- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,526
Nailed it....
Isaiah Nature, 52, questioned why lethal force was necessary. “Even though [Chris Kaba] was known as a violent man, if this is my job, I’ve got to look at the situation. I could shoot him in the leg, you could reach for the gun,” he said. But while Isaiah was insistent that the shooting “wasn’t justified”, he added: “The police officer is doing his job – you obey the law. The police officers know him as a gunman and a troublemaker – [If I’m a police officer] I’ve got to make sure I’m safe. They were both wrong – there’s no right.”
Meanwhile, race relations activist Lee Jasper, a former policing director for London, called for juries in such cases to hear expert evidence on institutional racism.
“If the rationale is a police officer only needs a reasonable belief to fire his weapon, then it’s tantamount to a licence to kill,” he said. “This verdict will make it absolutely clear to Black communities that when it comes to the Met police, Black lives don’t matter.”
‘Shocking’: Chris Kaba verdict stokes old frustrations in Brixton
Latest acquittal of an officer who shot dead unarmed Black man provokes disbelief, frustration and resignation in south Londonwww.theguardian.com
Precisely, so what was the thought process as to whether to fire or not? The jury concluded they didn't feel the officer's life was at risk, there's only one conclusion: race
Sorry, what? The jury didn’t conclude anything apart from him being not guilty of murder.
Does a jury offer a conclusion, or just a verdict?
What is your source for this?
Can you share the source for this re the jury
Could you post a link to that conclusion please?
Where did they conclude this please? Could you provide a source?
Can you provide a source for saying “The jury concluded they didn't feel the officer's life was at risk”?