Family disputes shooting events

The family of slain man Mike Taylor claim police 'executed” the 57-year-old who was shot dead by officers on Friday.

A post-mortem completed over the weekend confirmed Taylor was shot in the torso by officers who were responding to reports of a domestic incident at his Country Road property in the Karangahake Gorge.


Natalie Avery and her son, Carlin, 21, and her daughter, Amy, 14. Photo: Mark Taylor/Fairfax NZ

In a statement released Saturday, Acting Assistant Commissioner Bruce Bird says Taylor threatened officers and was shot while approaching their vehicle while armed with a machete.

'A number of shots were fired from the front seat of the patrol car at short range,” the statement reads.

'He has then moved back from the officers away from the patrol car where he attempted to follow police instructions, however collapsed from his injuries. Once the situation was secure, the attending police staff immediately commenced first aid and CPR.”

Police have since met with Taylor's family and spoken with them about the findings of the post-mortem.

'New Zealand Police extend our deepest sympathies to his family and loved ones at this time.”

But speaking to Fairfax his partner Natalie Avery and her children Carlin, 21, and Amy, 14, are disputing police's version of events.

She says Taylor had thrown a machete and sickle at the police car, turned his back, put his hands in the air and knelt down. Both she and her children would testify to this in court.

Natalie claims her partner had been walking away with his hands in the air and was dropping to his knees when he was shot from behind by officers.

On Friday she and Taylor had been arguing over 'something trivial” but he hadn't threatened them with the weapons.

'He hiffed a hot cup of coffee at me, believe me, it f...... hurts. I called police, but I wish I hadn't,” she says.

Police arrived as Natalie and daughter Amy were leaving the property and when Taylor spotted officers he threw the weapons, 'surrendered” and walked away, recalls Natalie.

She originally thought the officers were armed with tasers, but was then told by her son Carlin that Taylor had been shot.

Natalie says she saw only two officers in the car but police confirmed there were three at the property which has led her to believe Taylor was shot by a 'sniper”.

The Independent Police Conduct Authority and the Coroner are both investigating the shooting.

– Additional reporting Tony Wall / Stuff.co.nz

You may also like....

27 comments

shot

Posted on 13-06-2016 15:08 | By dumbkof2

front or back top or bottom makes no difference if you threaten anyone with a machete or slasher


@DUMBKOF2

Posted on 13-06-2016 16:48 | By Colleen Spiro

Ummmmmm....I read, Taylor had thrown a machete and sickle at the police car, turned his back, put his hands in the air and knelt down. What did you read? I do hope they get an accurate record of the autopsy report....but too late HE IS DEAD.


Colleen

Posted on 13-06-2016 17:14 | By Kenworthlogger

I read he was being rather a bad boy. He put himself in the position he was in. He is responsible. Simple. Good people behaving themselves do not get shot by Police. FACT.


@ Colleen

Posted on 13-06-2016 17:24 | By Annalist

Well I guess if you read something somewhere I guess that settles it then? Ummmmm


@ Kenworthlogger

Posted on 13-06-2016 19:31 | By Tga local

I think Halatau Naitoko, a 17 year old courier driver in Auckland, may disagree with you.


Wait for the Coroner to sort it out

Posted on 13-06-2016 22:17 | By Darren

Did police shoot before he turned around or after? We can't figure it out just by reading the papers. On 11th stuff said son had been in the shower and looked outside after he heard 5 or 6 shots. Some papers say mum heard 2 shots. Some papers say mum thought he'd been tasered and didn't know he'd been shot until son told her. What a mess. Leave it for the Coroner to sort out.


zero tolerance for domestic violence

Posted on 13-06-2016 22:51 | By BullShtAlert

About time we showed no tolerance for domestic violence. There's only one person responsible for all this and in my opinion it's not the police.


roles reversed

Posted on 14-06-2016 08:29 | By Primed

what would everyone be saying if the cops had been seriously hurt/killed. Remember they go towards danger while others leave. they were called as obviously the situation had escalated to a point.Do nothing wrong and be no need for police to attend.police are human too and have fammilies


Still had it coming...

Posted on 14-06-2016 08:31 | By Bay Citizen

Yeah, 'cos throwing a machete at a police officer is really asking to get yourself shot.


We're a sick society, ....

Posted on 14-06-2016 08:49 | By Murray.Guy

We're a sick society, .... in more ways than one. A family has lost a father, a partner. A police officer has felt forced to take the life of another. It quite possible that the deceased is also a victim of our present day inadequate, dysfunctional 'mental health' support, and we have folk (noticeably anonymously) saying 'tough, who cares, ...' It's a sick world in more ways than one!


Unless we were there

Posted on 14-06-2016 10:36 | By earlybird

and witnessed first hand what went down, we have no idea what is fact or fiction. No doubt we will find out in due course. In the meantime condolences to the family who have lost a father & husband.


We need ...

Posted on 14-06-2016 11:09 | By morepork

... full and open disclosure on this. I don't like the idea of a police officer shooting someone from the seat of his car. And we cannot tolerate people being shot in the back (if that happened) no matter how dangerous they may or may not be. Police have a difficult job to do that requires some drastic decisions to be made under pressure and quickly. We need to know that ALL officers who have access to firearms are properly trained for the responsibility which that entails. The decision to use lethal force is irreversible; there is no "do over". None of the posters here were there so, unless there is full and transparent disclosure, we can't decide if the action was warranted or not.


