Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Why cannot it have been manslaughter?

Manslaughter is about intent.

It would be very difficult to argue that Blake did not intend to at least cause serious injury to Kaba. He shot him. That intent to cause serious injury would satisfy a murder charge. Therefore, manslaughter is off the table. He either murdered him or he didn't. This case turned on whether Blake fired the shot in self defence; not whether or not he intended to kill or injure Kaba.

Explained here.
 
Last edited:
Manslaughter is about intent.

It would be very difficult to argue that Blake did not intend to at least cause serious injury to Kaba. He shot him. That intent to cause serious injury would satisfy a murder charge. Therefore, manslaughter is off the table. He either murdered him or he didn't. This case turned on whether Blake fired the shot in self defence; not whether or not he intended to kill or injure Kaba.

Explained here.
I have just read the IOPC document 'factsheet fatal shooting of Chris Kaba' October 2024. Its clear to me that a very through investigation was carried out by both the IOPC and the CPS. The document stated 'During the investigation, the officer was advised they were under criminal investigation for murder’ . A file was then sent to the CPS. Who applied the codes and evidential tests for making charging decisions. The CPS were clearly satisfied that their was enough evidence to provide a "realistic prospect of conviction ‘ for murder . I assume during that process the CPS would have consulted with top experienced KC(s) in these matters and a decision was a murder charge was appropriate and therefore would have a ‘realistic prospect of conviction’. The guardian wrote an excellent article on this issue manslaughter v murder. As you say the case focus was whether Blake fired the shot in self defence.
 
I have just read the IOPC document 'factsheet fatal shooting of Chris Kaba' October 2024. Its clear to me that a very through investigation was carried out by both the IOPC and the CPS. The document stated 'During the investigation, the officer was advised they were under criminal investigation for murder’ . A file was then sent to the CPS. Who applied the codes and evidential tests for making charging decisions. The CPS were clearly satisfied that their was enough evidence to provide a "realistic prospect of conviction ‘ for murder . I assume during that process the CPS would have consulted with top experienced KC(s) in these matters and a decision was a murder charge was appropriate and therefore would have a ‘realistic prospect of conviction’. The guardian wrote an excellent article on this issue manslaughter v murder. As you say the case focus was whether Blake fired the shot in self defence.

Well yes. If the CPS never got it wrong, nobody would ever be acquitted would they.

It does raise the question of how they got it so wrong with this that the jury kicked it out with such minimal consideration though. Whilst the theory of my new ally edcraw is interesting, I'd be more inclined to believe that it was a shameful and misguided effort to placate the pitchfork brigade.
 
Well yes. If the CPS never got it wrong, nobody would ever be acquitted would they.

It does raise the question of how they got it so wrong with this that the jury kicked it out with such minimal consideration though. Whilst the theory of my new ally edcraw is interesting, I'd be more inclined to believe that it was a shameful and misguided effort to placate the pitchfork brigade.
I for one wouldn't take a pitchfork up against cops armed with guns
 
Well yes. If the CPS never got it wrong, nobody would ever be acquitted would they.

It does raise the question of how they got it so wrong with this that the jury kicked it out with such minimal consideration though. Whilst the theory of my new ally edcraw is interesting, I'd be more inclined to believe that it was a shameful and misguided effort to placate the pitchfork brigade.
Agree, how the IOPC but more so the CPS after looking at all the evidence, discussion, advice, probing the evidence, what the defence case may be and how that is likely to affect the prosecution case etc and it takes a jury around 3 hours. In September 2023 the CPS issued this statement “Following a thorough review of the evidence provided by the IOPC (Independent Office for Police Conduct), the CPS has authorised a charge of murder against a Metropolitan Police officer following the death of Chris Kaba. The CPS statement of the 21st October 2024 stated “This has been a complex and sensitive case and the decision to prosecute was made after an in-depth consideration of all the available evidence. “We recognise that firearms officers operate under enormous pressure, but it is our responsibility to put cases before a jury that meet our test for prosecution, and we are satisfied that test was met in this case. “It is therefore right that the case was put before the jury for them to scrutinise and to decide. They have carefully considered each piece of evidence, including video and Martyn Blake’s own account. They have made up their minds in the proper way and we thank them for doing so.” The constant theme of the CPS is ‘thorough review’ , ‘in depth consideration of the evidence’ ‘ satisfied that test was met in this case’. However with all of that around 3 hours of jury deliberation.
 
Maybe - but pretty sure they do it as a way of making it seem more personal and being a bit of a bully which is their main reason for hanging around here.
Spymaster has been here 23 years, you've been here 3. In that time do you not think that a) if he was so very bad he'd have gone by now, and b) you've been here long enough to, feeling as you seem to, use the ignore button?
 
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.
Mr paulee

You think the way Irish people have been treated by the British system is funny?

Or you don't agree that the system needs dismantling?
 
Back
Top Bottom