Re: Police return fire in shoot-out
 

I don't suppose the printed version of that 'apology' was anything like as prominent as the original smear. :rolleyes:

Re: Police return fire in shoot-out
 

A side column on page 11 seemingly. Obviously I don't know for sure as I can't pick up a copy of the paper without a full CBRN suit.

I had a lucky escape tonight, I was looking at the Daily Mail website but managed to switch to viewing some porn before my girlfriend came in and caught me looking at something really embarrassing.

Re: Police return fire in shoot-out
 

Now that's a real girlfriend for you! :D

Re: Police return fire in shoot-out
 

One that goes mental when she catches you looking at the Daily Mail Online? Absolutely, that's one classy bird. Someone who's not afraid to take a stand against internet filth. :D

Re: Police return fire in shoot-out
 

It's understandable, though.

Viewing the Mail online is just the first step on the road to depravity - next thing you know, you are reading the Sun (for the funny articles, obviously), and it's only a matter of time before you are subscribing to the Daily Star and going on EDL marches........

Re: Police return fire in shoot-out
 

and from then on it's a steep downward slope to the Guardian.... :D

Re: Police return fire in shoot-out
 

why haven't they used the officers names ,i notice they use their numbers ,any specific reason or just a way of not apologising by name properly

Re: Police return fire in shoot-out
 

For the inquests all the officers are identified by a number or call sign. The names of firearms officers involved in incidents are very rarely released.

Re: Police return fire in shoot-out
 

Thanks Derek ,thats ok then i just thought it may have been the mail being a bit shirty because they were wrong and had to apologize

but then the tiny bit of space devoted ammounts to the same thing