Peterlee Murders: Police Name Shooting Victims (PICTURES)

Peterlee

First Posted: 03/01/12 07:03 GMT Updated: 03/01/12 07:03 GMT   PA

Police have named the victims of a New Year's Day gun rampage in which a man shot himself after killing three women.

Durham Police said Michael Atherton, 42, shot dead his 47-year-old partner Susan McGoldrick, her sister Alison Turnbull, 44 and her niece Tanya Turnbull, 24, before turning the gun on himself.

The bodies were found in "close proximity" downstairs in the semi-detached house in Greenside Avenue, Horden, Peterlee, after police were alerted to shots being fired shortly before 11.45pm on Sunday night.

Police believe family members had been out at a pub or for a meal before returning to the house where the incident took place.

As the shooting began, a teenager, understood to be Mrs McGoldrick's 19-year-old daughter Laura, fled through an upstairs window and raised the alarm. She ran into the street and pounded on a neighbour's front door asking for help.

Durham Police revealed that police had had "minor contact" with the family in the past. In 2008 police were contacted after claims Atherton was threatening to harm himself.

The matter has been voluntary referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) by Durham Police, as the force had previous contact with the family.

A spokeswoman for Durham Police said last night: "Police are continuing to try and establish the exact circumstances of what took place and are speaking to family, friends and associates of those who died.

"However, we can confirm that police currently believe Mr Atherton shot the three women before turning the weapon on himself.

"The exact weapon used has still not been established and will also form part of continuing inquiries."

Post-mortem examinations were being carried out last night, and police hoped to release more details today.

The families of those involved have asked not to be contacted by the media. Some of the victims' relatives are also being treated as significant witnesses.

Durham Police assistant chief constable Michael Banks told a news conference yesterday that a resident at the address was the "lawful holder" of shotgun and firearms licences.

He said these were for three shotguns and three "section one" firearms, a category requiring greater authorisation than a shotgun licence.

The revelation is likely to spark renewed debate over whether to further tighten Britain's gun licensing laws.

Police could not confirm at this stage whether any of those lawfully held weapons had been used in the shooting, Mr Banks said.

He added: "I would like to reassure our communities that the police are in control of this incident.

"At this moment, we are looking for no-one else in relation to this inquiry."

He said that shortly before 11.45pm on Sunday a number of calls were made to the police control room to report that shots had been fired at an address in Greenside Avenue, in Horden, Peterlee.

"Our information within those numerous messages was that several people had been shot," he said.

"The police were dispatched to the scene and shortly after midnight, as our officers entered the house, it was discovered that a man and three women were dead in the house.

"It is our belief at this stage that they died of gunshot wounds."

Mr Banks said of the man found dead in the house: "We believe he may be a member of a gun club. We're still researching that."

Detective Superintendent Paul Goundry said there had been other people in the house who were now being interviewed.

According to reports, Mrs McGoldrick's brother Bobby Hardman said the family was "numb from head to toe", adding: "We've lost three family members in one swoop and that's all I can say really."

Family friend Steve Patterson reportedly said Atherton's brother, Chris, had told him before the shootings that his brother had been suffering from depression.

Mr Patterson was quoted in reports as saying: "He said he was fed up with the way his life was going. I think he started feeling down after an operation he had on his heart."

Neighbours spoke of their shock at the incident.

One woman, who did not want to be identified, said: "I always called them Mike and Sue. I am devastated, totally devastated. Two nice people, I did not think anything like this could happen.

"We are all just shocked, just stunned. There are no other words to describe it. I cannot believe that four people died there."


FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK

Police have named the victims of a New Year's Day gun rampage in which a man shot himself after killing three women. Durham Police said Michael Atherton, 42, shot dead his 47-year-old partner Susan...
Police have named the victims of a New Year's Day gun rampage in which a man shot himself after killing three women. Durham Police said Michael Atherton, 42, shot dead his 47-year-old partner Susan...
Filed by David Hobbs  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 106
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
08:53 PM on 01/03/2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/29/jodi-arias_n_1174274.html
This is the worst case of Domestic Violence in U.S. history.
A woman shot her exboyfriend then stabed him 27 times, if that wasn't enough she cut his throut from ear to ear.
Give this a read
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
06:38 PM on 01/04/2012
Thank you for sharing that, it's sobering stuff.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Wagland
Resistance is fertile
08:22 PM on 01/03/2012
A couple of posters have asked why ban guns and not knives, cars etc. I guess you could argue that cars are useful items for many people - there are 31million in the UK and not many people want to see them banned (although it might improve some aspects of life!). It would be hard to live without knives, and it's easy enough to make one anyway. Best to ban carrying them in public and enforce as well as you can.

