"Hundreds" of Met Police armed response officers hand in the weapons after colleague charged with murder - Chris Kaba Shooting aftermath.
- Thread starter ianh
- Start date
Narrator #2: and it's quite fortunate it didn't.
The 2 tonne Audi weapon excuse seems a bit silly unless the armed police men are trained to exit their vehicles right in the path of an assailant and put themselves in harms way?
An unarmed person was shot in the head and giving free passes for this sets the wrong impression, surely if the officer acted accordingly they’ll be found not guilty and perhaps the public will be less angry and likely to riot if they at least see legal processes were followed
An unarmed person was shot in the head and giving free passes for this sets the wrong impression, surely if the officer acted accordingly they’ll be found not guilty and perhaps the public will be less angry and likely to riot if they at least see legal processes were followed
Soldato
No, because action was taken to not allow any of it to happen, which is now what the discussion is about. Please try and keep up.
Dunno the specifics but we had trouble with this lot in town - drug deal went bad, bunch of them met up in a car park near where I was out for a meal and basically laughing at the one police officer sent to keep an eye on them, then went into town to get revenge or whatever and 6 people ended up stabbed.
They chose to ignore this problem.
Soldato
And yet this is what his family had to say about him:
"Chris was so very loved by our family and all his friends. He had a bright future ahead of him, but his life was cut short.
"Our family and our wider community must see justice for Chris," they added.
And Sadiq Khan:
"The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said: "Chris had his whole life ahead of him and his death has had a huge impact on Londoners, and in particular black Londoners, with anger, pain and fear felt across communities, along with a desire for change and justice."
Scum, the lot of them. Should shoot them all, world be better place.
Soldato
You've literally got no idea what you're talking about.
Soldato
This has come about because no one wants to make the right decision for fear of starting a riot/having politicians criticise them/jeopardising their next promotion/having various social justice groups target them.
So both IOPC and CPS have decided to just pass the buck to a jury so they can wash their hands of responsibility - whilst disregarding the wider implications and the absolute mental torture they will have put those officers through.
This is another in a long list of armed officers, and police officers in general, being investigated for 3-10 YEARS for things to get to court and for things like CPS choosing to withdraw the charge on the day of the trial/judges criticising CPS for even bringing charges/judges directing juries to find the office not guilty because the evidence is non existent/jury's almost consistently finding officer not guilty.
How are we in a position where we are treating the London rapper part of the 67 drill rap gang, who previously has convictions for possessing firearms and knives and who beat the hell out of his girlfriend, after he tried to smash his way out of an armed police stop in a vehicle used in a gun incident the day before, as a victim. But the highly trained SFO has the suspect?!
And then people question why the police are reluctant to do their jobs and why crime is going absolutely mental particularly in the cities.
We're the only country in the world who treat our police officers like this. No one has ever said they shouldn't expect for their decisions to be scrutinized, after all someone was killed. Honest scrutiny is absolutely fine. Politically charged scrutiny is how we've ended up here. The likes of Harriet Harman and Saddiq Khan almost openly condemning the officer for murder whilst talking about Chris Kaba like he was Gandhi.
Absolutely mental.
Last edited:
Soldato
The mayor of London should really keep his mouth shut on this as it is now sub judice.
I don't think that's a recent quote
Man of Honour
I don't believe armed police should be above the law and have to agree - if the officer acted correctly then surely that will be proven in court and the process might serve to give some public confidence back in the Met which currently has to be one of the least trusted organisations in the UK by most.
We should never end up in an US style "shoot first" ask questions later culture.
Khan has frequent form for being far too quick to comment on matter like this (even when they don't relate to London in some case)
Unfortunately the Tories are no better. This for example is an entirely inappropriate message for any MP, let alone one in her position to send out at this stage in proceedings...
This is certainly a very strange case... the family were full of demands for justice until they were invites in to watch the footage by the police and then suddenly they announced they were 'stepping back' which sounds a lot like what they saw didn't justify their previous outrage.
The CPS better have a very robust case in this matter...
Uniformed poster struggles to differentiate between the legal burden of criminal proof and the very different and long standing (common law) right to defence of oneself and right to defend others from immediate danger.
Because the officers aren't striking obviously...
Stupid idea. No one can sensibly explain how this would improve things and what would change beyond costs going up and there being even more issues with 'cross border' crime and criminals!
We realised at least as far back as the 1990's that policing isn't just for the police do to.... for example local authorities have a role to play in crime reduction and detection. Even builiding planning needs to consider the effects decisions will have on crime. Thr police therefore need to be able to, effectively, work with partners in local government.
Therefore it makes sense to have London police force for London as London is its own regional area with its own local governorship.
It was at least much more peaceful than the infamous 'mostly peaceful' event in that CNN report.
A lot of people (me included) just know how ridiculous it would be to claim that an event were almost all the participants failed to bring guns in the US and the only person shot was one of the belligerent group was an 'insurrection'.
This already tends to happen anyway... it's called coroners court....
Putting all police officers who use fatal force in a criminal court is obviously a stupid idea.
For the millionth time we don't have an 'armed police force' like most other countries do. We have an unarmed one with a small cadre of tenants officers who volunteer to carry firearms. They are subject to very frequent training and can very easily have their stays revoked. They can also walk into work and say they are reminding their voluntary status and be re assigned to some other police work.