@KenWL

Posted on 14-06-2016 11:18 | By morepork

You are right that people who don't look for trouble generally don't find it. But there have been exceptions and it is important that all of us can have confidence in those whose job it is to protect and serve us. I fully support the police, but if they get it wrong, there needs to be correction so it isn't repeated. As mentioned in previous posts, we need to be sure that officers with access to lethal weapons are properly and fully trained, not just in handling those weapons, but in the ability to deal with situations where the use of lethal force might need to be considered. You'd hope that "going for his gun" would be the LAST resort,and only where there is a clear and obvious danger to the officer or others. I hope we get full disclosure on what REALLY happened.


@MurrayGuy

Posted on 14-06-2016 11:37 | By morepork

I disagree that we are a sick society. I would agree that there is sickness IN our society. Your point about our mental health system is a fair one; more needs to be done. The cold "he had it coming" response is engendered by people who are tired of seeing crime running rampant, their homes being invaded, and fearing for their own safety. We are not generally a callous society and there are many examples of NZers contributing to noble causes, not just with money. This a tragedy that could possibly have been avoided (we won't know unless there is full disclosure) but it doesn't mean we should throw the baby out with the bath water. Don't learn the wrong lesson; things need to be fixed and we should be working on that. I remain optimistic about our society and I wouldn't want to live anywhere else.


is it an important

Posted on 14-06-2016 14:50 | By NotNat

fact that police were called by the wife who is clearly afraid of her own husband? is it important that he was a well known bully. I think some of these comments would be valid if they had open fired on a group of innocent people but come on - the police were called for a reason! All men who think they can bully their way through life deserve the consequences. Police are trained they don't just pop their gun out and shoot anyone - they don't even carry guns usually I thought and if there was a reason for them to shoot wouldn't they warn first - I've heard them say over a loud speaker - "come out of the house with your arms up or we will release the dogs" warning one - guess what happens if you don't come out of the house.


Both sides are the same

Posted on 14-06-2016 17:10 | By astex

Both sides of the story seem to agree on the mans actions. Police say he was shot and then tried to comply with instructions and Family say he raised his hands and knelt down. The only disagreement seems to be WHEN the shot(s) were fired. Be quite clear for the coroner to sort out. Was he shot from the back or the front?


Police and Firearms

Posted on 15-06-2016 13:07 | By Kenworthlogger

Tga local that example is not even in the same ball park. If you look for trouble almost aways you will get it. Morepork you are totally right that where there is good there is also evil. Always has always will... However i dont believe for one moment that officers that have access to firearms be not properly or fully trained.


@KenWL

Posted on 16-06-2016 02:28 | By morepork

I wish I could share your confidence regarding Police Training. I would agree they get training, but the pressures of the job may mean it simply isn't enough. I guess I'd like to see it "beefed up" with more emphasis on ways to defuse a situation, and the recognition that you can't just sit in the car and shoot people... Mostly, they do an excellent job, so I believe they deserve full support, both from their Management and from the rest of us. It also isn't fair to criticize unless you're prepared to do their job. Having said all of that, we need to make sure that anyone killed by Police fire was in a situation where there was really no other option, which did not involve unacceptable risk to Police or Public. That's why we need full and open disclosure on the case in point.


Morepork

Posted on 16-06-2016 09:06 | By Kenworthlogger

What makes you think the training they get simply is not enough? If anyone approaches the police with a weapon in an aggresive manner then one can reasonably expect to be shot dead.


However!

Posted on 17-06-2016 10:17 | By astex

I would expect police training to include knowing how to reverse away from harm, in the police car.


Iknow

Posted on 17-06-2016 14:54 | By Kenworthlogger

Police are there to neutralise the threat not to run away...


Tasers?

Posted on 18-06-2016 10:23 | By maybelle

Police are issued with tasers, I thought these were the safer option(FOR EVERYONE) to dispel harmful situations. Surely if the police have the opportunity to fire a gun, why not a taser instead??


@KenWL

Posted on 18-06-2016 14:03 | By morepork

I guess my issue is with your use of "reasonably"... :-) In this country, it isn't reasonable to expect to be shot dead. People freak out, they get angry, they react emotionally, they're not thinking straight. Should the punishment for that be death? I contend that it should only be in the LAST resort where officers and/or public are in direct danger. There are other ways to subdue someone or nullify the threat from them. If we let it get "easy" to just kill someone, we are in danger of losing the important values that make our society what it is. If it is possible to sit in a car and kill someone because they pissed you off or you lost your own cool, then training in self-discipline is needed. And I am NOT saying that is what happened. We need full and transparent disclosure.


Maybelle

Posted on 18-06-2016 15:57 | By Kenworthlogger

A Taser is not as easily or quicky reloaded if you miss with your first shot like a firearm is. Guess you would realise this if you have used one. Morepork are you suggesting that you should be able to point a loaded firearm at Police and not expect to be shot? Please clarify that for me?


@KenWL

Posted on 19-06-2016 23:15 | By morepork

A fair question. No, I'm not suggesting that someone pointing a loaded (or even unloaded) weapon at a Police Officer (or anyone else) is acceptable. I covered it when I said lethal force is justified if there is clear lethal danger to an officer or member of the public,but I would like it if the Officer concerned had been trained in that kind of situation and was better equipped to make the call, than just shooting out of panic,or anger, or excitement. We need to know that the quality of the calls being made is as good as it can be. (I don't have a problem with the Officer shooting, if that IS the best call.) Hope this clarifies my position.


Morepork

Posted on 21-06-2016 03:21 | By Kenworthlogger

Yes that clarifies your position but you are describing what already happens. Police are already taught to think before they fire. Always have been assuming that they have access to a weapon in time unlike the last handfew of officers killed on the job because they were not armed.


No sympathy

Posted on 27-06-2016 15:30 | By Tgaboy

The man sounded like a local bully and off the rails in more way than one. And also very well known to police. Good ridance to bad rubbish I say.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.