Chris Kaba

[RaceWithChyna]

The police officer who shot Chris Kaba has finally been charged with murder. It took a while after investigations had to be held but I’m glad the CPS decided to charge the anonymous police officer.

Before people start, yes he’d been in jail. Yes, he’d apparently drove towards officers at an attempt to get away. None of this means he deserved to be killed with an immediate head shot. To make matters worse, he wasn’t even the person they were after. They only realised it was someone else after the fact that he was dead.

I hope the family get the justice that they deserve.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-66865099.amp

Genuinely interested in what would have been the right outcome.

I agree. I honestly believe that if the officer had did the right thing then why would he have any charges brought against him? That doesn’t make much sense to me. This is why it’ll be interesting to follow the trial to get as much information on what happened (and what should have happened) as possible!

Based on some other threads this week, it seems the 'innocent until proven guilty' principle is quite contextual on mumsnet.

And the point I was making was that on these type of threads someone always says 'shoot the tyres' and I am just making the point that we aren't any of us in the position where we know if that is the training given, or if the training says to shoot the legs if possible, or any other part of the body. Neither do we know if he was shooting at someone who moved ,even if by a small amount.
I'm awaiting the trial to see.

I don’t need to believe in innocent until proven guilty, I’m just a random civilian with my own opinion😂

Just like Lucy Letby, I never believed she was innocent even before the trial had started. I think the same with the Chris Kaba case. However, my opinion doesn’t matter because it’s simply an opinion. If the jury decide that the officer is innocent then that’s understandable as they would have been presented with every single detail. I’d also be following the trial so I’d have enough information to decide whether I personally thought he was still guilty or if he was innocent.

I hardly doubt that people believed innocent until proven guilty when it came to Wayne Couzens, don’t you? People are allowed opinions

@RaceWithChyna

I actually probably agree with most of your posts. My comment was aimed at those who are condemning without thought another high profile person (not yet charged I believe) but asking us for forbearance in this instance. If you're the type who makes up your mind without full evidence in all scenarios, at least you're consistent. Wouldn't want you on a jury though.

How can you compare chris kaba, a violent criminal, who was well known to the police and who was known to be involved in gang activity, who tried to attack police with a vehicle, to Sarah Everard?

You've obviously already made up your mind that kaba is an innocent victim, but if you drive a vehicle at the police in the course of them trying to apprehend you, there may be consequences. How offensive to compare that to the case of a woman who was attacked while walking home minding her own business.

I am not a police officer, so i don't know if the officers actions were right to shoot, but kaba was well acquainted with the police so knew the risks of failing to stop and get out of the car. He had the option of not escalating matters by driving at armed police officers. Sarah had no chance.

I live very very close to where the shooting happened and recently lived next to where CK's gang members lived and held everyone in terror - my DC and friends were working hard to avoid them.

It is 100% right that the police are held to account and act according to the law. Whatever the gang and crime situation, the whole point of a justice system and the rule of law is that it is not the wild west and any suspected criminal activity is dealt with within the law and respects the rights of everyone.

That day residents were in fear and not going out because the chase and helicopter surveillance and subsequent siege went on for hours.

I have no sympathy for the gang members and associates as such, people say CK had friends and family, just like the police, but where was his care for others' friends and family when a member of his gang shot someone else? When he was (previously) carrying a forearm?

It was, afaik, reported that the car he was driving was being looked for as having been involved in a firearms incident, it was known he had previous firearms conviction and armed associates.

But none of that justifies any unlawful killing by the police

It is even more important in areas like this that the police are 100% trustworthy. The would-be criminals need to have no excuses not to respect them, the community at large need to feel that the police are professional and will keep everyone safe.

I hope the trial is rigorous, fair and evidence based.

Give it a rest. The poster who I responded to knew exactly what I mean. I’m referring to ‘innocent until proven guilty’ and if you read my post properly then you’d understand my point.

If you think it’s okay for the police to kill someone because they’re a violent gang member then good for you! No one deserves to be unlawfully killed by the police despite who they are. No one!

