| Chris Kaba verdict 19:12 - Oct 21 with 28089 views | Zx1988 |
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c17lk592ygdo
Not sure what I make of this.
If, as the article perhaps suggests, the verdict hinged upon the testimony of Blake's fellow firearms officers, I feel a distinct sense of 'they would say that, wouldn't they'.
Is there any other scenario where, essentially, the corroborating testimony of one's chums would be enough to secure a not guilty verdict? |  |
| |  |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:23 - Oct 23 with 2009 views | bournemouthblue |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:17 - Oct 23 by DJR |
It's certainly not culture wars stuff on my part.
My focus isn't this case but the difficulty of holding the police to account. After all, Blair Peach, John Charles de Menenez and Ian Tomlinson weren't gun-toting, trigger-happy criminals and they didn't get proper justice. [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 10:40]
|
I don't know the other two but the John Charles de Menendez one was at a time when the police were incredibly techy after 7/7 from memory?
Did the Met leak that he had been told to stop and hadn't, when this hadn't actually happened at all?
The other thing which again maybe false information was they were suggesting they had been monitoring the flats he was in, for suspects post 7/7?.
It's probably quite telling that unlike the Mark Duggan case which resulted in sustained riots, the Chris Kaba case has not sparked the same outrage from communities within London, even if the family are understandably upset |  |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:26 - Oct 23 with 2004 views | Reus30 |
I really have enjoyed some of the posts on this thread. Really sensible, thought out, concise....
So here I am to change it up.
It's a case of two families:
A husband (maybe a father idk) working hard to get to where he is, doing something for the greater good who will be hounded out of his home, maybe killed, for doing his job and also doing the world a favour.
Another family painting a picture of their poor little lost angel of a boy, who was a criminal with no regards for any other human being than himself, who helped his family with the proceeds of crime and destroyed other families without any regard, trying to garner sympathy and create division. What they should really do is being looking at themselves in the mirror at what a rubbish job they have done of raising this POS.
Also shame on those who defended him just because of the colour of his skin. I bet that nob on GMB yesterday feels like a right wally now. [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 10:27]
|  | | |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:30 - Oct 23 with 1968 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:01 - Oct 23 by bournemouthblue |
Intelligence would have suggested he could have one, not that it was very likely he could be holding one whilst driving his car
The officers at the side, would have seen him with hands on the wheel presumably, they should be mic'd up so they may have relayed that, I don't know
Any death is a tragedy and the last thing any officer wants to do
And put this into a context, I know a friend from the army who did an exercise with firearms police
In 19/20 scenarios where the army would have shot, the police did not, that's the difference in restraint, they exercise |
I said very likely he had a gun... not very likely he could be holding one whilst driving his car. Some of you love putting words in people's mouths to make your point!
The point is given this was a car linked to a previous shooting it's very likely the driver on this occasion could have been in possession of a gun - be it in his coat pocket, on the passenger seat, in the glove compartment, down by his side, wherever! This is not just the random stopping of a car, it's a car they've been tracking due to it being previously involved in a shooting. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:36 - Oct 23 with 1945 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:08 - Oct 23 by DJR |
You did say "knowing all the evidence we now know"!
As it is, the CPS will have considered the evidence and come to the conclusion that they did. |
Yes. "Knowing all the evidence we now know" isn't the same as "Knowing all the evidence"!
You seem to think the CPS have only considered the evidence and don't have any ulterior motive, which is what some are questioning. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:39 - Oct 23 with 1932 views | tcblue |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:26 - Oct 23 by Reus30 |
I really have enjoyed some of the posts on this thread. Really sensible, thought out, concise....
So here I am to change it up.
It's a case of two families:
A husband (maybe a father idk) working hard to get to where he is, doing something for the greater good who will be hounded out of his home, maybe killed, for doing his job and also doing the world a favour.
Another family painting a picture of their poor little lost angel of a boy, who was a criminal with no regards for any other human being than himself, who helped his family with the proceeds of crime and destroyed other families without any regard, trying to garner sympathy and create division. What they should really do is being looking at themselves in the mirror at what a rubbish job they have done of raising this POS.
Also shame on those who defended him just because of the colour of his skin. I bet that nob on GMB yesterday feels like a right wally now. [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 10:27]
|
What about the other families, who suffer from racial profiling from the police in spite of not having committed any crimes?
