'It was genuinely horrible': Veteran news cameraman who 'became police sniper's eyes'

As the Sydney siege unfolded in the Lindt cafe, a Channel Seven cameraman was watching it all through his camera lens and providing vital information and vision for police snipers.

Veteran cameraman Greg Parker remained in the network's newsroom as his colleagues were all evacuated around him.

He was accompanied by a member of the force's crack shooting squad, who asked him to keep filming as authorities assessed the movements of the crazed gunman and his treatment of the 18 hostages.

The extraordinary circumstances called for extraordinary measures. Usually, in any critical situation, the media would be ushered well away from the scene but this time the two worked hand in hand.

What he saw and relayed back to the police command was as harrowing as it was stunning.

In an interview with Channel Seven, Parker said: 'One of the hardest things to see was there was three women forced to hold that flag up against the glass, and then another image of a poor guy in obvious distress with the muzzle of a shotgun, you know, in frame being pointed at his head.'

'It was the first time we'd seen a clear threatening pose, that the gun was pointed at a bloke's head who was in a very passive stance up against the glass.

As the drama began to unfold, Parker had three cameras pointed across Martin Place into the Lindt cafe, which would provide the closest possible, and clearest, view for authorities.

I've been involved in a situation where even though we did everything right in performing rescues, we couldn't save everybody. We did well to save as many as we did and we did everything right. And then we had to put up with amateurs who had no clear understanding of the circumstances claiming that because people died we'd obviously failed. That we couldn't possibly have done it all right. We did - and after investigation - a lot of investigation - we were found to have done the right things and to have done them well. But for months we had to just endure the innuendos and times blatant abuse from people who were not qualified to judge. And we couldn't defend ourselves because the matter was awaiting determination by the investigation and inquest. That's the problem - the people you are criticising aren't free to defend themselves. The investigation is likely to take weeks or months. It's an awful position to be in. As I say, I've been there.

How many hostage taking situations like this have you been involved in, and what was your role?

That’s funny, it sounds like you are the one claiming to be an expert, since you insist that it is wrong to think that something went wrong, although two hostages were killed, and another four wounded.

No, I'm not an expert. Just somebody who knows that everything can go right and people can still die for all sort of reasons.

Then you proceed to pretend that you are in actuality an expert, although in other posts you say you aren’t.

I'm not an expert on special operations/police tactics. I was however trained in maritime search and rescue, and that is the context in which I've described being involved in rescuing people in a situation where we could not save everyone. The incident I'm referring to was the 1998 Sydney to Hobart Yacht Race,

Quit being hall monitor and allow us to discuss this hostage taking crime and SWAT operation, and it seems like they turned down help from better “experts”.

You are the only person who I've seen comment - and I've read every thread on this - who I think is going too far. I've no problem with this being discussed sensibly and rationally, but you are going beyond that to the point of being unreasonable by casting judgements based on very limited information.

You are not just asking questions - you're insisting you know the answer. And, as I say, you are the only person I have seen going that far.

As for the idea they turned down help from the experts - my information is that rumour is not true (and the BBC has reported that the team that actually did the takedown - as opposed to the police containment team we saw on television - were from TAG East). But that is precisely the type of thing that will be investigated.

LOL, and here it sounded like you were a part of the hostage rescuing “we” that knew so much about all this, you were in the Navy.

You are something of a wind bag and a bit flamboyant with truth, and now you want to insist that we ask “questions” instead of offer our own comments and opinions?

I have probably spent more time training with the SAS than you, and while I didn’t do counter terrorism, if it’s OK, I would like to be able to give my own opinions, and one of those is that this mission turned out badly.

If so many people were wounded and died, you don’t think that is an indication that this was not as successful as it could have been.

Do you really think that if the police had allowed the Army Special Operations people in, that everyone might be alive?

I never said I was part of hostage rescuing. I never even implied it. I suggest you read what people actually write and avoid filtering it through your own misconceptions.

Yes, I was in the Navy for over 20 years. In that time, among a number of other roles, I served in the first Gulf War, where among other things I lead armed boarding parties involved in the interdiction of shipping. That as close as I ever came to doing anything remotely close to this type of thing and it isn't that close.

But I was also involved in search and rescue at other times, and I watched armchair amateurs like you criticise the work of experts who put their lives on the line to save others and caused good men significant grief that they should not have had to experience. I believe you wait until the evidence is in, before you attack people who risk their lives for others.

