Chris Kaba, 24, shot dead by police in Streatham, Mon 5th Sept 2022

[PTK]

Was the life of any police officer under threat from the victim?
Did the police officer who fired the shot act corrrectly?
If the answer to both these questions is "no", then should the police officer be punished or reprimanded in any way?

 

[Spymaster]

I think you're overstating the matter with moral exoneration since it is a court of law not a court of morals.

You are of course correct, but I felt that given the amount of hyperbollocks being posted on this thread, it would be unfair of me not to make a small contribution.

 

[Pickman's model]

You are of course correct, but I felt that given the amount of hyperbollocks being posted on this thread, it would be unfair of me not to make a small contribution.

on that basis you are, i believe, the greatest contributor to this thread

 

[Spymaster]

on that basis you are, i believe, the greatest contributor to this thread

We’ll allow you your delusion but it’s patently obvious to anyone normal who’s reading this, that you and the cranks have been comprehensively put to the sword here in every way imaginable. It's a resounding victory for sanity.

Long may it continue!

 

[two sheds]

I've resisted posting on the thread but now that it's descended to an appropriate level, I've been thinking it was a harsh punishment just for manoeuvring backwards/forwards to get into a parking spot. How many of us haven't bumped a couple of cars trying to do that?

 

[cesare]

on that basis you are, i believe, the greatest contributor to this thread

He'll be saying that lefties eat cats and dogs next.

 

[Spymaster]

He'll be saying that lefties eat cats and dogs next.

Swans.

Made of tofu.

 

[SLBDWELL]

He means people who don't think juries should be compelled to return guilty verdicts whenever the defendant is a police officer.

 

[SLBDWELL]

this is what does worry and sadden me that the jury system our foundation of justice since Magna Carta and the decsions by a jury is being sort of underminded. How would we feel if we have to sit on a jury in a high profile case. The London Mayor could only bring himself to 'I respect the decision made by the jury today' which says it all and he is police commissioner for London. I personally do want the french system were one has to prove ones innocent or 3 examining judges or no jury at all as in some very liberal european countries-

 

[alex_]

How would we feel if we have to sit on a jury in a high profile case. The London Mayor could only bring himself to 'I respect the decision made by the jury today' which says it all and he is police commissioner for London.

I’m not sure that the mayor could say anything else, what would have happened if he had said “the jury got it wrong”

 

[dessiato]

Was the life of any police officer under threat from the victim?
Did the police officer who fired the shot act corrrectly?
If the answer to both these questions is "no", then should the police officer be punished or reprimanded in any way?

And if the answers are yes? As the answers were, according to the juries interpretation.

 

[krtek a houby]

I personally do want the french system were one has to prove ones innocent or 3 examining judges or no jury at all as in some very liberal european countries-

Guilty before proven innocent? No juries?

Sounds very diplock. Sure why not just go straight for internment and cut out any the illusion of justice?

 

[Spymaster]

I personally do want the french system were one has to prove ones innocent or 3 examining judges or no jury at all as in some very liberal european countries-

This isn't correct. The French have an inquisitorial legal system along with most (all?) of continental Europe.

That means, in serious cases, an examining judge is involved in the process of evidence gathering, so it sometimes looks like the judge is "going after" the accused. If the examining judge believes there's a case to answer the case goes to trial by jury. There is still a presumption of innocence but the argument against it is that the presumption has been eroded by the fact that there's a trial at all. One (examining) judge has already decided that the defendant should face trial after examining the evidence, and the jury knows that. On the other hand, the examining judge may find that there's insufficient evidence against the accused and there'll be no jury trial.

 

[Pickman's model]

And if the answers are yes? As the answers were, according to the juries interpretation.

Why did he and his colleagues not simply retreat behind the safety of the cop car being as the car was boxed in and all the sound and fury as so often signified nothing?

 

[Pickman's model]

this is what does worry and sadden me that the jury system our foundation of justice since Magna Carta and the decsions by a jury is being sort of underminded. How would we feel if we have to sit on a jury in a high profile case. The London Mayor could only bring himself to 'I respect the decision made by the jury today' which says it all and he is police commissioner for London. I personally do want the french system were one has to prove ones innocent or 3 examining judges or no jury at all as in some very liberal european countries-

The mayor is not police commissioner for London. The met's commissioner is mark Rowley.

 

[tim]

this is what does worry and sadden me that the jury system our foundation of justice since Magna Carta and the decsions by a jury is being sort of underminded. How would we feel if we have to sit on a jury in a high profile case. The London Mayor could only bring himself to 'I respect the decision made by the jury today' which says it all and he is police commissioner for London. I personally do want the french system were one has to prove ones innocent or 3 examining judges or no jury at all as in some very liberal european countries-

I can't thing of any very liberal European countries. Could you give some examples?

 

[Spymaster]

Why did he and his colleagues not simply retreat behind the safety of the cop car being as the car was boxed in and all the sound and fury as so often signified nothing?

