Former police marksman Anthony Long is on trial for murder of Rodney, who was shot dead in north London in 2005

An armed police officer murdered a suspect, shooting him on sight and firing eight shots, including two that struck him in the top of the head, a jury has heard.

Former Metropolitan police marksman Anthony Long, 58, is on trial for the murder of Azelle Rodney in 2005, which he denies.

A jury at the Old Bailey in central London heard on Wednesday that Long, now retired from the force, had no lawful reason to open fire.

Long shot dead Rodney, 24, in April 2005 when Rodney was a passenger in a car being followed by the police, who believed the three occupants had weapons and were planning to rob Colombian drug dealers.

Rodney was killed in Mill Hill, north London, after officers forced a Volkswagen Golf car he was travelling in to stop by boxing it in with their unmarked vehicles.

Max Hill QC, opening the prosecution case, said Long opened fire “as soon as Azelle Rodney came into his gun sights”.

Hill told the jury that the police marksman opened fire less than one-tenth of a second after Long’s car pulled alongside the Golf containing Rodney in the rear passenger seat.

The court heard that Long squeezed the trigger of his gun eight times, shooting the suspect in the arm, body, twice around his right ear and then, after a pause of three-quarters of a second, twice through the top of his head, travelling down towards the base of his skull. Long’s first two shots had missed.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Azelle Rodney died after officers stopped the car he was travelling in with two other men in north London. Photograph: Family handout/PA

Hill told the jury: “On any view, we suggest you can safely conclude, Mr Long opened fire extremely quickly as the Bravo car came to a halt. So quickly we say, that he cannot have taken any time to observe anything happening inside the Golf before he opened fire.”

The prosecutor continued: “Mr Long cannot have seen whether Azelle Rodney was doing anything before he pulled the trigger on his police carbine.

“Therefore, we say that Mr Long in effect opened fire as soon as Azelle Rodney came into his gun sights. There was no time for anything to happen in between.”

The volley of shots shattered the Golf’s windows and, according to a witness, Rodney ducked down, then seemed to fly up, hitting his head on the inside roof of the car as the shots hit him. He then fell back with his head resting on a broken window.

After the shooting, police found handcuffs in the car and three weapons. The police operation was triggered by intelligence that said the suspects may have had a machine gun. It also said they were planning to rob Colombian drug dealers of class A drugs.

The prosecutor said the crown respected the work of firearms officers who had “onerous responsibilities”.

Hill said: “We are all, as citizens, entitled to expect that no armed officer will take the life of another unless there is no alternative.”

Long and fellow firearms officers were armed with a semi-automatic Heckler and Koch G36c carbine weapons, where the trigger has to be squeezed for every shot.

Hill told the jury: “We say that the very detailed analysis which you will bring to bear upon the events in Hale Lane on 30 April 2005 will demonstrate that this particular officer, Mr Long, opened fire for some other reason than sheer necessity.

“Whether through misjudgment, panic, or some other reason, Mr Long opened fire and took another life when the circumstances at the moment he pulled the trigger did not justify him in so doing. He is here before you and on trial for murder because he failed in carrying out his duty and responsibility on that day.

“We say that Azelle Rodney and the other men in the Golf were embarked on criminal activity that day, and they deserved to be stopped, to be arrested, and to be dealt with for any crimes they had committed. They did not deserve to be shot and killed, and it was not necessary that this should happen to Azelle Rodney.”

Hill, detailing the prosecution case, said: “The task of the firearms team was to disrupt criminal activity. There was no ‘shoot on sight’ approach authorised at any stage of the police operation, in other words, any shots that were fired would have to be properly justified by reference to the behaviour of the individuals in the Golf. The officers were not instructed or authorised to shoot Azelle Rodney, or anyone else, come what may.”

The defendant was a specialist firearms officer attached to the elite armed unit then called SO19, and known by the call sign E7.

As the car containing Rodney and the two other suspects entered Hale Lane, the order was given to force it to stop, called in police jargon a “hard stop”, the jury heard.



Hill told the jury: “The hard stop was carried out in Hale Lane, with the result that one of the police firearms vehicles drew alongside the driver’s side of the Golf. The front seat passenger in that police firearms car was this defendant, Mr Long.”

Long watched from the dock as the crown opened their case. Also in court was Susan Alexander, mother of the dead man.

The court heard that a video of the shooting exists because a police officer in a car just behind Long’s vehicle made a recording of the incident for “training purposes”.

The officer who made the video can be heard saying: “We’re going in,” as police started the manoeuvre to force Rodney’s car. The actual shots fired by Long are not captured on the video.

But the jury heard the video recording captured the sound of the eight rapid gunshots. The officer who was recording the video can be heard saying: “Sweet as, sweet as,” as the shots are fired. The shots lasted around two seconds, according to the recording.

The court heard that after his car pulled alongside the Golf, Long had said in a statement that he saw Rodney look left, then right before ducking down and reappearing with his shoulders hunched.

“Everything about his actions and his body language led me to believe that he had picked up a firearm, but I still couldn’t see a weapon,” Long said in a statement that was read out by Hill. “I was aware that my colleagues were deploying on foot from their vehicles. I believe that I couldn’t delay my decisions any longer.”

However, Hill questioned this version of events, telling the jury to “consider timing and speed”.



“Was there time for Azelle Rodney to look left, then look right, then duck down, then come back up with shoulders hunched? Four actions, none of them requiring many seconds to perform, but bear in mind the time available is 0.2 seconds at the most, for all of those movements.”

Hill said the guidelines issued to armed police officers were clear that “the ultimate responsibility for firing a weapon rests with the individual officer who is ultimately answerable in the court of law”.

He added: “Having analysed Mr Long’s account given in justification for opening fire, we say that you can be sure that it does not represent the truth. That being so, you can be sure that Mr Long had no lawful justification for shooting Azelle Rodney. That means that Mr Long must be guilty of murder.”



The trial continues.