If so many people were wounded and died, you don’t think that is an indication that this was not as successful as it could have been.

I think that's a flawed assumption. There were seventeen hostages and fifteen came out alive. They could have easily lost a hell of a lot more - especially if they'd gone in before they needed to.

You talk about the SAS - remember the Iranian Embassy Siege? I'm sure you do. Two dead hostages, with two wounded, in that one as well. It happens, even if you do everything right, you can't always save everybody.

Do you really think that if the police had allowed the Army Special Operations people in, that everyone might be alive?

My information is that they did - that the takedown team was from TAG East. But that's not, as far as I can see, being either confirmed or denied at this point, and while my source is good, I won't say it's perfect without evidence. If it is, that might change my position. I wait for the facts. That's the type of thing that will come out during the actual investigations.

Nobody is stopping you expressing an opinion as far as I can see. But I'm going to express mine as well - and that opinion is that you are going too far in your judgements and criticisms given the limited information you have available to you.

Actually you did imply it, but it turns out you were in the navy, read your own posts, although they are so long winded.

Seriously, you want to compare this lone gunman with a shot gun in a cafe, to the Iranian Embassy Siege?

You really are not knowledgeable about this kind of operation, but anyone should be able to know the difference between the challenges involved in this cafe, versus terrorists holding the Iranian Embassy Siege, even an armchair amateur like you should know better than to compare those two.

“A group of six armed men stormed the Iranian embassy in South Kensington, London. The gunmen took 26 people hostage—mostly embassy staff, but several visitors and a police officer, who had been guarding the embassy, were also held. The hostage-takers, members of an Iranian Arab group”

“Firearms (including pistols and submachine guns), ammunition and hand grenades. The weapons, predominantly Soviet-made, are believed to have been smuggled into the United Kingdom in a diplomatic bag belonging to Iraq.”

By the sixth day of the siege the gunmen had become increasingly frustrated at the lack of progress in meeting their demands. That evening, they killed one of the hostages and threw his body out of the embassy. As a result, the British government ordered the Special Air Service (SAS), a special forces regiment of the British Army, to conduct an assault to rescue the remaining hostages. Shortly afterwards, soldiers abseiled from the roof of the building and forced entry through the windows. During the 17-minute raid, the SAS rescued all but one of the remaining hostages, and killed five of the six terrorists.”

“Meanwhile, further teams entered the embassy through the back door and cleared the ground floor and cellar.[54] The SAS then began evacuating hostages, manhandling them down the stairs towards the back door of the embassy. Two of the terrorists were hiding amongst the hostages—one of them produced a hand grenade when he was identified. An SAS soldier, who was unable to shoot for fear of hitting a hostage or another soldier, pushed the grenade-wielding terrorist to the bottom of the stairs, where two other soldiers shot him dead.[51][55]
The raid lasted 17 minutes and involved 30–35 soldiers. The terrorists killed one hostage and seriously wounded two others during the raid while the SAS killed all but one of the terrorists.”

Actually you did imply it, but it turns out you were in the navy, read your own posts, although they are so long winded.

Yes, I was in the Navy. You have some sort of problem with that, do you? And I implied nothing except that I've been involved in rescuing people and copping ill judged and stupid criticism from amateurs, which is quite true. As for being longwinded, that's fair - I believe in being thorough especially when I'm discussing things with somebody who doesn't seem to understand simple concepts.

Seriously, you want to compare this lone gunman with a shot gun in a cafe, to the Iranian Embassy Siege?

Just pointing out that just because people die, doesn't mean something went wrong - and it can happen even if the SAS are involved.

You're the one claiming that deaths mean mistakes were made and seems to think that it wouldn't happen with elite forces. And that's my point.

I could talk about some other operations by various groups, but I wouldn't assume you've heard of most of them because they are a lot more obscure - I was pretty sure that was one you would know about and it makes the point.

I’m not saying anything of the sort as you claim about death equals failure, ZI am saying that in this case, it is clear that mistakes were made since this was a relatively easy hostage situation, yet resulted in so many wounding =s and deaths.

Get it? We are talking about this situation, it may be that you just don’t know enough to even have any questions

Please give the sources for your claim that Tag East actually did the take down.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.