Zero. Police officers of the same rank and on the same 'band' (based on length of service although PC's can now be 'held back' if they aren't performing) have the same base salary and hourly rate for any overtime worked.
The Met and some surrounding forces also pay all of their officers a regional allowance for the cost of living. Butbthis would be the same for an AFO/SFO and a neighbourhood PC/ response PC/ Detective etc.
This isn't true. They still get paid the same amount but often earn silly money as they work load of hours on overtime and can claim expenses for things like food purchased, travel and accommodation because they are all over the place, often at short notice.
Again carrying a gun, in the UK, is not a 'duty' (as in something an officer can be required to do)
This issue has some similarity with police 'response/ pursuit driving' (which is also something police volunteer to do and which they can all refuse to do if they want).
The issue with the driving is that police don't actually have any consideration in the law for the manner in which they are requested to drive. And that manner would tick all the boxes for 'dangerous driving' putting officers in a parlous situation for a job that they are asked to perform. In the same way Soldiers and armed police officers are different from other people. The state has given then a lethal weapon and asked that they be ready to use it, if neccesary, to achieve an aim of the state.
The nature of that weapon is such that Almost any intentional discharge of it would satisfy the mens rea aspects for a murder charge.
There should perhaps be a consideration as to whether some additional law is needed to reflect thr unique position of emergency service 'response/ pursuit' drivers and armed officers.
Last edited:
Soldato
He is the most snakey politician I can think of - and, as I'm sure you'll appreciate, that's saying a lot considering the company he keeps
Normally I'm in the camp of "Well, maybe CPS have more evidence than is public so can make a better decision on things like this" so tend to avoid criticising them before we know full facts.
However, *this* was one of the biggest things that made me think they hadn't. The family were organising protests/marches/online appeals - you name it, they were doing it. Then the IOPC/Police invited them in to watch the video and the very next day they put out a statement saying they were stepping back from their protests. If there was anything even *remotely* contentious, they would have continued their protests. If there was something that supported their view, it would have fired them up even more to expand their protests. But what the BWV has actually done has shut them down completely - and the ONLY reason I can think of for this is because it showed Chris Kaba in a terrible light.
Then you think how politically motivated the IOPC/CPS are and the last one they dealt with resulted in London burning and, behind the scene, all sorts of people getting chewed out for all sorts of things - so would they really just wash their hands of responsibility and pass the buck onto a jury? You bet they would. But that's not how our justice system works. CPS need to be satisfied there is a realistic chance of prosecution - which from how the family reacted to the BWV - I'm suspecting there isn't.
Last edited:
Perhaps it wasn't simply the viewing of the video, but the discussions with the IOPC/CPS where they may have outlined their intentions, negating the need for continued protests?
Soldato
I agree the US takes it to the extreme, but these armed officers have to make split second decisions to protect their own safety and that of their colleagues.
The guy was a criminal, involved in an armed police response for whatever reason, and got shot. Why should we have any sympathy for this?
It would not matter if he was black, white, red, my auntie. I would feel the same way.
Soldato
Depending on the tactic, that's exactly what they do. Obviously they will try to avoid standing in front of the vehicle, but good planning rarely survives first contact - especially when the first contact is a 2 ton Audi Q8 coming at you at the rate of knots.
Yeah, i remember when German Police shot dead this poor unarmed man. Bet he was an aspiring architect, who was thrilled to become a father and love football too:
2016 Berlin truck attack - Wikipedia
If you want to know how dangerous vehicles are, just look at the amount of people killed or serious injured after being run over by one.
No, they won't. Some members of the public say they want justice, but they either don't know what justice is, or they choose to ignore it because it doesn't suit their narrative. Justice is the concept of being treated fairly, impartially, properly and reasonably. They don't want that - they want him convicted. The irony is, these sects of the public are the same ones telling the justice system how wrong it is that they are not treated fairly/impartially/properly/reasonably. All the while this officer has his entire future/family hanging in the balance from years on end, with the prospect of receiving a life sentence and 15+ years behind bars. Can people even imagine what that must feel like? A feeling of nausea 24/7 would be the only thing I can imagine it being like.
And if the officer is found not guilty - what are they going to say then?! Yep, they're going to say the whole justice system is biased and this is another case of an officer getting away with murder. This is straight from the playbook!
I don't blame the officer for this, I don't even blame Chris Kaba or his family for this - I squarely blame our system for this. A system that has given legitimacy to wild accusations made by social justice warriors. A system that has allowed the IOPC/CPS to become politicised for fear of being criticised by people like Sadiq Khan/Harriet Harmen etc. A system that has the BBC news printing in every article that "he was months away from becoming a father and was unarmed at the time" to garner sympathy.
And the AFO's stepping down is now a bill that the public must pay. Are they going to blame AFO's for not jeopardising their entire futures/family futures for fear of being caught up in political bull ****? Or are they going to blame the system which points the finger at law enforcement first, because they won't fight back, and is happy to portray criminals and lovely caring people?
Last edited:
Are you suggesting that the officer is deliberately being prosecuted with the intention the officer be found not guilty? How Machiavellian of you!