Kaba

Madgran77

*What they did know was that he was a known violent criminal and their lives were probably being put in danger by trying to stop him.*

No they didnt know he was until after he was shot.

I am not suggesting with my comments that the police action was necessarily wrong or disproportionate but I do think that the information about what informed their decision making needs to be accurate

They knew the car he was driving had been used in a shooting outside a school the day before.

The driver rammed police cars in an attempt to get away and it was feared the driver could be armed and lives could be lost.

Clearly Kaba was a known violent criminal and the Police were at risk. However (and it's a big however) surely we can't having the Police shooting criminals without repercussions?

The police do NO T shoot violent criminals without repercussions. There is always an intensive inquiry and a thorough investigation. This officer should never have been charged with murder, and his name and personal details should not have been revealed.
No-one has mentioned how having shot a man dead will affect this officer, as it does on all involved in taking a life in the course of duty. Then two years of torment waiting for this trial, now knowing he has a price on his head from these sordid families involved in gang culture, and still people querying his actions.

maddyfour

I saw his family proclaiming his innocence last night on BBC news.
I don’t know how they have the brass neck to stand there and claim he was a victim.
Unbelievable!

Quite. sadiq Khan and Corbyn and their pathetic followers were calling for justice for Kaba too.

They all look very stupid now the facts are out.

Allira

So cleared by a jury but could be found guilty by the IOPC?
Is the IOPC above the law?

An interesting question indeed.
Are they above the law?

Agree with OP. The officers followed procedure.
The Met will have a problem with having trained armed officers willing to do armed shifts if they don’t sort this out.

They knew the car he was driving had been used in a shooting outside a school the day before

But they didnt know if the driver was armed on this occasion and in fact he held up both hands to show he wasnt.

My point is purely that in the discussion the facts about what they knew or didnt know in this situation needs to be accurate.

But the police did not know whether there was a weapon in the car or on his body.
He had the option to switch off the engine, stop the car and open the door.

eazybee

But the police did not know whether there was a weapon in the car or on his body.
He had the option to switch off the engine, stop the car and open the door.

Instead he took the option of repeatedly ramming the police cars…

BlueBelle

Why didn’t they shoot the tyres out, the car wouldn’t move then The man may be a terrible criminal but he wasn’t armed on this occasion and was shot point blank in the head !!!We don’t even have the death penalty in this country so just shoot dreadful criminals instead

I could have understood if he had been armed they knew he wasn’t and you could see his arms and hands were free of any weapons

Apparantly, the guns used, by police officers, could not quickly shoot tyres out on a moving car.

No sympathy for the guy that was killed - he chose to live that life. And, in the end, it killed him.

eazybee

But the police did not know whether there was a weapon in the car or on his body.
He had the option to switch off the engine, stop the car and open the door.

Do you think you can post this again in very large letters, as it doesn’t seem to be getting through to some.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Since the prosecution of the officer involved, many police officers have declared themselves unwilling to use a firearm in the course of duty. Who can blame them? I'm glad that people join the force, but wonder why they do - each and every one of them is on a hiding to nothing from the moment they step out to protect us. Why was the officer's name made public? The inevitable consequence is that his life, and the life of his family , is now in danger .

I was relieved about the not guilty decision being reached in three hours, after a long forensic hearing. Later, I read the details about Kaba’s criminal activity which the jury knew nothing about.
The jury was told he was a father to be. The fact the mother of the child had an injunction against him because of domestic abuse wasn’t mentioned.

He was a proper little charmer wasn't he .

It’s disgusting that the recorder allowed the Police Officer to be named yet Kaba’s past was protected.

A good friend of mine was a firearms officer in the local police, he also did undercover work, he was identified and his family threatened by a gang.

He now serves in another country a very long way from the UK but sticks to routine policing now.

Another one here in total agreement with the OP.

I think Cooper should instruct the IOPC not to proceed with further prosecution of the officer and he should receive government compensation for the unnecessary trial.

Sago

It’s disgusting that the recorder allowed the Police Officer to be named yet Kaba’s past was protected.

The jury weren't influenced in their decision by his past record; they reached their conclusion on the evidence presented in this case.

I agree with the not guilty verdict but think it v relevant that the identity of the driver was not known when he was shot. Bluebelle made a fair point.

I have a nephew who was a firearms officer in his local police. When he realised the possible danger to himself and his family he resigned. He later left the police altogether.

The police officer in this case should never have been identified. If we realise this, why didn’t the judge?

winterwhite

I agree with the not guilty verdict but think it v relevant that the identity of the driver was not known when he was shot. Bluebelle made a fair point.

Wrong!
The police knew that the car had been used as a get away vehicle the day before, in a school shooting.
Why do you think the armed police were there? Firearms police don’t go out to every incident in London. They knew this was a dangerous criminal.

Maddyfour, not Wrong at all. They did not know who the driver was until afterwards. There seems to have been much justification on this thread based on knowledge acquired after the event. That’s what I meant.

I agree that the prosecution should not have been brought and certainly not have dragged on for so long, and hope that a better method of inquiring into these cases will be found. That’s the main point. I also agree that the views of Kaba’s family were given more attention that they deserve.

They also would have been briefed about the recent shooting Kaba was recorded as being responsible for. They’d know their gangsters