That's what drives the inequality and the anger - even if this single instance was one where the police were judicially cleared, there's so many more micro and macro aggressions which don't even come to trial. | | | |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:39 - Oct 23 with 1919 views | bournemouthblue |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:30 - Oct 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
I said very likely he had a gun... not very likely he could be holding one whilst driving his car. Some of you love putting words in people's mouths to make your point!
The point is given this was a car linked to a previous shooting it's very likely the driver on this occasion could have been in possession of a gun - be it in his coat pocket, on the passenger seat, in the glove compartment, down by his side, wherever! This is not just the random stopping of a car, it's a car they've been tracking due to it being previously involved in a shooting. |
And I'm not disagreeing with any of what you have said there
I'm just saying they know he wasn't holding one at the time so both scenarios are true
In the Mark Duggan case, when they were following them, I believe passengers in the back lowered down at one point, which worried them, given that was a movement which could suggest they were reaching for one
It's a very tricky job
In that case, they knew he'd picked up a gun but couldn't say how, that was omitted from the published evidence presumably because the gun was given to the group by police informers etc
When the car was pulled up and they shot Mark Duggan after he also tried to run away, it transpired the gun was a reasonable distance from the scene, suggesting they had chucked it and not seen it happen
The big problem with that one was the police lied about how the incident had played out initially and that upset the families and communities when they learnt he was unarmed
I believe one of the officers was shot by the bullet which passed through Mark Duggan and they then had suggested gun fire had been exchanged which wasn't true [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 10:42]
| |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:42 - Oct 23 with 1897 views | SaleAway |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:26 - Oct 23 by Reus30 |
I really have enjoyed some of the posts on this thread. Really sensible, thought out, concise....
So here I am to change it up.
It's a case of two families:
A husband (maybe a father idk) working hard to get to where he is, doing something for the greater good who will be hounded out of his home, maybe killed, for doing his job and also doing the world a favour.
Another family painting a picture of their poor little lost angel of a boy, who was a criminal with no regards for any other human being than himself, who helped his family with the proceeds of crime and destroyed other families without any regard, trying to garner sympathy and create division. What they should really do is being looking at themselves in the mirror at what a rubbish job they have done of raising this POS.
Also shame on those who defended him just because of the colour of his skin. I bet that nob on GMB yesterday feels like a right wally now. [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 10:27]
|
I think the interesting thing about this thread, is that essentially, we've probably all agreed that the officer in this case did nothing wrong, but the discussion has been more abstract about police powers in general, and again, there is probably a consensus around the fact that police with weapons do need to be held to account, but exactly where that threshold is, is really hard to see.
Interesting for me, is that we talk about the controversial killings ( Tomlinson, Atkinson, de Menezes), but with no context for the hundreds/thousands of times the police are put in positions of threat but manage to de-escalate. Yes, we hope that they never make mistakes, but actually, de Menezes is almost 20 years ago.
I'm actually more concerned about the low level police racism/bullying/harassment that is hard to monitor, than the high profile but thankfully very rare incidences of armed police going too far. I think if we're talking about holding police to standards, we're probably better off not looking at the special ops people, who are by definition under the microscope more often, than general plod who goes about his business daily without nearly as much oversight.
For those interested, there is a wiki page with law enforcement deaths...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_th
Gives you an idea of the situations these guys find themselves in, and how sometimes there really is no choice.... obviously, what we don't see here is how many situations like this were sorted without loss of life.... I would imagine hundreds if not thousands... | |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:44 - Oct 23 with 1865 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:39 - Oct 23 by tcblue |
What about the other families, who suffer from racial profiling from the police in spite of not having committed any crimes?
That's what drives the inequality and the anger - even if this single instance was one where the police were judicially cleared, there's so many more micro and macro aggressions which don't even come to trial. |
That's certainly a problem and trust needs to be rebuilt in the police - but it can't be a get-out clause used on every occasion (as Kaba's family are trying to do). Sometimes they are genuinely a wrong-un, regardless of the colour of their skin.
As I said earlier, the family playing that card, whilst suppressing the true nature of the man, have done that cause more harm than good. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:46 - Oct 23 with 1853 views | bournemouthblue |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:42 - Oct 23 by SaleAway |
I think the interesting thing about this thread, is that essentially, we've probably all agreed that the officer in this case did nothing wrong, but the discussion has been more abstract about police powers in general, and again, there is probably a consensus around the fact that police with weapons do need to be held to account, but exactly where that threshold is, is really hard to see.