Guns, in contrast, are useful to very few people. As they are purpose-built to do harm, it seems obvious to me that they must be tightly controlled. Farmers need them, target-shooting enthusiasts can be sympathised with (though I'd like to see such guns kept at a registered location, maybe a police station). But why do people living in towns, with no land or livestock to protect, need to have one in their homes?
09:56 PM on 01/03/2012
I agree, also this 'mental health' argument is, in many ways, irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether someone is an obvious raving lunatic or appears to be the nicest guy you could ever have met. He has the same ability as the rest of us to act normally 99.9% of the time but still to have his own will and the potential to change into something else overnight, under a particular given set of circumstances. This might involve anger, jealousy, alcohol, drugs, or any of the other reasons that people commit murder in an instant, only to regret it for the rest of their life. To suppose that anybody could ever be regarded as 'safe' enough to have one gun in the house (let alone six), just because they appear normal, and manage to satisfy some test from time to time, is as ridiculous as thinking that passing the driving test makes you a good driver.
11:46 PM on 01/03/2012
Paul Wagland: One of the strongest arguments for firearms owners keeping them in their own homes is simply security. That may sound a bit odd until you consider what happens when a thief goes looking for firearms. Which is easier for the thief, many firearms and ammunition located all over the place under very tight security, or a whole arsenal located in just one place? Oh, and target weapons are not 'purpose-built to do harm' quite the opposite, they are built for accuracy, are often very heavy, unwieldy, and often single-shot. The average criminal would much prefer a sawn-off shotgun because it is cheap, easy to lop off the barrels, easy to conceal, and doesn't need much skill to use at close range. I don't know about now but there was a time when you could walk onto practically any farm and find a loaded shotgun just propped up behind the door. Target shooters have always kept their weapons in heavy steel security cabinets with firing mechanisms such as bolts, and ammunition separately and they don't advertise what they have to anyone outside of their fraternity. Trepanning guides are also ''useful to very few people'' is it obvious that they too ''must be tightly controlled'' because one of those in the wrong hands would be disastrous?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Wagland
Resistance is fertile
10:16 AM on 01/04/2012
I'm curious to know if you're aware of anyone currently trepanning for pleasure? Hard to trepan your family to death, then turn the trepanning saw on yourself. (I do get your point though).

