"Hundreds" of Met Police armed response officers hand in the weapons after colleague charged with murder - Chris Kaba Shooting aftermath.

[John40]

Not only has every counter-terrorism officer in the Met this morning stood down there are hardly any armed vehicles on the streets of London as other officers are "undergoing a period of reflection"

Hundreds have handed in their blue tickets this morning.

 

[Gaygle]

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?

Perhaps.... But the people involved in the protests have a fierce and well known distrust of CPS/IOPC - why are they suddenly going to trust them then? And they viewed the footage over a year ago, some 2 weeks after the shooting itself - WAYYYY before any investigation had even really started and WAYYYY before CPS/IOPC could start substantial promises to the family (not that they would even be able to do that!) to the degree that would cause them to immediately cease protesting.

Kaba's cousin actually seems like the most impartial one - strangely, even more impartial than some Labour MP's!! At least Kaba's cousin can recognise that police should shoot when there is an imminent threat to life - that seems to be beyond Sadiq Khan and Harriet Harman, because they're politicising the whole thing for their own, snakey gains.

 

[loftie]

Narrator: None of this happened.

I never said it did. My issue was that they assumed the only outcome was a broken leg. They "fixed" the outcome to a certainty, it was never a certainty. I agreed with every other point they made in their original post, but not that the trade was a broken leg Vs someone being shot to death - no one could know what it would be so it's impossible to assume what it would be.
Unless there's access to a crystal ball on the super secret section of the forum, in which case, next week's lotto numbers please.

 

[NVP]

They're standing down over what they feel is an injustice against one of their colleagues, who's being charged for an injustice against a career criminal by the system that oversees injustice within their service.

Not sure what their issue is, everyone was just doing their job. Ironic.

 

[John40]

Counter terrorism officers in other counties have refused to cover the ones in London who are currently stood down which is quite right, last night London only had 2 armed response vehicles on the streets instead of 16.
At the moment there isn't one single counter-terrorism officer in London who is armed.

 

[Gaygle]

To be fair - this is not just about armed officers.

This is about a system that has been allowed to grow in which the police are blamed for the choices of those that they are trying to stop. Whether that be when they're driving a stolen moped after robbing people, when they're being subjected to an armed stop in a car used in gun crime the day before or whether that be when they're protesting about the environment/student rights/whatever and want to smash up the local branch of Curry's in their fit of rage.

The police have to manage all of these, and instead of the media supporting them, they look for *anything* they can to criticise under the guise of "holding the police to account" and write subtly biased articles, causing politicians to jump on the bandwagon because they're thinking about the election coming up in a few months, and in the process they castrate the rule of law. We then get left with an ineffective police force who, as a result, are so afraid of their shadows that crime becomes ingrained in society. No one wants to confront a criminal because they're worried if the criminal jumps out of the third storey window or crashes into someone as they're driving away, the IOPC will come in and start ordering gross misconduct proceedings on everyone. And with the powers that Mark Rowley now wants - he will be free to fire anyone he wants, for whatever reason. So social media campaigns could result in you losing your career because it's easier for a politician to just fire you and get rid of you, than it is them risking their next promotion by defending you.

 

[StriderX]

The media doesn't care about holding anyone to account, it's simply a matter of a particular story having a fair amount of drama and stretching it out until nobody cares anymore.

 

[Caracus2k]

---

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?

1) the CPS weren't involved in showing the family the video.

On Wednesday, Kaba’s family met Met police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, and the IOPC director general, Michael Lockwood, where they were shown bodycam footage of the incident.
Following the meeting, Kaba’s mother, Helen Nkama, said: “It was hard … very hard.
“As I’ve said before, my heart is already broken. What I want is justice for my son and I want the truth.”
Jefferson Bosela, Kaba’s cousin who was also at the meeting, said: “It was hard, but the family just wants justice. For now, the family are going to take a break and take a step back.”

Chris Kaba shooting: family call for ‘justice’ after viewing bodycam footage

After a private meeting with new Met commissioner, Kaba’s mother said she wants ‘justice for her son'

www.theguardian.com

2) Neither the IOPC nor the CPS would have been able to tell the family what their 'intentions' were, around this time last year, beyond the normal investigation (by the IOPC culminating in a file being sent to the CPS for their review).

There's no chance that this would have been enough for the sudden about face the family performed after seeing the video.

