Chris Kaba Shooting
Discussion
P0PC0RN said:
I'm not sure anyone has jumped to any conclusions regarding who was right and who was wrong on this thread. I have jumped to my own (well informed) conclusions about the process involving the IOPC - it's poor and whilst it's only right the matter is investigated the cop involved has been treated appallingly by the press, politicians and a vocal section of the public.
Everyone wants a fair, transparent and fully informed inquest into Kaba's shooting by the Police - it's in the interests of everyone, even me as a police officer. There is no place for state sponsored executions or violence and we have all seen the damage and bloodshed caused by Police actions in the UK and overseas - lawful or otherwise.
Looking at your comment you have to picked up on the being pursued without blue lights but completely missed some of the other released information.
- Kaba was driving someone else's car which had been involved in a shooting/ firearms offence the previous day/s - who knows if he was involved but he was a convicted guns and gangs criminal who was previously jailed for a shooting. He would have been aware of the way Police will respond to armed crime.
- he's made off from the Police - the blue lights and sirens are arguably an irrelevance - there were marked cars present and he's reacted in a negative fashion- it's a car chase blues or not
- he's been boxed in and a load of uniformed police officers have jumped out of marked police cars in a lit up area and have pointed guns at him whilst shouting armed Police etc. He has then attempted to ram his way out which has ended up with him being shot once.
- witnesses have provided accounts and asked "why didn't he just give up/stop
- a car is a weapon and can be used to kill or maim. If Kaba, or anyone else, tries to drive out of a Police box in a big heavy 4x4 generally in the direction of a cop (who wants to go home at the end of their shift) who happens to be pointing a gun at the driver I would argue it's justified to discharge that firearm - there is nothing else available to Police that will stop a car immediately in those circumstances - our oath is to protect life and that includes our own - I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6
I would suggest he was shot dead because of the actions detailed above more than a ANPR marker.
I understand why it's repeatedly raised and clearly the Policing of the Black community (and other diverse communities) has been poor and rightly crisitised but I struggle to find a link (with what we know) between the shooting and his race - his behaviour on the other hand...
At what point did he make off from Police? Did he know the plain car was following him? I dont recall this being some high speed pursuit through the streets.Everyone wants a fair, transparent and fully informed inquest into Kaba's shooting by the Police - it's in the interests of everyone, even me as a police officer. There is no place for state sponsored executions or violence and we have all seen the damage and bloodshed caused by Police actions in the UK and overseas - lawful or otherwise.
Looking at your comment you have to picked up on the being pursued without blue lights but completely missed some of the other released information.
- Kaba was driving someone else's car which had been involved in a shooting/ firearms offence the previous day/s - who knows if he was involved but he was a convicted guns and gangs criminal who was previously jailed for a shooting. He would have been aware of the way Police will respond to armed crime.
- he's made off from the Police - the blue lights and sirens are arguably an irrelevance - there were marked cars present and he's reacted in a negative fashion- it's a car chase blues or not
- he's been boxed in and a load of uniformed police officers have jumped out of marked police cars in a lit up area and have pointed guns at him whilst shouting armed Police etc. He has then attempted to ram his way out which has ended up with him being shot once.
- witnesses have provided accounts and asked "why didn't he just give up/stop
- a car is a weapon and can be used to kill or maim. If Kaba, or anyone else, tries to drive out of a Police box in a big heavy 4x4 generally in the direction of a cop (who wants to go home at the end of their shift) who happens to be pointing a gun at the driver I would argue it's justified to discharge that firearm - there is nothing else available to Police that will stop a car immediately in those circumstances - our oath is to protect life and that includes our own - I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6
I would suggest he was shot dead because of the actions detailed above more than a ANPR marker.
I understand why it's repeatedly raised and clearly the Policing of the Black community (and other diverse communities) has been poor and rightly crisitised but I struggle to find a link (with what we know) between the shooting and his race - his behaviour on the other hand...
https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/news/statement-re...
Geffg said:
Yeah I’m surprised anyone decides to be a firearms officer with the way things go. I’m sure they don’t go out with the intention of finding a black person who they can shoot. It’s ok others saying they should’ve done this done that, but when in that situation and you have split seconds to make a choice then it’s not so simple.
But then it’s not just firearms officers, the police do anything and theirs uproar about being heavy handed and yet the scrotes can be as nasty and violent as they want against them.