Interesting for me, is that we talk about the controversial killings ( Tomlinson, Atkinson, de Menezes), but with no context for the hundreds/thousands of times the police are put in positions of threat but manage to de-escalate. Yes, we hope that they never make mistakes, but actually, de Menezes is almost 20 years ago.
I'm actually more concerned about the low level police racism/bullying/harassment that is hard to monitor, than the high profile but thankfully very rare incidences of armed police going too far. I think if we're talking about holding police to standards, we're probably better off not looking at the special ops people, who are by definition under the microscope more often, than general plod who goes about his business daily without nearly as much oversight.
For those interested, there is a wiki page with law enforcement deaths...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_th
Gives you an idea of the situations these guys find themselves in, and how sometimes there really is no choice.... obviously, what we don't see here is how many situations like this were sorted without loss of life.... I would imagine hundreds if not thousands... |
That's a figure never released or at least pedalled out by the police themselves or politicians as far as I am aware
It would put into perspective how much restraint is used
Another thing people won't realise is the police are given basic medical training and will start working on the target, as soon as it is safe to do so to try and make sure they don't die | |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:50 - Oct 23 with 1815 views | itfcjoe |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:39 - Oct 23 by tcblue |
What about the other families, who suffer from racial profiling from the police in spite of not having committed any crimes?
That's what drives the inequality and the anger - even if this single instance was one where the police were judicially cleared, there's so many more micro and macro aggressions which don't even come to trial. |
But for me this case is unhelpful in that regard, because it's not an injustice it gives more props to those on the other side of the debate. |  |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:51 - Oct 23 with 1805 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:39 - Oct 23 by bournemouthblue |
And I'm not disagreeing with any of what you have said there
I'm just saying they know he wasn't holding one at the time so both scenarios are true
In the Mark Duggan case, when they were following them, I believe passengers in the back lowered down at one point, which worried them, given that was a movement which could suggest they were reaching for one
It's a very tricky job
In that case, they knew he'd picked up a gun but couldn't say how, that was omitted from the published evidence presumably because the gun was given to the group by police informers etc
When the car was pulled up and they shot Mark Duggan after he also tried to run away, it transpired the gun was a reasonable distance from the scene, suggesting they had chucked it and not seen it happen
The big problem with that one was the police lied about how the incident had played out initially and that upset the families and communities when they learnt he was unarmed
I believe one of the officers was shot by the bullet which passed through Mark Duggan and they then had suggested gun fire had been exchanged which wasn't true [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 10:42]
|
My point is (in this case) simply shooting the tyres still leaves a healthy young man in a car with a gun potentially nearby. Once he's no longer driving the car (because the tyres have been shot) then his hands are free to use any gun he has in the vehicle. That's assuming he needs both hands - appreciate this isn't the movies but is it not possible to drive and fire a handgun at the same time? | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:54 - Oct 23 with 1800 views | SaleAway |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:50 - Oct 23 by itfcjoe |
But for me this case is unhelpful in that regard, because it's not an injustice it gives more props to those on the other side of the debate. |
In a way, I think this is the reason that this thread has stayed civil, because its not fuelled by a sense of recent injustice. | |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:59 - Oct 23 with 1759 views | DJR |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:23 - Oct 23 by bournemouthblue |
I don't know the other two but the John Charles de Menendez one was at a time when the police were incredibly techy after 7/7 from memory?
Did the Met leak that he had been told to stop and hadn't, when this hadn't actually happened at all?
The other thing which again maybe false information was they were suggesting they had been monitoring the flats he was in, for suspects post 7/7?.
It's probably quite telling that unlike the Mark Duggan case which resulted in sustained riots, the Chris Kaba case has not sparked the same outrage from communities within London, even if the family are understandably upset |
This from Wikipedia is one aspect of the Menenez case.
On 13 October 2008, at an inquest into the death, a police surveillance officer admitted that he had deleted a computer record of Cressida Dick's instruction that they could allow Menezes to "run on to Tube as [he was] not carrying anything". At the inquest he told the court that "On reflection, I looked at that and thought I cannot actually say that." The IPCC announced that it would investigate the matter "[at its] highest level of investigation".
