Edit Content
Friday, Nov 1, 2024
Edit Content
Reading: Met Police Officer Who Shot Chris Kaba Acquitted of Murder
- Advertisement -

Met Police Officer Who Shot Chris Kaba Acquitted of Murder

Admin
Admin 103 Views Add a Comment

A Metropolitan Police officer has been acquitted of murder charges in the shooting of Chris Kaba, a case that has sparked significant public interest and debate over police use of force.

A Metropolitan Police armed officer, who was on trial for murder after fatally shooting an unarmed suspect in the head, has been found not guilty.

In September 2022, Chris Kaba was shot by Martyn Blake on a residential street in Streatham, south London.

Kaba, aged 24, was driving an Audi suspected by the police to be connected to a firearms incident from the previous evening. The authorities pursued and subsequently forced the vehicle to stop.

The not guilty verdict is likely to intensify the anger surrounding Blake’s trial, a decision that had already sparked outrage among his fellow Met firearms officers and the force’s commissioner, Mark Rowley.

The jury deliberated for just under three hours before reaching its verdict. Blake, visibly relieved, exhaled as the decision was announced.

Kaba’s relatives stood only a few feet away. His father, Prosper, had to be assisted out of the courtroom following the verdict; another relative swayed back and forth.

Blake, aged 40, was escorted by his police colleagues as he exited the courthouse. A decision is pending from the police oversight body on whether he should still undergo disciplinary proceedings for gross misconduct, and an inquest is approaching.

The Guardian has learned that police chiefs have urged ministers to provide increased legal protection for firearms officers, a proposal currently under consideration by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper. An announcement on this matter may be expected in the coming days.

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

Scotland Yard continues to be on high alert for any potential disturbances and is carefully observing community tensions.

Following the verdict, Rowley stated that the mechanism for holding police accountable was “broken.” The commissioner commented: “Sgt. Blake made a quick decision based on what he believed was necessary to safeguard his colleagues and protect London. The jury concluded that this belief was genuine and deemed the force used as reasonable.”

The use of fatal force understandably raises significant concern within communities, especially in Black communities where trust in policing is low. We have much work ahead to rebuild confidence in our service, and we recognize that incidents like this add further strain to relationships already under pressure.

“No police officer is exempt from the law, yet it’s evident that the system designed to hold them accountable is flawed. I am concerned about the insufficient support officers receive while performing their duties diligently. My greatest concern lies with public safety; if we diminish the morale of dedicated officers, their ability to combat crime diminishes as well, which could jeopardize London’s security.”

Blake’s suspension would be lifted immediately, according to Rowley.

Kaba’s family released a statement expressing their devastation. They stated: “The not guilty verdict deepens the sense of injustice we’ve been burdened with since Chris was taken from us, intensifying our unbearable sorrow. No family should suffer through such unimaginable grief as we have experienced. Chris was taken away too soon, and this decision indicates that his life—and others like him—are undervalued by the system. Our son deserved more.”

Martyn Blake’s acquittal represents not only a setback for our family but also for everyone impacted by police violence. Despite this outcome, we refuse to be silenced. We sincerely thank all those who supported us and stood up for justice. Our fight continues—for Chris, for justice, and meaningful change. Chris’ life mattered deeply, and nothing can diminish that truth from us.

The Audi that Kaba had been driving was forced to stop and was quickly surrounded by armed officers who sprang from three police cars, attempting to extract the suspect from his vehicle.

Blake, positioned in a police car that obstructed the front of the Audi, explained he discharged his weapon out of concern that Kaba might drag an officer under its wheels or attempt to run them over while trying to flee.

He stated that the car was being used as a weapon and that he had shot in self-defense, also aiming to protect his colleagues. His main objective was to “incapacitate” the driver, who was crouched low over the steering wheel.

The prosecution stated that the Audi driven by Kaba was obstructed almost immediately, leaving no opportunity for escape or any chance to run over officers.

The prosecution acknowledged that Kaba made “concerted” attempts to evade the police; however, his Audi’s maximum speed during the standoff was only 12 miles per hour.

Another armed officer mentioned that he was also on the verge of opening fire. The officers recounted hearing the screeching of tires and the revving of the Audi’s engine.

Police halted the Audi without knowing who was driving, aware solely of its connection to a shooting from the previous night.

Blake’s charges led to outrage among armed Met officers. They were infuriated when he was suspended from duty, and after being charged with murder, many refused to carry weapons.

The Met was concerned that a guilty conviction might have sparked a new and possibly larger rebellion among their firearms officers.

The police watchdog, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), conducted the criminal investigation.

Frank Ferguson, who leads the special crime and counter-terrorism division at the Crown Prosecution Service, stated: “We understand that firearms officers work under tremendous pressure. However, it is our duty to present cases that meet our criteria for prosecution before a jury. In this instance, we are confident that the criteria have been met.”

Thus, it was appropriate for the case to be presented to the jury for their examination and decision.

Share This Article
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

- Advertisement -