Police officer cleared

Shooting the tyres doesn't immobilise a vehicle.

Stick to watching films.

Well they could have shot the tyres for one thing and immobilised the vehicle.

The car was boxed in and didn’t pose much of a risk because it couldn’t get the speed to do damage.

Shoot the tyres and then approach the car.

If he pulled a gun (which he wouldn’t have because he was unarmed), then shoot.

Yes, I didn’t suggest he didn’t do that. I said, just as you quoted “the dead man did not drive his car at a police officer . . . . .”.

Chris Kaba was a violent criminal, but it looks like what he was doing with his car was trying to get away, not drive it at people. I don’t know if that was the case and you don’t either if you didn’t sit through the trial. Criminals are entitled to a trial in this country. Be careful what you wish for.

You have completely missed the point. He wasn’t shot to stop him from driving off. He was shot to stop him from potentially killing police officers in his attempt to get away.

And yes, criminals are entitled to a trial. And a trial is what he likely would have got if he’d done what he was told to do. What criminals aren’t entitled to, however, is carte blanche to injure and kill whoever tries to stop them from escaping, whether it’s intentional or not.

Who was the “registered driver”? I hadn’t seen that reported.

since Kaba didn’t respond appropriately to police when stopped, and show his details and explain whose “registered driver” car he was driving …. LE never did get to find out.

Kaba’s response to LE put everyone - civilians, LE and himself, at significant risk of harm. The body cam very significant evidence … when he initially puts hands up, then drops right hand down - reaching for ? Then ramming forward, then back.

No of that is complying, all creates risk to his own life. One might think he was attempting death by cop.

Does anyone think police should have downed weapons and let Kaba just do more ramming and/or potentially draw a weapon? Wait for Kaba to decide his next move?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cy0l048xky7o

video of the shooting linked to this car and him trying to ram his way out.

Oh yes, it’s everything to do with driving a nice car and nothing whatsoever to do with a car being involved in a shooting the night before 😂. You are making yourself look very silly with these comments.

Apparently the dead man did not drive his car at a Police Officer until the Officer stood in front of the car to shoot him 🤷‍♀️

Sorry, what? There is publicly available footage that shows the car being rammed into various police vehicles trying to block him in.

And don’t drive a nice car while black (I don’t mean Kaba)! 🙄

Um, you said this I don’t think the reasons you’ve stated, was enough for the office to kill him. Especially as they weren’t even known at the time

His specific offences weren’t know, but the fact the vehicle he was driving had been involved in a shooting was known, so either way, it was known there was involvement in gun crime that warranted serious intervention from armed officers. It’s you who’s being obtuse in your desperation to defend a lawfully killed criminal!

Maybe you should be a police officer. Hindsight is a wonderful thing...do you think if the police officers could have said with certainty that there were no weapons in the car and that he would have not hurt anyone with his car, they would have shoot him anyway? There is no way police would do that knowing they would be dragged to hell and back by the public, jury's and the police force for years after taking this decision. This decision was taken in an attempt to protect their own lives and the public.

It appears he shot someone a few days before he was killed. Dont think his rehabilitation worked very well.

I don’t think tasers work through safety glass.

I’m not sure where to start.

I could point out that bullets and the human body are not really compatible and that any shot, be it in the arm or leg, has the potential to kill if it hits the wrong spot. Or I could point out that the purpose of shooting someone is to urgently stop them from doing something, and shooting someone in the arm is not going to stop someone from killing someone else. Or I could ask you where exactly the officer should have shot when the criminal was sitting in a car with most of his body covered and the officer didn’t have the luxury of time to line up an accurate shot that would prevent the car from killing his colleagues while avoiding all major organs and arteries.

But what I think I’ll ask you is, how about if the police start chasing you down the road, you pull over? How about you don’t use your car as a weapon to batter your way free because you don’t want to be arrested? Why would you think that driving away was still an option when you’re blocked in by cars and armed police are pointing loaded guns at you and shouting at you to stop?

It’s really, really easy not to get shot by police. You don’t even need to put any great degree of effort into it.

What do you suggest they did instead? Ask him very nicely?

Definitely the wrong decision!

You should only shoot if your life is in danger.
His life was not in danger.

These police are trigger happy and should use tasers instead.

So many posters stating emphatically that the verdict was “the correct decision”! You weren’t in the court. You haven’t heard all the evidence. Apparently the dead man did not drive his car at a Police Officer until the Officer stood in front of the car to shoot him 🤷‍♀️ I haven’t heard all of the evidence either, so I have no idea if the verdict was correct. I do know that we do not have the death penalty in this country and certainly not without trial!

As for the claim that Police Officers should not be named when charges are brought, do you believe that should also have applied to David Carrick who committed some of his horrendous crimes against women whilst he was on duty as an armed Officer, or Wayne Couzens when he used his warrant card in the commission of his crime - the brutal murder of Sarah Everard? Surely we have moved on from unquestioning trust in Police Officers. Chris Kaba was a violent criminal, but it looks like what he was doing with his car was trying to get away, not drive it at people. I don’t know if that was the case and you don’t either if you didn’t sit through the trial. Criminals are entitled to a trial in this country. Be careful what you wish for.

Some people, should they accept the challenge should be above the law.

How could this possibly go wrong?

Do you actually know what rehabilitation means?

Di you really see the slightest chance someone like this can be rehabilitated?

And no, a big part of a custodial sentence is the punishment as well, not just rehabilitation.

Rehabilitation is a mute point in this case because there was no rehabilitation. Chris Kaba was at the time of his death an active and senior member of a gang, as a result he was subject to a gang injunction. He was named as the gunman who shot someone in a nightclub just days before his own death

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clyly5122yeo

That's only how it works on TV. Shoot to wound is not a practical tactic. If you discharge a firearm at someone it's because you have determined that lethal force is justified and necessary. If they survive that's their luck but if you open fire on somebody it's assumed you will kill them. If you don't kill them, you've fucked up.

Delulu!!!
Do you honestly believe this man had been rehabilitated or you just playing devil's advocate?

Prison is punishment, deterrent, for public protection, and rehabilitation.

If someone aims to shoot in the chest but ends up shooting them in their head, maybe they need additional training

CK was ducking down and moving around so this wasn't about lack of training. He was given multiple warnings to stop and the officer bravely stood infront of the car and took action to stop other people being harmed. As the reports later showed CK had gunshot residue on his clothing so this wasn't someone who was unfamiliar with violence, which is why he acted so aggressively.

I have no doubt he would have harmed the officers or pedestrians, with the car, had he got away. On that basis the officef took the right action.

@ItsTheGAGGGGGGGGG

Are you mad . Rehabilitation ??? This guy was a violent criminal since the age of 13. He would never be rehabilitated. How many lives did that policeman save by shooting him .
Mans a wrongun through and through and he got his just desserts . Good riddance to bad rubbish .