I am not sure if anything ever came of this investigation, given that a legal settlement was reached the following year.
As regards that settlement, a Guardian journalist reacted critically to the level of compensation paid by the Metropolitan Police, comparing the level of pay out with awards by employment tribunals, and speculating that "perhaps [de Menezes'] life was worth less because he was poor. [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 11:09]
|  | | |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 11:03 - Oct 23 with 1741 views | bournemouthblue |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:51 - Oct 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
My point is (in this case) simply shooting the tyres still leaves a healthy young man in a car with a gun potentially nearby. Once he's no longer driving the car (because the tyres have been shot) then his hands are free to use any gun he has in the vehicle. That's assuming he needs both hands - appreciate this isn't the movies but is it not possible to drive and fire a handgun at the same time? |
I'm not advocating for shooting the tyres out at all
If you have a high power vehicle wheel spinning in front of view, it may well have the power to push the blocking vehicle out the way and then you have a serious threat to you or other colleagues
There's three other things going on there from the shooter's point of view, the noise, the rocking of the car and some tyre smoke, all which is going to hinder your accuracy
I maybe wrong but I don't expect them to train a great deal with a sporty 4x4 wheel spinning and trying to force it's way through
They will certainly rehearse the stopping procedure but I suspect the car is almost always stopped when they are asking people to get out of the car etc [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 11:04]
| |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 11:21 - Oct 23 with 1683 views | Churchman |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 10:42 - Oct 23 by SaleAway |
I think the interesting thing about this thread, is that essentially, we've probably all agreed that the officer in this case did nothing wrong, but the discussion has been more abstract about police powers in general, and again, there is probably a consensus around the fact that police with weapons do need to be held to account, but exactly where that threshold is, is really hard to see.
Interesting for me, is that we talk about the controversial killings ( Tomlinson, Atkinson, de Menezes), but with no context for the hundreds/thousands of times the police are put in positions of threat but manage to de-escalate. Yes, we hope that they never make mistakes, but actually, de Menezes is almost 20 years ago.
I'm actually more concerned about the low level police racism/bullying/harassment that is hard to monitor, than the high profile but thankfully very rare incidences of armed police going too far. I think if we're talking about holding police to standards, we're probably better off not looking at the special ops people, who are by definition under the microscope more often, than general plod who goes about his business daily without nearly as much oversight.
For those interested, there is a wiki page with law enforcement deaths...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_th
Gives you an idea of the situations these guys find themselves in, and how sometimes there really is no choice.... obviously, what we don't see here is how many situations like this were sorted without loss of life.... I would imagine hundreds if not thousands... |
Of course police using weapons need to be held to account. But the level of account should be consistent, not based on skin colour, ‘communities’ or anything like that.
We live in one community called the U.K. the rules should be consistent for all. No separate rules for Albanians running part of Cardiff Bay, Travellers in SE London, the Romulans in Kings Lynn, slavery gangs in Rochdale or Klingons in Norwich. A set of laws for all to be abided by all.
How people are held to account should not be a matter of public trial like this policeman had to endure or indeed the people at Manchester airport. Analysis of actions should be objective and independent but done in such a way as to protect/support the police but to hold them accountable for their actions.
Sounds impossible and I don’t have the answers. All I know is that people putting themselves at risk for our protection are people with families too. They are not all bigots, racists etc but there will be some just in all walks of life. It is for the Home Office and police to modernise, set their standards and procedures and improve and keep improving.
