Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Man connected to organized crime killed by sniper



The Toronto Sun is reporting that A sniper shot a 37-year-old murder victim - once dubbed “Mr. Big” when he was nabbed in a major drug bust - from nearly 200 metres away.

The Toronto Star reported that “This is a shot that was made at a considerable distance – at night, in the dark, it was windy, and Clinton was on the move when he was shot,” Bui said. “I believe that this person has some considerable skill or some training.”

CBC reported that Bui said the rifle used in the shooting has "a strong connection to Montreal," although he didn't specify exactly what that connection entailed.

Clinton was found fatally shot on a driveway in Scarborough, Ontario on Sept. 30, 2015.

Nicolo Rizzuto was shot in his home by a sniper November 10, 2010.

11 comments:

  1. 200m isn't really that big a deal. "At night" isn't either in a well lit urban area, and most quality scopes have a decent "twilight factor". Likewise we don't know what they mean by "on the move", he was in a driveway, so it's possible he was at a predictable pause in his movement, ie. unlocking a vehicle preparatory to getting in/getting in, with this scenario there would be non-existent deflection involved in taking the shot. At 200m wind is not really that big a factor for any centerfire rifle cartridge, they all buck it pretty well out to that distance and the fact that it was windy in general doesn't speak to specific windage conditions between the the shooter's position and the target.

    It's interesting that they say the rifle used has a strong connection to Montreal. This shoot was a while back so they've more than had enough time to do a comparison between the projectile recovered and any other recovered projectiles, say the Rizzuto shooting, or a cartridge casing comparison if the shooter is dumb enough to leave them behind.

    While the skill level demonstrated isn't in the grand scheme of things all that high (well within the range of being self taught IMHO)the shooter is still (lets assume) 2 for 2 in the real world. He's going to have background with firearms and shooting, possibly hunting as well.

    Still and all, it wouldn't take a "sniper rifle" to do this, or specific training in sniping either. A decent deer rifle with a correctly zero'd scope would be capable of these shots.

    I will admit I'm curious to see what rig was used.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 200 M at night seems like a big deal to me. It just looks like an old hunting rifle. They recovered a a Browning BLR short magnum lever-action model with a Bushnell scope and a bipod from the scene:
      http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/murder-update-clinton-foo-1.3542673

      Delete
    2. It's not, trust me. Neither the range nor the factor that it was at night is as remarkable as the police seem to think, which tells you something about the police quite frankly. .300 Short Magnum will buck wind just fine at 200m, so that also is basically a non factor. Any semi experienced shooter/hunter could have made this shot. It's not the kind of rifle you would generally choose for this kind of job and there's a very good chance they can't trace it any further than a legal owner who probably lost it in a burglary, which is how a surprisingly large number of firearms wind up in criminal hands. Using a bipod gives the shooter a very stable platform, making this shot even that much easier.

      Thanks for the link, curiosity satisfied.....

      Delete
    3. Trust you? Why is it that whenever anyone says that I have a hard time doing so? Making a shot at night the length of two football fields is somewhat more impressive than the local nutbars who can't hit the broadside of a barn at point blank range. It would be hard for me to make that shot and I have spent some time working on target practice. You are correct in that the riffle likely can't be traced. That's why they left it at the scene. It was a nonregistered throw away.

      Delete
  2. people who are target shooters usually spend money on their rifles and a lot are custom made. Shooting at the distance described and hitting the target is fairly good shooting. There would have been some training and may have been while the shooter was a teenager. Whoever did the shooting is not an amateur and most likely has done other "work".

    When you consider almost no one hits their target in Surrey, this shooting was "good", not in terms of the shooting but the accuracy. which just goes to show you, if you want some one dead, it can be done. Although personally I'd rather it not be done at all. But for those who want to play with the "big boys", this is one of the job risks.

    ReplyDelete
  3. We used to have to put 5 rounds within a couple inch grouping over iron sights at 200 yards with an FN to qualify while in HM Forces.

    That's with a 7.62 / .308 round. No different than any hunting round for deer today. If the police think that shot was impressive they are very sorely mistaken (and poorly trained).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 200 yards with an iron sight on an AR? I could not do that.

      Delete
  4. Oh, and the "unique bipod" comment - I just glanced at it but it just looks like an UTG.

    Logically speaking, every individual material thing is unique.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "while in HM Forces." I think that's the point. In military training it is common. Does that mean the suspect had military training? As far as I'm concerned, a kill on a moving target at night at 100 M is impressive. 200 M meters is awesome. Lee Harvey Oswald who was accused of shooting Kennedy did so at less than half that distance. It was considered a good shot then because it was a moving target. Oswald was suspected of having some kind of military training or that of the agency. A Canadian sniper in Afghanistan broke the record for the longest kill and that was over 2,000 M but it was with a much different riffle.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Oswald was suspected of having some kind of military training" What?? Come on man, Oswald was former US Marine. You know, "Every Marine a rifleman", 600 yard targets back when he was in. He only had a marksman rating (marksman, sharpshooter, expert) but still....

    You don't have to have been in the military to be able to shoot this well. Like I say, this is without doubt good shooting but not spectacularly impressive on the scale as a whole. Civilians regularly out shoot the military and LEO's at various types of matches, and there are plenty of civilians who shoot long distance rifle as well. Most of the records are held by civilians.

    ReplyDelete
  7. OK so Oswald did have military training. Big surprise. That's why the agency recruits people with former military training. Although I do think Bill Fordy is a complete idiot and the amount of sexual harassment charges in the RCMP is insane, I don't think we can rightfully mock the police all the time.

    The police said this was a very good shot that required some kind of training to perform. I think that is a fair statement. It's the the difference between standing upright and steadying the rifle with your own hands compared to lying down and placing the rifle on a sandbag or a bipod. Two different worlds.

    I really don't think there is a need to split hairs. Trailrunner's initial comment claiming that 200m isn't really that big a deal has merit. I just want to avoid unnecessary arrogance and negativity when referring to the police all the time. A lot of them are arrogant idiots but all in all they do put their lives on the line to protect public peace. 200 M is twice as far as the Kennedy assassination and is a lot better that all the recent shootings we have seen in Surrey. It's really that simple.

    ReplyDelete