How was there a split second decision when Kaba was unarmed? But then it’s not just firearms officers, the police do anything and theirs uproar about being heavy handed and yet the scrotes can be as nasty and violent as they want against them.
Isn’t the use of firearms a very last resort if there’s no other alternative you could use (including walking away) and life is definitely in danger
He tried to ram his way out of a Police box - his negative response to the Police attempt to stop would indicate his intentions of not stopping which becomes a pursuit.
Not a 'traditional' chase (which was initially reported) admittedly!
The front stopping vehicle was a marked ARV/BMW X5 and it would have been clear to anyone what the Police attentions were.
If the shooting officer got out of the passenger side of the X5 (a possibility looking at the bullet hole) he or she would have found themselves in a awful situation - left is a Tesla, right is a X5 straight ahead is a guy ramming his way out of a Police box and should he break free your getting run over. By turning and running your likely to get run over if he breaks out!
That said, its heart breaking that his daughter will be raised without a father and will grow up being subject to negative views and learnings from both sides of the debate - there are no winners in this situation.
Not a 'traditional' chase (which was initially reported) admittedly!
The front stopping vehicle was a marked ARV/BMW X5 and it would have been clear to anyone what the Police attentions were.
If the shooting officer got out of the passenger side of the X5 (a possibility looking at the bullet hole) he or she would have found themselves in a awful situation - left is a Tesla, right is a X5 straight ahead is a guy ramming his way out of a Police box and should he break free your getting run over. By turning and running your likely to get run over if he breaks out!
That said, its heart breaking that his daughter will be raised without a father and will grow up being subject to negative views and learnings from both sides of the debate - there are no winners in this situation.
Dingu said:
I think there is a lot of jumping to conclusions from people based on the person shot and the idea that the police must be good. The Met have a long and ignominious history of treating certain groups very poorly so when they pursue someone using an unmarked car without lights or siren and end up shooting them dead it’s right that it is thoroughly investigated.
I’m a middle aged white guy, but I’m pretty sure if I deliberately drove my car at an armed Police officer, I’d get shot as well. Mr Miata said:
How was there a split second decision when Kaba was unarmed?
Isn’t the use of firearms a very last resort if there’s no other alternative you could use (including walking away) and life is definitely in danger
All we know is what we have read in the mediaIsn’t the use of firearms a very last resort if there’s no other alternative you could use (including walking away) and life is definitely in danger
Those cops didn't know he was unarmed - all they knew is that the vehicle he was driving had been involved in a shooting the previous day. They didn't even know who was in the vehicle. It's been stopped by armed Police because of the previous shooting and it's gone 'wrong' from there. Those who use firearms in the commission of an offence or to harm have to be Policed by someone. If the Police just let these people go then what?
If you put yourself in the officers shoes what would have done?
Your stopping a car known to have been involved in a shooting the previous day. It's dark you have no idea how many people are in the car, you don't know what they have on them but the occupants had a viable firearm the day before (which they discharged) and most importantly you don't know their intentions or capabilities when challenged by Police.
The chances of a pursuit are high - pursuits are incredibly dangerous so pre-emptive tactics are preferable.
Vehicle is boxed/ blocked and you get out of your marked car, point your G36/ Glock at the driver and start shouting armed Police your intention is to lock up the driver and search the vehicle + go home at the end of the shift.
All of a sudden the driver starts to ram your Police car in an attempt to escape. Your on foot in front of the subject vehicle occupying it's escape route - the photo above shows your own escape routes are blocked by vehicles. You know that the Audi will serious hurt or kill you if it hits you and you have family/loved ones/ kids at home.
Your pointing your gun at the driver - he's made his decision - whats yours?
P0PC0RN said:
Your pointing your gun at the driver - he's made his decision - whats yours?
Step between the cars parked at the side and on to the pavement and see if he manages to break through or just wedge himself into a gap, if he breaks through then try and catch him next time. If the shooting linked to the car had been the same day then I could see why he was shot. Anyone with knowledge of gangs policing knows that if a vehicle is used in something serious like a shooting then whoever was driving at the time will get rid of the vehicle quickly by either burning it out or giving it to someone else so I struggle to believe they genuinely thought the person who had carried out the shooting was still driving around in the same car 24hrs later.Where does the info that the car was involved in a shooting - reports (including the IOPC summary - posted earlier) only state the vehicle was involved in a firearms incident.
