Azelle Rodney death: Marksman E7 calls for judicial review
A police marksman who shot dead a man in north London has applied for a judicial review of a public inquiry which found he had no "lawful justification" for the killing.
The officer, known as E7, killed Azelle Rodney in Edgware in 2005 after the car he was in was stopped by armed police.
E7 said he opened fire because he believed Mr Rodney had picked up a gun.
But the inquiry ruled E7 "could not rationally have believed" Mr Rodney was holding a sub-machine gun.
Lawyers for E7 have now served a claim for judicial review on former High Court judge Sir Christopher Holland.
They are seeking a declaration that Sir Christopher's conclusions relating to E7's use of force are "irrational", or an order quashing parts of the report that conclude the officer's use of force was not justified.
Alternatively, they want a declaration the conclusions in the report about E7's beliefs have breached procedural rules.
In his report, Sir Christopher considered issues including what information the police team had, how reliable it was, whether their approach minimised the risk to life, and if stopping the car was done with only necessary force.
He said: "There was no lawful justification for shooting Azelle Rodney so as to kill him.
"E7's accounts of what he saw are not to be accepted.
"Prior to firing he did not believe that the man who turned out to be Azelle Rodney had picked up a gun and was about to use it.
"Further, on the basis of what he was able to see, he could not rationally have believed that."
E7 told the inquiry he saw Mr Rodney start moving around, reaching down and then coming back up with his shoulders hunched.
But Sir Christopher's report dismissed this account, which was also contradicted by eyewitnesses.
The firearms officer could face a criminal trial over Mr Rodney's death. Prosecutors are considering whether to bring charges.
Mr Rodney was shot six times, once each in the arm and back, and, fatally, four times in the head.