A 29-year-old Metropolitan Police officer, PC Dermot McCabe, had his firearm collection seized following concerns raised by colleagues over his journal entries. The entries, which included references to the notorious serial killer Jack the Ripper and statements such as 'We live and die by the gun' and 'I've become a force to be reckoned with,' prompted an investigation.
Colleagues forced entry into McCabe's London flat out of concern for his well-being and discovered the journal. The case came to light when McCabe appealed a decision to revoke his firearms license after these concerns were passed to North Wales Police, who subsequently seized his guns and ammunition. McCabe was also placed on desk duties.
During the appeal at Mold Crown Court, it was heard that McCabe had sought to possess up to 2,000 rounds of ammunition, along with rifles and a shotgun, and had referred to owning a 'full arsenal of firearms with my armour.' He also reportedly claimed to be conducting 'market research' when questioned about owning a ballistic helmet.
McCabe, who moved from Wales to join the Metropolitan Police, stated that the journal entries were taken out of context and had innocent explanations. He explained that passages about Jack the Ripper were written after a visit to a museum in London and did not indicate an obsession with the historical figure. The phrase 'a force to be reckoned with' was attributed to a term used by his former private school headmistress, and 'We live and die by the gun' was a reference to a collection of Western short stories.
He testified that he had been granted firearms and shotgun certificates in 2022 and was a member of gun clubs, participating in shooting competitions. He described himself as a keen sports shooter with a 'quirky sense of humour' and asserted that he was a suitable person to own firearms, although he acknowledged his entries could be misunderstood.
Following an adjournment, McCabe withdrew his appeal. The judge, Nicola Jones, made no findings of fact against McCabe but ordered him to pay £5,000 in costs. She noted that the journals, written during the lockdown period when McCabe was younger, were private and not intended for public view. The judge added that while issues were raised, there was 'more to this than meets the eye, not in a sinister way.'