What doesn’t work is public trial of this man, which given what has come out of it looks a bit like a show trial to me. It destroys him and his family and is a disincentive for any right thinking person to do a highly skilled and dangerous job in my view. |  | | |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 11:25 - Oct 23 with 1658 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 11:03 - Oct 23 by bournemouthblue |
I'm not advocating for shooting the tyres out at all
If you have a high power vehicle wheel spinning in front of view, it may well have the power to push the blocking vehicle out the way and then you have a serious threat to you or other colleagues
There's three other things going on there from the shooter's point of view, the noise, the rocking of the car and some tyre smoke, all which is going to hinder your accuracy
I maybe wrong but I don't expect them to train a great deal with a sporty 4x4 wheel spinning and trying to force it's way through
They will certainly rehearse the stopping procedure but I suspect the car is almost always stopped when they are asking people to get out of the car etc [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 11:04]
|
Yep, we got a little sidetracked, my original point to you was that there was a strong likelihood of a gun being in the car and the police would be very mindful of that. You disputed that he could use one as he was driving and my response is a) Can you not shoot and drive at the same time? and b) Does it matter anyway? Even if he has a gun by his side, on the passenger seat etc. - it's still a gun threat. With that in mind the officer's more justified in shooting him. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 11:30 - Oct 23 with 1636 views | bournemouthblue |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 11:25 - Oct 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Yep, we got a little sidetracked, my original point to you was that there was a strong likelihood of a gun being in the car and the police would be very mindful of that. You disputed that he could use one as he was driving and my response is a) Can you not shoot and drive at the same time? and b) Does it matter anyway? Even if he has a gun by his side, on the passenger seat etc. - it's still a gun threat. With that in mind the officer's more justified in shooting him. |
A) Yes, it's not likely but not impossible certainly, any movement towards grabbing a gun or holding one results in immediate response and almost inevitably death
In this case, he was shot because they saw the vehicle as a weapon so it's a moot point but I understand your points
B) I've probably answered some of that in point A, does it matter? It's probably not relevant in this situation but of course, if they knew he could have a gun, they will be a bit more tetchy, certainly | |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 11:51 - Oct 23 with 1599 views | Reus30 |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 11:21 - Oct 23 by Churchman |
Of course police using weapons need to be held to account. But the level of account should be consistent, not based on skin colour, ‘communities’ or anything like that.
We live in one community called the U.K. the rules should be consistent for all. No separate rules for Albanians running part of Cardiff Bay, Travellers in SE London, the Romulans in Kings Lynn, slavery gangs in Rochdale or Klingons in Norwich. A set of laws for all to be abided by all.
How people are held to account should not be a matter of public trial like this policeman had to endure or indeed the people at Manchester airport. Analysis of actions should be objective and independent but done in such a way as to protect/support the police but to hold them accountable for their actions.
Sounds impossible and I don’t have the answers. All I know is that people putting themselves at risk for our protection are people with families too. They are not all bigots, racists etc but there will be some just in all walks of life. It is for the Home Office and police to modernise, set their standards and procedures and improve and keep improving.
What doesn’t work is public trial of this man, which given what has come out of it looks a bit like a show trial to me. It destroys him and his family and is a disincentive for any right thinking person to do a highly skilled and dangerous job in my view. |
Very valid point.
We have enough trouble getting police adequately trained as it is. Whilst they should always be held accountable, instances like this where they are dragged through a very public court case isn't exactly going to boost recruitment - quite the opposite.
Thing is, what is the answer? it's all so murky and convoluted that having functioning public services like the police is going to be difficult to create. I appreciate police don't help themselves with some of their actions and any policeman I have dealt when I have been victim of a crime or pulled over previously, have been utter ego-based dbags but something needs to change.
All I know is that I am glad that fella got what was coming. Criminals need a bit of fear, maybe this is it. | | | |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 12:35 - Oct 23 with 1540 views | blueasfook |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 09:07 - Oct 23 by GlasgowBlue |
As did the former leader of the Labour Party, Black Lives Matter Uk and the Runnymede Trust. The CPS were under huge pressure to prosecute. |
Not to mention prolific virtue signaller and Met Police hater Sadiq Khan. Even in his tweet yesterday he managed to make it mostly about London's black community mistrusting the police. I bet he was gutted when the not guilty verdict was returned. |  |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 20:55 - Oct 23 with 1247 views | bournemouthblue |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 12:35 - Oct 23 by blueasfook |
Not to mention prolific virtue signaller and Met Police hater Sadiq Khan. Even in his tweet yesterday he managed to make it mostly about London's black community mistrusting the police. I bet he was gutted when the not guilty verdict was returned. |
Is that in the case or are you in danger of misinterpreting his words, based on what the right-wing gutter press have been telling you to think?
| |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 21:32 - Oct 23 with 1210 views | Churchman |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 20:55 - Oct 23 by bournemouthblue |
Is that in the case or are you in danger of misinterpreting his words, based on what the right-wing gutter press have been telling you to think?
|
Ok, so first paragraph: ‘I respect the decision’. But does he agree with it? I respected Ken Livingstone. Even heard him speak, enjoyed it but didn’t agree with most of it.