Moreover the fact that the IOPC and police were jointly involved in showing the family the video indicates that they likely both thought doing so would serve to 'calm things down which is very odd given the CPS have subsequently decided their is sufficient evidence to change the officer!

Such a decision would normally mean some new evidence had come to light in the meantime.

I guess we will have to wait for the trial to be held to find out.

 

[spaggyboy]

Imagine protesting and refusing to do your job because you're NOT allowed to murder unarmed civilians. Personally I don't want armed police to be above the law.

 

[Caracus2k]

Imagine protesting and refusing to do your job because you're NOT allowed to murder unarmed civilians. Personally I don't want armed police to be above the law.

They are declining to continue to volunteer for an optional due because they beleive they are insufficiently regarded in law when asked to do what their role ultimately requires.

1) again for the millionth time they are not refusing to do their jobs. This is the consequence/ reality of having an 'unarmed' police force.

2) do you want armed police or not? Have you thought through the logical consequences of their being no/ a vastly insufficient armed response capability in the police?


Like I said before it's long past due for their to be additional law around situations where society asks people to carry firearms or drive outside of the normal parameters of road driving.

 

[spaggyboy]

What a stupid comment.

1) again for the millionth time they are not refusing to do their jobs. This is the consequence/ reality of having an 'unarmed' police force.

They're armed police that have turned in the their guns in a hissy fit after being told they're not above the law and that killing unarmed civilians is bad.

I'd call that refusing to do their jobs.

2) do you want armed police or not? Have you thought through the logical consequences of their being no/ a vastly insufficient armed response capability in the police?

Do I want an institutionally racist organisation to be able to kill people without any consequences?

Not really no. The whole Met Police needs burning to the ground.

Like I said before it's long past due for their to be additional law around situations where society asks people to carry firearms or drive outside of the normal parameters of road driving.

Translation: You think the Police should be above the law.

 

[MissChief]

Imagine protesting and refusing to do your job because you're NOT allowed to murder unarmed civilians. Personally I don't want armed police to be above the law.

This is what concerns me. Are Armed Police effectively asking for immunity from prosecution? The impunity to shoot who they want as long as they can say to their superiors 'I thought he was a threat to myself or others'? That's an awfully wide open statement to make.

Also, from what I've read, there are nearly 2,400 weapon permit carrying officers in the Met. Around 100 have handed their permit back.I don't think this counts as 'hundreds'.

Also, they get no extra pay for being a weapon carrier. Feels like some of them just wanted one because 'guns are cool' and 'I'll get to shoot someone', although I'm sure they are a minority.

 

[Gaygle]

Two Metropolitan Police Officers Cleared Over Wimbledon Shooting As CPS Offers ‘No Evidence’

Two specially trained Metropolitan Police firearms officers have been cleared of any criminal wrongdoing today, 11th October, following an investigation that was led by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).

Brooklyn McFarlane was shot by officers at around 08:00 hours on 3rd December 2018 on Haydons Road in Wimbledon, south-west London.

One officer, identified as NX1, was charged with wounding with intent, while the second, identified as MY55, was charged with attempted wounding with intent.

The Crown Prosecution Service charged the two officers following a referral of evidence from the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), which investigated the shooting.

The shootings happened following a ‘pre-planned operation’ by the Met’s elite Flying Squad relating to an attempted cash in transit robbery on 3rd December 2018.

During the operation, Brooklyn McFarlane was shot in the chest by officers. He was later charged with conspiracy to commit robbery.

Abdirahman Mohomad Omar was also charged with the same offence.

Both officers had fired their weapons once during the operation. A knife and a crowbar were recovered from the scene.

Police firearms officers can open fire if they have an honest belief there is a threat to their own life or those of others. Firearms officers volunteer for the highly specialised role.

Both officers had been placed on restrictive duties by the Metropolitan Police for the duration of the investigation, meaning that they had been given office-based jobs.

A spokesperson for Three Raymond Buildings, the legal team who represented one of the officers, said:

‘Following a painstaking review of the evidence and the disclosure, in this case, the Crown Prosecution Service offered no evidence on the first day of the trial on the basis that there was not a realistic prospect of conviction’

The IOPC finished its investigation in November 2019 and notified the CPS in January 2020 of the possible charges, which the CPS agreed with.