I'm sure you're right that target shooters are a highly responsible bunch. My post was meant more to defend our existing gun laws (which offer pretty tight control) than to argue for more restrictive legislation. Nonetheless there are plenty of people in the UK who legally keep guns in their homes with no good reason to do so. They don't target shoot or keep livestock. They just like guns. That's what I'd like to stop.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michaelxx
05:58 PM on 01/03/2012
I think we should be able to carry guns without answering to anybody.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
06:44 PM on 01/03/2012
why?
07:14 PM on 01/03/2012
Thismortalcoil: Why not? This may surprise you but Michaelxx's comment is one of the most balanced possible assuming that it comes from somebody who does not have any issues with firearms. Many people here today are obviously frightened of firearms and one possible reason is that they are aware of the temptations and/or desires which exist within them. Anybody who has ever owned and used firearms safely, responsibly, and properly would have the same level of comfort with the idea as Michaelxx. Think of something which applies to you in the same way and imagine how you would feel if your ownership of that thing depended on nobody else abusing the use of one, such as a car. Like it or not more people die as a result of car impacts than by shootings so why single out lawfully and safely held firearms? The only logical explanation is the one I propounded earlier whereby there is an agenda to disarm the civilian population which would leave only the armed forces, the police, and criminals at large carrying and using firearms against people. I don't think that is a very good idea.
05:18 PM on 01/03/2012
Looks like Huff Stasipost doesn't like the way this version of the story and comments is going and so they have opened up another version and are not accepting comments! Funny that.
majdf18148
I have nothing to declare but my curiosity
05:07 PM on 01/03/2012
Owning a firearm should not become illegal unless the weapon is not licensed. People will always find a way of either accessing a gun, or another weapon, if they are steadfastly intent on murder, mayhem and/or suicide.What we need to do is to restrict, as far as possible, the ownership of licensed weapons to mentally stable people who are devoid of psychotic tendencies. A suggestion to help this might be a legal requirement for all gun owners to inform the police of their GP's details. The police could, firstly, before issuing the license check on the applicant's mental health (does this already happen?) and secondly require the GP to report to the police immediately any signs of mental illness become apparent with the license holder. This could be checked annually, the cost borne by the license holder and the weapons siezed immediately any concerns are raised. The fact is if guns of any kind are legally held there will always be an element of their misuse, we can however minimize that risk, that said far more people are killed in this country with weapons other than guns so, as dreadful as this incident is, we need to maintain a sense of perspective.
06:18 PM on 01/03/2012
The reason that 'far more people are killed in this country with weapons other than guns' is rather obvious - we don't routinely allow people to have guns. As for restricting ownership to 'mentally stable' people, someone doesn't have to be mentally unstable, at least outwardly, to present a permanent risk to society. There are no checks that can prevent a situation where that person decides, perhaps without showing any previous signs of violent behaviour, that the easiest way to injure or kill others is by using the firearm designed for the job, that they keep on the premises, rather than a knife or other weapon which is less likely to have the same effect. Given the neighbours comments, that seems to be exactly what happened here.
majdf18148
I have nothing to declare but my curiosity
07:16 PM on 01/03/2012
You are right but experience tells me that people who suffer from mental health issues more often than not start off displaying milder symptoms that get progressively worse. If such people have licensed firearms these should be removed at the very onset or identification of the illness. This man had a history of depression, he had contact with the very police aho had licensed his firearms. I accept between 2008 and the incident that was a solitary contact but in my view that time in 2008 his weapons should have been immediately removed until there remained no doubt as to his state of mind. He may well have got them back and still carried out the killings, we will never know. I am advocating caution in order to minimize the risks, nothing more.Regarding his neighbours I wonder if they were aware he had threatened self harm and was allowed to keep his weapons, seemingly without further recourse to his family doctor for advice on his state of mind? Just a thought.
01:29 PM on 01/03/2012
Condolences to the families of the victims.

Time for some serious knee jerk reactions, the Police should hand over the details of all those licensed to keep guns and ammunition at home to Baliffs and have the lot collected up and recycled into something useful like Fridges and Cookers.

Unless you live on a farm there is absolutely no excuse for owning a weapon let alone a fire arm of any kind. If that does not suit your 'lifestyle' choices go and live in the USA where you will be welcomed with open arms. Simples, job done, end of.
01:42 PM on 01/03/2012
You are so short sighted ..... i'm very suprised you don't trip over your own shoe laces!
01:57 PM on 01/03/2012
Surprisingly I do not trip over my shoe laces and you have failed to provide a single good reason for anyone owning a weapon or fire arm.
01:46 PM on 01/03/2012
I think your vision is pretty good.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Mickey Mouse 1
There are no lies or deceit on a chess board.
01:08 PM on 01/03/2012
They'll probably use this as another excuse to review gun licences.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
02:18 PM on 01/03/2012
From what people have said on here criminals are having no problem getting hold of guns, so it's not just gun licences that need to be reviewed but the whole issue of guns in the UK.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Mickey Mouse 1
There are no lies or deceit on a chess board.
10:59 PM on 01/03/2012
Labour used the Dunblane shooting as an excuse to get rid of guns in the UK, so I expect they will also use this as another excuse to bash the legitimate gun lobby.
01:03 PM on 01/03/2012
My sympathy goes to the family that are left to cope with this terrible tragedy. However, the plain fact is, people who have guns have them for a reason, and it is not for decoration.
This comment has been removed.
11:40 AM on 01/03/2012
What is this country coming to ? In my 74 years, I can honestly say I have never known a Christmas time like it for all these murders and killings. It is time decent sentences were handed out for these crimes. Prison is not a deterant these day's, they are holiday camps. Mobiles, drugs, televisions etc easily obtainable for inmates. Time for the death penalty to be bought back me thinks !!!!!!!!!!!!
katertaif
My wife thinks I have one fault. Everything I do!
11:22 AM on 01/03/2012
Same old reaction, let's tighten the gun laws. labour did it after Dunblane. Reports after that horrific event showed that the owner of those guns was to say the least mentally unstable, and the police knew it. I understand, or at least it was reported that he had several times pointed a gun at friends. whether loadedor unloaded that to say the least is an idiotic thing to do. If the police had acted then, Dunblane would never have been able to happen. In this instance, the gun holder had ' had contact ' with the police before, and the police had reason to at least temporarily suspend his licences and remove them from him. Unfortunately such things are going to happen from time to time, but like Dunblane this one seems to have been preventable. Instead of talking about tightening the already prohibitive gun laws - prohibitive for the legal owner at least, criminals ar unaffected by any laws - notice should be taken of, and licences revoked when an individual becomes ' known to the police '. When I lived in S. Africa I had a gun licence, I know of several people, two of them reserve police officers whose licences were revoked and the weapons confiscated after doing stupid things.
01:28 PM on 01/03/2012
Since Hungerford and Dunblane (where semi-automatic rifles and pistols were banned, licensing was tightened right down on, and medical checks got alot more stringent), but still the actual percentage of firearms related incidents has risen by over 11% during the last 10yrs!
Can't people see its not the implement thats used, its the person using it!
What would happen if he had run them over in his Ford Focus ...... would they then ban all 4 door saloons???