'On Monday 5 September 2022, Mr Chris Kaba was driving an Audi motor vehicle in South London. The Audi Mr Kaba was driving was believed to be linked to a firearms incident which took place the previous day and an automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) marker had been placed upon it.'
Looks like he was shot to prevent escape rather than the fact he posed any danger
'On Monday 5 September 2022, Mr Chris Kaba was driving an Audi motor vehicle in South London. The Audi Mr Kaba was driving was believed to be linked to a firearms incident which took place the previous day and an automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) marker had been placed upon it.'
Looks like he was shot to prevent escape rather than the fact he posed any danger
Edited by Bigends on Friday 31st March 15:12
123DWA said:
Step between the cars parked at the side and on to the pavement and see if he manages to break through or just wedge himself into a gap, if he breaks through then try and catch him next time. If the shooting linked to the car had been the same day then I could see why he was shot. Anyone with knowledge of gangs policing knows that if a vehicle is used in something serious like a shooting then whoever was driving at the time will get rid of the vehicle quickly by either burning it out or giving it to someone else so I struggle to believe they genuinely thought the person who had carried out the shooting was still driving around in the same car 24hrs later.
Your planning your personal survival on making a small gap between some cars or wedging yourself against something and hoping the driver doesn't aim at or hit you? BraveCan you imagine the public outcry/ daily mail headline - Armed Police could have stopped crazed gangland gunman but let him on his way because he didn't want to talk to the police. Gunman went onto kill family of 5 at bus stop in botched drive by shooting the next day....
Letting the car go burns the intelligence and potentially looses vital evidence of a serious offence - the police ultimately stopped Kaba and his actions have lead to the outcome - no one forced him to ram Police cars.
Your theory is based upon the criminals knowing that their vehicle has been 'made' by Police - we stop people all the time in cloned/nicked/crime cars who have no idea they have been made by the Police. We have no idea where the intelligence/ information regarding the vehicle came from but the Met have obviously graded the intel well enough to force a armed stop.
Anyone with a knowledge of Policing would know that....
123DWA said:
Step between the cars parked at the side and on to the pavement and see if he manages to break through or just wedge himself into a gap, if he breaks through then try and catch him next time. If the shooting linked to the car had been the same day then I could see why he was shot. Anyone with knowledge of gangs policing knows that if a vehicle is used in something serious like a shooting then whoever was driving at the time will get rid of the vehicle quickly by either burning it out or giving it to someone else so I struggle to believe they genuinely thought the person who had carried out the shooting was still driving around in the same car 24hrs later.
Are you suggesting the application of a rule 123DWA said:
Anyone with knowledge of gangs policing knows that if a vehicle is used in something serious like a shooting then whoever was driving at the time will get rid of the vehicle quickly by either burning it out or giving it to someone else so I struggle to believe they genuinely thought the person who had carried out the shooting was still driving around in the same car 24hrs later.
which has absolutely no grounding in fact particularly when applied across an entire diverse criminal demographic in order to resolve a completely dynamic, dangerous situation? Decision models for threats like these just don't work like that thankfully. Officers, advisers and SIOs tend to policy specific factors to each unique situation as they arise for what I'd hope were obvious reasons.TheSunReports said:
The officer, who had the opportunity to stop the killer before they went on to shoot the 7 year old girl, said,"I knew the vehicle had been involved in another shooting less than 24 hours before I had the chance to stop it and that shooting showed the car carried someone with the capability and intent to murder someone as they'd tried only yesterday. But I know from dealing with gangs than the person wouldn't be in the car now as they always get rid of the vehicle quickly or burn it out. Not drive around and try to finish the job they failed to do yesterday.
sebdangerfield said:
123DWA said:
Step between the cars parked at the side and on to the pavement and see if he manages to break through or just wedge himself into a gap, if he breaks through then try and catch him next time. If the shooting linked to the car had been the same day then I could see why he was shot. Anyone with knowledge of gangs policing knows that if a vehicle is used in something serious like a shooting then whoever was driving at the time will get rid of the vehicle quickly by either burning it out or giving it to someone else so I struggle to believe they genuinely thought the person who had carried out the shooting was still driving around in the same car 24hrs later.