This is the case which the Met Commissioner referenced in his letter to the Home Secretary.

Imagine being dragged through 5 years of IOPC legal proceedings for the CPS to turn up on the first day and say "Erm, actually, we're just going to discontinue this one".

And then after that embarrassment - imagine the IOPC directing the Met to then try and hold misconduct proceedings against the officers!! Then if they pass the misconduct proceedings they've then got to worry about being revetted - which if they fail they can also be fired for!

And what were the officers doing at the time? They were stopping this gang from terrorising the streets:

The gang attacked guards at cash points in London, Oxford, Bedfordshire and Northamptonshire, usually congregating and travelling from an estate in south London.

Armed with loaded handguns and other weapons they wore ballistic body armour and balaclavas. Over 18 months they stole more than £400,000.

Violent armed gang members jailed after attacking security guards refilling cash machines

The gang used guns, knives, hammers and crowbars to terrorise staff before fleeing in a fleet of stolen vehicles and leaving few clues behind them.

news.sky.com

Again, I have to ask, how have we allowed a system to develop where it's fine to go after the police officers who stop armed and dangerous robbers from operating?

 

[Kenai]

This is what concerns me. Are Armed Police effectively asking for immunity from prosecution?

We'll never know unless they decide to collectively make some sort of statement but it wouldn't be a stretch to assume their actions are because they feel the charges are without merit.

 

[Caracus2k]

They're armed police that have turned in the their guns in a hissy fit after being told they're not above the law and that killing unarmed civilians is bad.

I'd call that refusing to do their jobs.

Your mistake has been pointed out. You continuing to regurgitate the same nonsence doesn't change this.

Do I want an institutionally racist organisation to be able to kill people without any consequences?

This comment tells me:

1) you either haven't read the McPherson report or lack the abilty to understand it

2) you dont understand what that phrase a talky means


And

3) you also probably don't have a clue how wide the remit for this very nebulous phrase is and how it applies to almost everything by the people who coined it.

See here:

This is why people are losing respect for the police...

Please Daddy government, protect me from the woman silently stood still in a public place :(:(:(

forums.overclockers.co.uk

Not really no. The whole Met Police needs burning to the ground.

Well at least your consistent with the quality of your posts.

Translation: You think the Police should be above the law.

translation: the law needs to reflect unique situations for example where people are asked to drive well outside of the normal parameters for road driving or be issued items whoose use will almost always amount to an intent, in law, to kill.

 

[Fubsy]

Imagine protesting and refusing to do your job because you're NOT allowed to murder unarmed civilians. Personally I don't want armed police to be above the law.

Your message is written in a way to construe this person put their uniform on for the day intending to go out and blow someone's head off. Don't you think that's a tad strong?

Personally I wouldn't want to do a job where if I make a split second decision, that everyone else can then judge with hindsight, it could turn out to be wrong and result in the death of a person but then also sees me up for murder charges. If I knew that up front, no matter what my training, the understanding that I am a HUMAN that is prone to making a mistake would make me steer well clear of a role like that.

Would you be happy if this was done by AI and robotics? It would be able to back up all it's decision making with data, and on probability of thread to life, calculate the final action taken to eliminate a threat. No mistakes made.

 

[labbby]

I’ll be amazed if this wasn’t a good shoot with the amount handing their tickets in.

 

[Brazo]

As long as there are armed officers on the streets mistakes will happen. Should the blame for mistakes be placed onto the officers risking their lives who after all are human?

Or should the reason why they have to carry guns (the criminals) be blamed?

I personally think anyone associated with gun crime should receive an additional sentence for those killed as a result of officers having to deal with gun crime, accidental or otherwise.

No I don’t know the facts of this case but I’m guessing no one thinks he got out of bed that morning thinking right I’m going to shoot (the guy who was shot)!!

 

[Deleted member 77746]

Would you be happy if this was done by AI and robotics? It would be able to back up all it's decision making with data, and on probability of thread to life, calculate the final action taken to eliminate a threat. No mistakes made.

ED209 on every corner and robocop in every city and towns.

They couldn't be held responsible for a death by mistake then.

 

[AtreuS]

Gotta laugh at how the article on the BBC today is making out the suspect to be just a normal guy on way home and got shot out of the blue..... no mention of the chase and trying to run over officers etc. Another flloyd... "he an angel" routine...