Nobody wants these horrific incidents to occur, and we can all grieve and feel saddened for those affected familys on the rare times this sort of thing happens, but how can you legislate against somebody going mad with ANY implement - be it a gun / spade / ball point pen / car ???
01:57 PM on 01/03/2012
An angry man with a gun is far more likely to use it in haste. If he had to think about arranging a group of people in the middle of the road, then running them over (let alone the problem of running himself over afterwards), he might think twice about it. It is also easier to use a gun than a knife or a club which requires actual contact with the victim(s).
katertaif
My wife thinks I have one fault. Everything I do!
03:21 PM on 01/03/2012
I couldn't agree with you more bigfoxy. As you say, people pull the trigger/drive the car/stab someone with a kitchen knife or whatever. Anyone sufficiently disturbed as to actually want to kill someone, will find something to use, to bend to their purpose. Used properly, in competition or whatever (which is why I had a licence) a gun is no more and no less dangerous than any other means of killing.
11:17 AM on 01/03/2012
After having recieved a telephone call at the police stn. reporting gun shots, the police statement is:"It is our belief at this stage that they died of gunshot wounds." just shows how clever they are to deduce from that call, that a 'Gun', may have been used dunnit.
Makalha
Opinions are not facts.
10:50 AM on 01/03/2012
I believe it is rare that a legally held gun is used in a crime by the licence holder . As horrific as this is please remember that in most crimes involving firearms the weapons are not held legally . Personally I wouldn't want to own one but many people enjoy target shooting or clay pidgeon shooting . Whatever laws there are in place for gun ownership it won't stop criminals obtaining them any more than the law making it illegal to carry a knife stops them being carried and used .
10:08 AM on 01/03/2012
This sort of incident could happen anywhere where a firearm licence is issued. My dad used to go hunting in Northern Italy and had therefore a firearm licence that needed renewing every year, subject to medical examination and a statement from the provincial tribunal stating the person had ono convictions. Both documents had to be produced to the local paramilitary police who endorsed the licence for a further year. The licence was in the form of an ID documents bearing the various yera renewal endorsments. This system was in force in Italy the best part of 55 years ago. The shotgun had to be dismantelled on entering the house and ammunition had to be kept in a different area. Sporadic checks were made to enforce the terms of the licence and these check for paid for by a large yearly renewal fee, tribunal fee, and doctor fee. So this was finced by the various fees levied. More than one firearm licence would have had even more stringent checks like.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
02:06 PM on 01/03/2012
That sounds far more sensible. In cases like this, where a man shoots members of his family then himself, there is often a history of domestic violence, and this man was even self harming - so there may have been signs that a professional could have picked up on.
This comment has been removed.
09:48 AM on 01/03/2012
AOL. Why aren`t firearms owners being allowed to post on this subject? It is our right to be able to.
Clearly a case of favouritism towards those who are against firearms and their owners.
10:12 AM on 01/03/2012
No m8 its a cas of Huffington Post not posting comments they dont like, Which is most of them!!!
10:57 AM on 01/03/2012
Read on vvkmt, there are posts by firearms owners.
11:17 AM on 01/03/2012
I`ve had three deleted today, none were abusive or derogatory.