Are you suggesting the application of a rule 123DWA said:
Anyone with knowledge of gangs policing knows that if a vehicle is used in something serious like a shooting then whoever was driving at the time will get rid of the vehicle quickly by either burning it out or giving it to someone else so I struggle to believe they genuinely thought the person who had carried out the shooting was still driving around in the same car 24hrs later.
which has absolutely no grounding in fact particularly when applied across an entire diverse criminal demographic in order to resolve a completely dynamic, dangerous situation? Decision models for threats like these just don't work like that thankfully. Officers, advisers and SIOs tend to policy specific factors to each unique situation as they arise for what I'd hope were obvious reasons.TheSunReports said:
The officer, who had the opportunity to stop the killer before they went on to shoot the 7 year old girl, said,"I knew the vehicle had been involved in another shooting less than 24 hours before I had the chance to stop it and that shooting showed the car carried someone with the capability and intent to murder someone as they'd tried only yesterday. But I know from dealing with gangs than the person wouldn't be in the car now as they always get rid of the vehicle quickly or burn it out. Not drive around and try to finish the job they failed to do yesterday.
Geffg said:
Yeah I’m surprised anyone decides to be a firearms officer with the way things go. I’m sure they don’t go out with the intention of finding a black person who they can shoot. It’s ok others saying they should’ve done this done that, but when in that situation and you have split seconds to make a choice then it’s not so simple.
So you have to ask - why do they volunteer to do it?P0PC0RN said:
Your planning your personal survival on making a small gap between some cars or wedging yourself against something and hoping the driver doesn't aim at or hit you? Brave
Can you imagine the public outcry/ daily mail headline - Armed Police could have stopped crazed gangland gunman but let him on his way because he didn't want to talk to the police. Gunman went onto kill family of 5 at bus stop in botched drive by shooting the next day....
Letting the car go burns the intelligence and potentially looses vital evidence of a serious offence - the police ultimately stopped Kaba and his actions have lead to the outcome - no one forced him to ram Police cars.
Your theory is based upon the criminals knowing that their vehicle has been 'made' by Police - we stop people all the time in cloned/nicked/crime cars who have no idea they have been made by the Police. We have no idea where the intelligence/ information regarding the vehicle came from but the Met have obviously graded the intel well enough to force a armed stop.
Anyone with a knowledge of Policing would know that....
Fair points, I hadn't considered the preserving evidence angle of stopping the car. My experience of this kind of thing is from the wrong side of the desk so its interesting to hear it from the police angle. Can you imagine the public outcry/ daily mail headline - Armed Police could have stopped crazed gangland gunman but let him on his way because he didn't want to talk to the police. Gunman went onto kill family of 5 at bus stop in botched drive by shooting the next day....
Letting the car go burns the intelligence and potentially looses vital evidence of a serious offence - the police ultimately stopped Kaba and his actions have lead to the outcome - no one forced him to ram Police cars.
Your theory is based upon the criminals knowing that their vehicle has been 'made' by Police - we stop people all the time in cloned/nicked/crime cars who have no idea they have been made by the Police. We have no idea where the intelligence/ information regarding the vehicle came from but the Met have obviously graded the intel well enough to force a armed stop.
Anyone with a knowledge of Policing would know that....
Bigends said:
sebdangerfield said:
123DWA said:
Step between the cars parked at the side and on to the pavement and see if he manages to break through or just wedge himself into a gap, if he breaks through then try and catch him next time. If the shooting linked to the car had been the same day then I could see why he was shot. Anyone with knowledge of gangs policing knows that if a vehicle is used in something serious like a shooting then whoever was driving at the time will get rid of the vehicle quickly by either burning it out or giving it to someone else so I struggle to believe they genuinely thought the person who had carried out the shooting was still driving around in the same car 24hrs later.
Are you suggesting the application of a rule 123DWA said:
Anyone with knowledge of gangs policing knows that if a vehicle is used in something serious like a shooting then whoever was driving at the time will get rid of the vehicle quickly by either burning it out or giving it to someone else so I struggle to believe they genuinely thought the person who had carried out the shooting was still driving around in the same car 24hrs later.
which has absolutely no grounding in fact particularly when applied across an entire diverse criminal demographic in order to resolve a completely dynamic, dangerous situation? Decision models for threats like these just don't work like that thankfully. Officers, advisers and SIOs tend to policy specific factors to each unique situation as they arise for what I'd hope were obvious reasons.TheSunReports said:
The officer, who had the opportunity to stop the killer before they went on to shoot the 7 year old girl, said,"I knew the vehicle had been involved in another shooting less than 24 hours before I had the chance to stop it and that shooting showed the car carried someone with the capability and intent to murder someone as they'd tried only yesterday. But I know from dealing with gangs than the person wouldn't be in the car now as they always get rid of the vehicle quickly or burn it out. Not drive around and try to finish the job they failed to do yesterday.