I live not on the other side of Tulse Hill and I’m very familiar with the gang he associated with and his past. It wasn’t anything that was hidden. However, as you’ve pointed out, none of that means he’s allowed to be killed by the police.

I hope the trial is rigorous, fair and evidence based.

100%

It’s interesting and very telling when people bring up Kaba’s past to use it as a way to justify what happened to him.

It’s similar to when George Floyd was killed and you’d see people say, ‘well he was stealing from a store so what did he expect,’ ‘play stupid games, win stupid prizes’ and so on. Because someone has done something illegal, they’re allowed to get killed by the police because of it? Don’t we have laws to avoid these sorts of situation? It’s madness that some people really believe you can justify a police officer taking someone’s life!

If the CPS have taken the unusual step of charging the officer, there must be reasonably satisfied that something went wrong. I'm sure the situation will be clarified at the trial.

Surely this matter is sub judice now that someone has been charged? I think the mods should delete this thread.

Good point.

Because someone has done something illegal, they’re allowed to get killed by the police because of it?

No, but if there's a scenario where the police are trying to apprehend someone dangerous to the public then it's a slightly different ballgame. I'm talking hypothetically because I don't know what the specifics of this case are.

Met Police issue ammunition is hollow point rounds. The are designed to disintegrate on impact to eliminate the danger of ricochet, or going through the target and continuing to injure a bystander. It's why Jean Charles de Menezes didn't have a head to take to heaven.

Also standard training is to aim for the largest target area. Generally the torso.

Even situation is unique so it's hard to have a one size fits all response.

As predicted:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/22/chris-kaba-murder-met-police-officers-give-back-guns/

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/file/857702/CCS2077CCS0120853800-001Code-of-Practice-on-Armed-PolicinggPrint177.pdf

Obviously doesn't explain tactics but is v clear on investigating

The primary intention of the police, when discharging a firearm, is to prevent an immediate threat to life by shooting to stop the subject from carrying out their intended or threatened course of action. In most circumstances, this is achieved by aiming to strike the central body mass (the torso).
Where it is imperative that the subject is immediately incapacitated (for example, if about to detonate a person-borne IED), then an aim to strike the head or central nervous system may be considered.

www.college.police.uk/app/armed-policing/discharge-firearms

Im glad this stuff is investigated. We don't know everything, I don't generally mistrust the police but I don't want to be okay with people being killed by the police because we don't have the death penalty with or with out a trial in the UK thank goodness.

You're right that your background doesn't determine whether it's ok to kill you but George Floyd was very different. That was clearly murder or gross negligence manslaughter. There is absolutely no way that can be argued against.

In this case, it may well be self defence but the officer put himself in a position where that was needed instead of like, not standing in front of an agitated criminals car

We need to wait for more facts to come out but this one isn't clear cut

Are US police no longer armed then?

No problem if people want to report the thread to have it deleted! I’ll certainly start another thread once the verdict has been given

News today reporting that over 100 met firearms officers have handed in their firearm licence.

I don't think it's ok to shoot someone 'because of their background' either op but think it's disingenuous to ignore the fact that his lifestyle, and that of the car's owner, would not be in the officer's mind when making their decisions.

I think I'll reserve judgment until we know more.

I don't blame the FA officers feeling unsupported because presumably they can't announce why the decision to charge has been made. Must be a tricky situation for the Police.

Just hope that none of you are ever in the position where you might need a firearms officer to intervene. Seems this officer and the force as a whole seems to have been thrown under the bus.Seems to be the 'cool' thing at the moment to criticise the police and call out everything as racism . Many firearms officers have handed in their guns, a fact that anyone with half a brain will see as very dangerous.
I come from a family of police officers and they all despair at how policing is next to impossible now.
Instead of speculating let's just wait and see. In my eyes though, black or not, if you carry on driving when told to stop then expect to be shot. It isn't rocket science. That officer had a split second to make that decision. I couldn't do the job, many of you commenting couldn't. So as I said, let's wait and see what the outcome is.