only wish I had a gun rather than a camera."

[Republic of Texas]

I suspect that Indian police guarding a train station are not the best trained police they have. Training would go a long way towards giving them the confidence to act with more, um, aggression.

[JoeA]

Yes, but we’re not trained professionals whose job is to protect the public. This is unforgivable.

[Soothesayer]

I do. I already have a deathwish so the risk of dying part would be a joy.

[Hodar]

Heaven help the police officer who returns fire, against a terrorist, and accidentally grazes a civilian with a richote, or from debris. The policeman will be vilified and have his career destroyed.

This is what happens when a society places too many constraints on those we hire to protect us. You wind up with people who are either too inept to do their job, so scared to do their job, or view their job solely as a paycheck.

Consider the law enforcement in New Orleans who abandoned the city after Katrina. Those who fled, taking new cars with them were hired back on the force. Those who were video taped pushing shopping carts through WalMart and looting are again back on the force. The few who remained at their posts are treated neither better, or worse, than those who abused the privileges afforded them by the citizens of New Orleans.

I would think that like a ‘Good Samaritan Law’ that protects a citizen making a good faith effort to save another; there be a comparable law allowing the Law Officers (and anyone else who is armed) to take out the bad guys, with ‘reasonable’ immunity from personal and property damage. That means that if you can take a head shot at a bad guy, but graze Grandma- you won't be sued by Grandma for her inconvenience and pain. This makes the whole ‘human shield’ tactic kind of meaningless - because every sharpshooter will kill the hostage taker to send a very clear message. The scum can run, but they can't hide.

[cripplecreek]

Sounds like the terrorists just rolled over any police that got in their way. Kind of like putting the Mayberry police up against a Navy Seal team.

[samtheman]

Many Cops don’t like to risk their pension just to save others.

I'll never forget watching the video (not fatso-moore's, but other videos) of the cops outside Columbine school, all huddled around the outside listening to gunshots from within as students were methodically murdered.

Waiting for cops to protect you is a sure path to an early grave.

[Shooter 2.5]

I’m a coward. Since I am a coward I would be emptying my sidearm into terrorists like no tomorrow.

I’m guessing the police officers were in shock. Since they had no orders to do anything, they did nothing.

That’s one brave photographer.

[Soothesayer]

Very possible.

I have muslim acquaintances who are actually blaming the Hindus for the attack.

[sarasota]

I’m not happy thinking this, but could the police have been in on this? That just doesn’t make sense.

[Republic of Texas]

That was a decision from the leadership. Politicians. Hopefully we know more now and would go in immediately. In Mumbai, these targets were specifically chosen because they were “soft”. That certainly means that the terrorists knew there were ill trained police there, and not many at that.

[dragnet2]

How many of these guys were there? 15?

15 people holding off and shutting down an entire city, and 5,000 security forces, is pretty amazing.

[kbennkc]

I doubt any local police force would stand up against what was basically a Special Op’s force.

Again , I am putting my reputation as a cop basher in jeopardy , but LEOs in the Treasure Valley area of Idaho will shoot back , reload , and engage the targets until their basic carry load is expended . I guaranty .

[driftdiver]

LEOs?

What the Indian cops came against was a trained military unit. I doubt most of them had the training to know how to respond.

Most cops in the US also don’t have the training. thats why they are called cops and not soldiers.

[Dick Bachert]

BUT, ACCORDING TO DIANE FINESWINE, BABS BOXER, CHUCKY SCHUMER, ET AL – OOOOO – GUNS ARE SOOOO DANGEROUS!! In what may be a perverse form of population control, these MORONS – many of whom are themselves armed or have armed people around them -- would prefer us to have to call 911 – and DIE while the cops are en-route.

These murderous muzzies are HERE and the more of us who CARRY CONCEALED, the more of them we can “off” BEFORE they kill on the scale of their recent activities in Mumbai.

WHY THEY WANT OUR GUNS!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j73SsNFgBO4

[JimSEA]

MIGHT AS WELL BE COLUMBINE...

Good point. Certainly the police were "behaving" from an ACLU point of view.

[Leisler]

It is actually a very common human behavior.

At that moment, the officer could well have lost his life, for distant benefit of others.

Where as if he didn’t engage, he lived and others paid.

So, it was kind of rational in a game theory type way.

On the other hand, we have no idea of how little training these officers had. They might not of even shot more than a few rounds their entire career.
We have no idea as to the espre, cohesion of the Police. They might well feel, and at least at this level were correct, that fellow street officers would not risk coming to their aid.

With my suspicion that these men were poorly trained, poorly paid, with low moral and leadership and most likely correct notions that if they engaged the scum, that they would not receive support, then it isn’t too hard to believe what happened.

The photographer showed the partial instinct to engage the terrorist, but like many urban males, was/is unfamiliar with weapons.

From what I have read, the Indian employees behaved very well to their guests. As also the later on, more trained assault forces and the firemen.

[warsaw44]

That terrorist in the photo was taken alive. I have not heard of any others taken captive but him.

[fso301]

I doubt any local police force would stand up against what was basically a Special Op’s force.

Back in the 1990's. pistol armed LA Police did a pretty good job bottling up those machinegun armed bank robbers until SWAT teams could arrive.

Then there was the FBI agents in Miami who went up against machinegun armed bank robbers in the 1980's. Of course, that shootout didn't go well for the FBI agents but still, the FBI agents didn't hesitate to do their jobs.

[warsaw44]

So true: no one really knows what their reaction will be until it happens.

[Ciexyz]

My thoughts, too, that the police were in shock. It makes a person seem like they're standing around doing nothing, when the body and mind have shut down for self-preservation.