Current Affairs Met Police

[PhilM]

Tomlinson wasn't armed nor had he attacked anyone, let alone a lying officer.
Menezes wasn't armed, nor had he attacked anyone.

Suppose we can let the kill squads assume what they like so long as it isn't you being hunted down and murdered. Jobs a good un.

We aren't talking about Tomlinson or Menezes. So I'll ask again, would it have been reasonable to suspect he (Kaba) may have been armed at that point?

 

[Rita_Poon]

We aren't talking about Tomlinson or Menezes. So I'll ask again, would it have been reasonable to suspect he (Kaba) may have been armed at that point?

No.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

One once told me I rode my bike like a big girls blouse. I was 8 years old. Cut me deep.

[When we have a system that fails to deal with serious failures in policing, including violence, rape and murders then we are sacrificing others for the idea of our own personal safety. When we enable a system that continues to fail the innocent and imprison them in a futile effort to garner public support 'against crime' we once again sacrifice others for the mirage of our own personal safety. - It is a shame I cannot be more clear and more convincing regards the issues of corruption, negligence, political hucksterism, convenience and careerism regards our so called authorities and the gestapo they wield to keep the masses in line.]

There's another way of looking at this. Sure, there's are plenty of examples where police conduct fails and the response has been suboptimal.

On the other hand, wildly screaming at every instance is also problematic. Because you just go to the other extreme and automatically condemn.

Or start the Pete approach of whatabouttery and bring up other examples unrelated to this instance.

Don't go Peteblue. It's not healthy.

 

[Rita_Poon]

There's another way of looking at this. Sure, there's are plenty of examples where police conduct fails and the response has been suboptimal.

On the other hand, wildly screaming at every instance is also problematic. Because you just go to the other extreme and automatically condemn.

Or start the Pete approach of whatabouttery and bring up other examples unrelated to this instance.

Don't go Peteblue. It's not healthy.

The job is to do it right, the job is to uphold the law primarily by example. When police break the law in effort to enforce it, they make a mockery of the whole show. And those police that stand idly by whilst other officers break the law are guilty all the same, the duty is to the law first, the brotherhood of the uniform second.

They have lost sight of this, and is why there is such scrutiny, dislike and fear of them.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

The job is to do it right, the job is to uphold the law primarily by example. When police break the law in effort to enforce it, they make a mockery of the whole show. And those police that stand idly by whilst other officers break the law are guilty all the same, the duty is to the law first, the brotherhood of the uniform second.

They have lost sight of this, and is why there is such scrutiny, dislike and fear of them.

Sure, but you start up with this in relation to every discussion.

Personally I find it a bit 2nd yr Sociology student.

From my dealings with the police I've generally found them very helpful and have helped family and friends get justice.

As I say there's tons of bad behaviour from the cops, but this isn't one of them and I think a lot of folk have jumped in and are having a hard time considering they might have got things wrong.

 

[Alan Whittle]

Or they are held to account as have been in this case and found to have been justified in their actions

Stephen Lawrence’s family like this.

 

[Alan Whittle]

We aren't talking about Tomlinson or Menezes. So I'll ask again, would it have been reasonable to suspect he (Kaba) may have been armed at that point?

They could see his hands. Clearly. That was confirmed in court. Unless he was steering the car with his feet?

 

[TommyDavo]

The job is to do it right, the job is to uphold the law primarily by example. When police break the law in effort to enforce it, they make a mockery of the whole show. And those police that stand idly by whilst other officers break the law are guilty all the same, the duty is to the law first, the brotherhood of the uniform second.

They have lost sight of this, and is why there is such scrutiny, dislike and fear of them.

A court of law has found him not guilty, so he has not broken the law. You hitched your cart to the wrong horse this time.

 

[Alan Whittle]

A court of law has found him not guilty, so he has not broken the law. You hitched your cart to the wrong horse this time.

I’m sure you were just as supportive with the O J Simpson verdict.

 

[TimmyOTool]

Stephen Lawrence’s family like this.

Odd comment to make

 

[Alan Whittle]

Odd comment to make

Police; held to account, justified in their actions. The Lawrence family have been waiting 30 odd years for this from The Met.
I think they would see it as progress in the force. Transparency, good governance, clear process. How so odd?

 

[Rita_Poon]

Police; held to account, justified in their actions. The Lawrence family have been waiting 30 odd years for this from The Met.
I think they would see it as progress in the force. Transparency, good governance, clear process. How so odd?

Seems a new account on the hunt for some trouble. Amazing timing.

 

[Rita_Poon]

A court of law has found him not guilty, so he has not broken the law. You hitched your cart to the wrong horse this time.

Slaps on the back all round then. A job done square and true.

 

[Alan Whittle]

Seems a new account on the hunt for some trouble. Amazing timing.

No, I thought it a fair question. My point was relevant but a bit left field.

 

[PhilM]

No.

Well there we go.

If you don't feel it was reasonable to suspect that he may have had a weapon on him, based on all the intelligence, the subjectivity can't be removed.

They could see his hands. Clearly. That was confirmed in court. Unless he was steering the car with his feet?

That's not the point being discussed: Rita said it was unreasonable for the police to suspect at the time that the driver may have had a weapon on his person.

That goes against all the evidence provided. The police stopped the car, like they did, because it was linked to two previous shootings in recent days.

Kaba was known to drive the car, known to have access to firearms, believed to have used one recently, had prior form of firearms offences and much more.

Was it unreasonable, at the time, for armed police to stop the car rather than non-armed officers? Ignore everything afterwards, with hindsight...

... was the decision at the time justifiable? That's how the law works.