Probably several reasons, but none matter.

The jury were not there to consider the operational tactics. They were there to decide whether or not Blake murdered Kaba.

 

[dessiato]

Why did he and his colleagues not simply retreat behind the safety of the cop car being as the car was boxed in and all the sound and fury as so often signified nothing?

Probably several reasons, but none matter.

The jury were not there to consider the operational tactics. They were there to decide whether or not Blake murdered Kaba.

I think Spymaster has answered this quite well here.

 

[pbsmooth]

TBF I can understand why some might think he's better off dead. It's not always easy to live in area like mine.

So we’re in agreement. Thanks for seeing sense.

 

[SLBDWELL]

This isn't correct. The French have an inquisitorial legal system along with most (all?) of continental Europe.

That means, in serious cases, an examining judge is involved in the process of evidence gathering, so it sometimes looks like the judge is "going after" the accused. If the examining judge believes there's a case to answer the case goes to trial by jury. There is still a presumption of innocence but the argument against it is that the presumption has been eroded by the fact that there's a trial at all. One (examining) judge has already decided that the defendant should face trial after examining the evidence, and the jury knows that. On the other hand, the examining judge may find that there's insufficient evidence against the accused and there'll be no jury trial.

Sorry it was my error it should have read 'I do NOT support the french system ( inquistorial ). Being judge by our peers i think is the best system.

 

[krtek a houby]

Sorry it was my error it should have read 'I do NOT support the french system ( inquistorial ). Being judge by our peers i think is the best system.

That makes a bit more sense.

However, victims of inherent discrimination and imperialism in the UK don't have a great record of getting judged by their peers.

Our day will come.

 

[SLBDWELL]

Guilty before proven innocent? No juries?

Sounds very diplock. Sure why not just go straight for internment and cut out any the illusion of justice?

It was an error on my part I am not in favour of the French system . I am in favour of the jury system means we are judged by our peers . Diplock was never seen as right or fair espcially as i understand it was one judge for certain offences. i can understand the issues of jury intimadation and selection etc during the troubles so 3 judges would have been slightly fairer . thankfully i belive it was abolished mid 2000s but a friend in NI said that they do have a non jury system for certain offences.

 

[Pickman's model]

Probably several reasons, but none matter.

The jury were not there to consider the operational tactics. They were there to decide whether or not Blake murdered Kaba.

so you're saying that no operational tactics were introduced into evidence. are you sure?

 

[SLBDWELL]

That makes a bit more sense.

However, victims of inherent discrimination and imperialism in the UK don't have a great record of getting judged by their peers.

Our day will come.

You have raised an interesting point part of which is used to question the jury system ; can you gives some examples of were inherent discrimination and imperialism has played a part in the jury decision? Also what would you replace the jury system with or how would you twick it to ensure that as you say by the sounds of it ' inherent discrimination and imperialism' is eliminated.

 

[Spymaster]

so you're saying that no operational tactics were introduced into evidence. are you sure?

No. I’m saying what I said.

This was a murder trial. It was not the jury’s job to consider whether or not things could have been done differently. Their role was to rule on whether Blake’s actions constituted murder.

 

[krtek a houby]

You have raised an interesting point part of which is used to question the jury system ; can you gives some examples of were inherent discrimination and imperialism has played a part in the jury decision? Also what would you replace the jury system with or how would you twick it to ensure that as you say by the sounds of it ' inherent discrimination and imperialism' is eliminated.

The Birmingham 6, Guilford 4 and Maguire 7 spring to mind, as does the Gibraltar murders of 1988. Although the latter executions were carried out with trial or jury.

The British "justice" system needs dismantling and a fairer one put in place.

 

[Pickman's model]

No. I’m saying what I said.

This was a murder trial. It was not the jury’s job to consider whether or not things could have been done differently. Their role was to rule on whether Blake’s actions constituted murder.

so you don't think operational tactics played any part in the evidence they considered, although this would obviously have a bearing on whether they thought blake committed murder.

 

[Spymaster]

so you don't think operational tactics played any part in the evidence they considered, although this would obviously have a bearing on whether they thought blake committed murder.

I've made no comment on the evidence adduced. I expect the jury to have considered whether or not Blake's part in the tactics of the operation constituted murder. Not whether Kaba may not have been shot if the tactics were different, as you suggested above.

 

[edcraw]

The jury were not there to consider the operational tactics. They were there to decide whether or not Blake murdered KaKaba.

Indeed - and no one seems to want to question the operational tactics, least of all the head of the Met, despite being told to do so over 15 years ago.

 

[Spymaster]

Indeed - and no one seems to want to question the operational tactics, least of all the head of the Met, despite being told to do so over 15 years ago.

It might well be the case that the tactics should be reviewed but as you say, nobody seems to be calling for that.

Instead the outcry is to demand that someone gets wrongly convicted of murder, and to claim some sort of miscarriage of justice when they're not.