Bigends said:
Where does the info that the car was involved in a shooting - reports (including the IOPC summary - posted earlier) only state the vehicle was involved in a firearms incident.
'On Monday 5 September 2022, Mr Chris Kaba was driving an Audi motor vehicle in South London. The Audi Mr Kaba was driving was believed to be linked to a firearms incident which took place the previous day and an automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) marker had been placed upon it.'
Looks like he was shot to prevent escape rather than the fact he posed any danger
Of course he was. 'On Monday 5 September 2022, Mr Chris Kaba was driving an Audi motor vehicle in South London. The Audi Mr Kaba was driving was believed to be linked to a firearms incident which took place the previous day and an automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) marker had been placed upon it.'
Looks like he was shot to prevent escape rather than the fact he posed any danger
Edited by Bigends on Friday 31st March 15:12
Bigends said:
Where does the info that the car was involved in a shooting - reports (including the IOPC summary - posted earlier) only state the vehicle was involved in a firearms incident.
'On Monday 5 September 2022, Mr Chris Kaba was driving an Audi motor vehicle in South London. The Audi Mr Kaba was driving was believed to be linked to a firearms incident which took place the previous day and an automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) marker had been placed upon it.'
Looks like he was shot to prevent escape rather than the fact he posed any danger
From a cosy armchair & without seeing the evidence.'On Monday 5 September 2022, Mr Chris Kaba was driving an Audi motor vehicle in South London. The Audi Mr Kaba was driving was believed to be linked to a firearms incident which took place the previous day and an automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) marker had been placed upon it.'
Looks like he was shot to prevent escape rather than the fact he posed any danger
Why not wait for the conclusion of the process?
vonhosen said:
Bigends said:
Where does the info that the car was involved in a shooting - reports (including the IOPC summary - posted earlier) only state the vehicle was involved in a firearms incident.
'On Monday 5 September 2022, Mr Chris Kaba was driving an Audi motor vehicle in South London. The Audi Mr Kaba was driving was believed to be linked to a firearms incident which took place the previous day and an automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) marker had been placed upon it.'
Looks like he was shot to prevent escape rather than the fact he posed any danger
From a cosy armchair & without seeing the evidence.'On Monday 5 September 2022, Mr Chris Kaba was driving an Audi motor vehicle in South London. The Audi Mr Kaba was driving was believed to be linked to a firearms incident which took place the previous day and an automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) marker had been placed upon it.'
Looks like he was shot to prevent escape rather than the fact he posed any danger
Why not wait for the conclusion of the process?
123DWA said:
Step between the cars parked at the side and on to the pavement and see if he manages to break through or just wedge himself into a gap, if he breaks through then try and catch him next time. If the shooting linked to the car had been the same day then I could see why he was shot. Anyone with knowledge of gangs policing knows that if a vehicle is used in something serious like a shooting then whoever was driving at the time will get rid of the vehicle quickly by either burning it out or giving it to someone else so I struggle to believe they genuinely thought the person who had carried out the shooting was still driving around in the same car 24hrs later.
Thankfully armed officers don't think "I wonder how I can hide" when faced with a lethal threat. They aren't the ones to back down when facing a suspect, the suspect is. Whether the lethal threat was actually there after the fact is moot, if the officer had a realistic honest held belief it was there at the time, then it's justified.123DWA said:
P0PC0RN said:
Your pointing your gun at the driver - he's made his decision - whats yours?
Step between the cars parked at the side and on to the pavement and see if he manages to break through or just wedge himself into a gap, if he breaks through then try and catch him next time. If the shooting linked to the car had been the same day then I could see why he was shot. Anyone with knowledge of gangs policing knows that if a vehicle is used in something serious like a shooting then whoever was driving at the time will get rid of the vehicle quickly by either burning it out or giving it to someone else so I struggle to believe they genuinely thought the person who had carried out the shooting was still driving around in the same car 24hrs later.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff