Police officer cleared

Aaaah it makes sense now - no wonder gang culture and county lines is rife when overly liberal apologists who aren’t very bright and have woeful misunderstanding of basic policing principals, are ‘helping’ them. What help do you actually provide other than condoning and minimising what they do?

His life was in danger and a jury agreed after seeing evidence - something you have not done.

In fact they were so convinced that they wanted to make a public comment and the judge wouldn’t let them. Rightly so, juries aren’t there to say anything other than guilty or not guilty, but it just shows the strength of their feeling.

Many posters have compared both people and no one took offence.

No they haven’t

My point was that he was an unidentified, innocent person.

Do you actually consider someone driving a car involved in the shooting of a human to be an ‘innocent person’. In what way was he innocent? It means he either was the shooter or knew the shooter - the police can’t risk it just being an unaware family member.

Given mere days before he WAS involved in a shooting I’d say that’s not innocent.

My point was that he was an unidentified, innocent person.

Wrong. I followed the trial podcast and have thought he deserved it from the off way before I knew his background and still believed he was a builder with a child on the way.

The officer admitted that he had no idea who this person was and the time of the killing.

He doesn’t need to know! Do you think his downfall was not tapping on the window first to say “What’s your name mate? Gotta run you through the database while you kill my colleagues before I can do anything”.

Even peadophiles don’t get shot dead, even though they are monsters.

They would if they behaved like Kaba.
you seem to consider the feelings of children - what do you think of Kaba being a child groomer?

You should only shoot to kill if your life is in danger and this officers life wasn’t in danger.

yes it was. As was everyone around him. And now we know how little consideration Kaba had for innocent bystanders I think it’s fair to say if he hadn’t killed him Kaba would not have stopped until someone was seriously hurt.

He went and stood in front of a moving car.
The car was not driving at him trying to run him down.

Yes it was. Watch the bodycam footage. He disobeyed orders and continued to drive and rev.

as for standing in front of a moving car - you seem to criticise this but instead you should be in awe of the bravery of people like Blake who volunteer to protect YOU. Some people are cowards and some people are heroes.

Not only embarrassed for you…. I now also feel sorry for you as you seem unable to have logical, rational thoughts but still trying to convince others that CK was:
innocent man
&
the LE officers did not feel lives were in danger ..from person driving car ID’d as been involved in a GUN Crime and vehicle was being driven dangerously during a police stop. By a person failing to comply.

Are you aware that handguns are illegal in the UK since 1997. Anyone with a handgun or (linked to one) is expected to be armed and dangerous.

Your opinion is being influenced, which is exactly the point I’m trying to make.

The officer admitted he had no idea who was in the car and didn’t know about the gunpowder etc until after he was killed.

This could have been an innocent person and lessons should be learned.

I have never said that I think he should be arrested or charged but he needs to be given extra training to learn how to deal with this in the future.

You should only shoot to kill if your life (or someone else’s life) is in immediate danger.
Choosing to stand in front of a moving car, is not being in immediate danger.

No they don't think he deserved to be shot dead. If he had got out of the car and put his keys on the roof he wouldn't have been shot but arrested and taken into custody where he would have had a solicitor. Instead, he chose to ram his car at police vehicles.

@Choochoo21 this "unidentified, "innocent" person was driving a car that had been flagged because of a link to 3 shootings (2 very recent), not a dodgy tax disc. I don't think they send out armed police to deal with minor driving infractions, do you?

Now, if a car has been linked to 3 shootings, don't you think there might be a more than slight chance that the driver might have a gun on them? Said driver then evades arrest and rams cars trying to escape. What do you think the police should have done? Let him through so he could speed off through the streets, possibly armed and driving something the size of a small tank? Or stand around waiting for him to get out firing a gun?

They had seconds to make a decision. One officer had already got his glove caught and thought he was going to be dragged. What you are saying is absolute tosh and illogical.

His fellow officers lives were in danger due to the criminals use of the vehicle as a weapon.

Yet you claim he wasn't using it as a weapon?

This is why we have juries. I hope to god you never get on a jury.

Not read this thread for a day or two but how on earth has it deteriorated to a poster bringing Sarah Everard into it?? I didn’t see the post as it’s been deleted but I dread to think what it said.

