Saturday, 26 October 2024

Your Prejudices Are Showing, Gaby...


And they aren't, of course, as the total waste of public money that was the trial of an armed officer for shooting dead a deadly threat has shown...

For Kaba’s grieving family, this latest in a string of acquittals was proof the police “can kill with impunity”, as a campaigner said.

Funny sort of 'impunity' that puts you on trial for following your training. Are you sure you know what that word means, Gaby? Will this help?

Police chiefs, conversely, have responded by demanding more safeguards against prosecution. Though the home secretary, Yvette Cooper, has agreed to demands that officers in such cases remain anonymous until convicted – not unreasonably, given the threats reportedly made against Blake and his loved ones – she has ordered an independent review into some of the more questionable asks on the National Police Chiefs’ Council wishlist, alongside a crackdown on police vetting and an overhaul of CPS guidance on charging officers. It’s time to get to the bottom, once and for all, of why successful prosecutions are so rare.

Because every member of that jury would have put themselves in the place of that officer facing a man using a vehicle as a deadly weapon and wondered just what else he was supposed to do, Gaby.... 

The home secretary cannot, however, let herself be held to ransom.

The Home Sec has already been held to ransom (by the racehustlers) many times, what's one more? 

...let us also hear from those who think justice is already almost impossible to get and who understand the human consequences of some of the NPCC’s more technical-sounding demands, such as making it harder for inquests to return verdicts of unlawful killing against police officers.

I think we've heard quite enough from that quarter, with their selective outrage when blacks are harmed by someone not also black, don't you? 

It’s true that we expect extraordinary things of firearms officers. Of the two other fatal shootings investigated in the year Kaba died, one involved a white man with a knife who attacked a police station and charged headlong at a Derbyshire firearms officer, who held off firing until the man was barely arm’s-length away. The other was a white man in Cumbria, holding a knife to a young child’s throat. He was shot after repeatedly refusing to drop the knife, and the child survived. The skill and steadiness under pressure involved in both cases is astonishing, and the consequences of a mistake unimaginable. I certainly couldn’t do it. But the same is true of brain surgery, and that doesn’t render surgeons above the law.

It does mean that it seems to take an extraordinarily long time to bring them to justice, Gaby. And I'd bet there's far more surgeons than AFOs in the country.

3 comments:

  1. ‘…. It’s time to get to the bottom, once and for all, of why successful prosecutions are so rare.’

    Could it be because high-profile cases like this are more likely than others to be publicly tested in a court of law in order to forestall accusations of a cover-up and therefore that the majority of defendants are (correctly) aquitted?

    There’s a growing trend for campaigners in such cases to demand ‘justice’ when what they mean is essentially revenge in the form of a criminal conviction; not only do such calls make a mockery of the principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’, they represent an attack on the entire framework of law and order. Add to that a requirement for verdicts to satisfy some kind of statistical criteria - an easy step for those thoroughly indoctrinated with the idea of quotas and equity of outcome - and you have the potential for something very disturbing indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's no more sophisticated than the argument against capital punishment:
    a) because on some rare occasions innocent people are convicted and executed
    b) and because on even rarer occasions I might be one of those people
    c) nobody should be executed
    d) therefore killers who go on to kill again are just the cost we must all pay for my safety

    so
    a) because on rare occasions an armed policeman might kill an innocent person...
    b)...
    c)...
    d) allowing criminals to go on and do harm again are just the cost we must all pay for my safety

    ReplyDelete
  3. "There’s a growing trend for campaigners in such cases to demand ‘justice’ when what they mean is essentially revenge in the form of a criminal conviction"

    They are often worse than the family, who at least can used the 'blinded by grief' excuse, even when the dead crim was just as much a terror to them....

    "...killers who go on to kill again are just the cost we must all pay for my safety"

    Funny how I have no fear of being shot by armed cops...

    ReplyDelete