Second para: we police by consent. Agreed. Whose consent? But yes it’s important it’s properly and thoroughly investigated. Agreed. By public show trial?
Para three: agreed.
Paras four and five: the length and content indicate to me where his interest and focus really lie, from the length and content, particularly the last paragraph. ‘I will continue to work with the government to hold the Metropolitan Police to account to ensure any lessons are learned’
So what lessons from this case are to be learned by the Met? That if you are a firearms officer you’d be crazy not to get another job?
I get that I may be biased in that I’m not a big fan of Sadiq Khan and I’m probably reading this completely wrong and out of context. I’m no expert. It really needs a qualified reader/analyst of the written word.
However, if you were a Met Police firearms officer and read it, would you see it as ringing endorsement of the work you did?
As I say, my take on this letter is probably wrong and am happy to be corrected. It’s just thoughts for debate. [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 21:35]
| | | |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 21:40 - Oct 23 with 1193 views | bournemouthblue |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 21:32 - Oct 23 by Churchman |
Ok, so first paragraph: ‘I respect the decision’. But does he agree with it? I respected Ken Livingstone. Even heard him speak, enjoyed it but didn’t agree with most of it.
Second para: we police by consent. Agreed. Whose consent? But yes it’s important it’s properly and thoroughly investigated. Agreed. By public show trial?
Para three: agreed.
Paras four and five: the length and content indicate to me where his interest and focus really lie, from the length and content, particularly the last paragraph. ‘I will continue to work with the government to hold the Metropolitan Police to account to ensure any lessons are learned’
So what lessons from this case are to be learned by the Met? That if you are a firearms officer you’d be crazy not to get another job?
I get that I may be biased in that I’m not a big fan of Sadiq Khan and I’m probably reading this completely wrong and out of context. I’m no expert. It really needs a qualified reader/analyst of the written word.
However, if you were a Met Police firearms officer and read it, would you see it as ringing endorsement of the work you did?
As I say, my take on this letter is probably wrong and am happy to be corrected. It’s just thoughts for debate. [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 21:35]
|
Am I Met Firearms officer, no?
Have I worked as a Firearms officer, no
Is it an area I have an interest in, yes
I think it's a politician's answer I would suggest
Labour are missing an open goal on crime though imho, given the record the Tories have with it, both with the police and the prisons over the last 14 years | |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 21:52 - Oct 23 with 1173 views | baxterbasics |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 20:55 - Oct 23 by bournemouthblue |
Is that in the case or are you in danger of misinterpreting his words, based on what the right-wing gutter press have been telling you to think?
|
A weasel statement from a weasel Mayor.
What an utter turd. |  |
| |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 22:08 - Oct 23 with 1143 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Chris Kaba verdict on 21:32 - Oct 23 by Churchman |
Ok, so first paragraph: ‘I respect the decision’. But does he agree with it? I respected Ken Livingstone. Even heard him speak, enjoyed it but didn’t agree with most of it.
Second para: we police by consent. Agreed. Whose consent? But yes it’s important it’s properly and thoroughly investigated. Agreed. By public show trial?
Para three: agreed.
Paras four and five: the length and content indicate to me where his interest and focus really lie, from the length and content, particularly the last paragraph. ‘I will continue to work with the government to hold the Metropolitan Police to account to ensure any lessons are learned’
So what lessons from this case are to be learned by the Met? That if you are a firearms officer you’d be crazy not to get another job?
I get that I may be biased in that I’m not a big fan of Sadiq Khan and I’m probably reading this completely wrong and out of context. I’m no expert. It really needs a qualified reader/analyst of the written word.
However, if you were a Met Police firearms officer and read it, would you see it as ringing endorsement of the work you did?
As I say, my take on this letter is probably wrong and am happy to be corrected. It’s just thoughts for debate. [Post edited 23 Oct 2024 21:35]
|
As I said to you earlier (but you might've missed it): I don't see anything wrong with his statement there. He needs to support the decision whilst also not inflaming tensions, so has to be very careful with his words (re: the black community).
At worst it's a politician's answer, trying to appease everyone. There will be people in the black community, who don't like him, saying it favours the police. People who don't like Khan pick over his words to find what they want. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