Completely disrespectful and not even relevant. I don’t understand how some people think.

The law must apply to everyone, equally.

My job is working with gang members and potential members, particularly those with ND or trauma who are more at risk of going down that path and not being to get out of it.
Before this, I have worked in many prisons and I used to be a teacher specialising in SEND and behavioural issues.

For people like me, CK (although I don’t know his background so can’t judge fully) are the worst type of influences on the people who I try and help.

I have no investment in him nor do I hate the police who I work closely with.

My feelings are purely based on the fact that you should only shoot to kill if your life is in danger.
This officers life was not in danger.

He had gunpowder residue on his sleeve and a balaclava in his pocket. Meaning it’s likely he was recently shooting a gun which is probably why he didn’t stop

I’m pleased I missed the post about comparing a gang member who eats women and grooms children to an innocent woman who has raped and murdered.

Vile.

What kind of person gets their kicks defending scum?

So you’ve just made it up then?

Couldn't agree more.

The police in France shot the fuck out of the guy and I was glad.

I don’t understand why they just didn’t shoot his tyres <sarcasm>

Sorry I didn’t mean to offend by comparing the 2.
Many posters have compared both people and no one took offence.

My point was that he was an unidentified, innocent person.

People only think he deserved to be shot dead, because of his criminal background.

If this was your mum or child, then you would think otherwise.

The officer admitted that he had no idea who this person was and the time of the killing.

Even peadophiles don’t get shot dead, even though they are monsters.

You should only shoot to kill if your life is in danger and this officers life wasn’t in danger.

He went and stood in front of a moving car.
The car was not driving at him trying to run him down.

I'd like to add that I've worked in the prison system in YOI. This offender should never have been released early.

As someone who is married to an army veteran who has, in the line of duty, shot many people - I find it laughable that you think a man behind glass moving quickly back and forth is easy to shoot an exact spot on their body. What do you think shooting his chest would have done? Not to mention, this all happens in a high stress high adrenaline terrifying situation, everything moves rapidly and a nanosecond makes a huge difference

But please, pray tell what qualifications do you possess to make you know better than trained firearms officers?

Why would this be an innocent person? If they randomly stopped him for no reason I’d agree but he was in a car associated with a shooting. Should that have been ignored?!

He wasn’t unarmed. He was driving a massive car. And whilst you’re right in the police didn’t know who he was or if he was armed, here’s what they did know:

• He was driving a car associated with a major crime the day before. They need to stop him and find out who he is. If that was your child who’d been shot, would you not want them all over it if they’d spotted the getaway car?!
• he didn’t stop, after many many opportunities, which began with them trying to simply pull him over. Then when they blocked him he tried to escape.

Tell us - what should have happened instead? Try answering without nonsense about tyres and other body parts. Others have explained why that doesn’t work.

Martyn Blake followed protocol to the letter and he’s been put in extreme danger because dipshits don’t understand the basics of policing and are desperate to show how right-on they are.

meanwhile what are people like you doing about gang culture and county lines - two things that adversely affect black people?

Another detail which has emerged is that Kaba and his associates ran a protection racket threatening female small business owners of colour in their community. Corbyn, Abbott, Khan and others SHAME ON YOU.

@Choochoo21 , your posts make me wish for a “No thanks” icon right next to the “Thanks” one. 🙄

If that was the case Jon Worboys would still be raping women in his taxi so it’s absolutely imperative the law doesn’t change - though I support the few anomalies such as firearms officers

It’s quite clear that cars can still be driven aggressively with a shot-out tyre. So, @PersephonePotts , you’re quite right, shooting a tyre out, even shooting out two, three or four tyres, would have been futile and even more dangerous!

This thread has been an eye opener. The irony is that I'm a life long Lefty and far from uncritical of all policing, but it amazes me that people are still trying to make CK into some sort of victim.

This is perhaps another thread for another day but UK Universities have lost the plot. Rather than being higher education institutions they’re now a liberal cult-like platform that demand people who just want to learn hold the same views as them.

Was at Newcastle Uni for an event the other day and they proudly state they have converted all their toilets to gender neutral. I held it in.