Should This Police Officer Even Be Facing These Charges?

[anotheoldgit]

http://news.sky.com/story/1608039/firearms-officer-arrested-over-police-shooting

But get ready for a period of rioting and looting if this officer is cleared of all charges.

[Zacs-Master]

Then what, exactly, was the point of your OP cos it strongly suggests you thought he would be.

[EDDIE51]

This report has more detail, it seems that there is speculation that the man who was shot was asleep in the Audi when he was killed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35136111
If that is true then the officer acted illegally.
It is also important to note that as 2 people have been arrested and charged over this many facts can not be reported.

[anotheoldgit]

Zacs-Master

/// Then what, exactly, was the point of your OP cos it strongly suggests you thought he would be. ///

Just because it "strongly suggests" to yourself and PP does not mean that is what I was suggesting.

I may be suggesting that he 'COULD' be, and that is fact, but that is entirely different from suggesting that he 'WOULD' be.

[Zacs-Master]

So do you agree, after having read several answers to your OP, that he should be 'facing' these charges? Or do you still believe he shouldn't?

[THECORBYLOON]

If you did not think he would be charged, why say, 'But get ready for a period of rioting and looting if this officer is cleared of all charges.' since he could be cleared only after a trial?

[EDDIE51]

There is something unusual about this case.
The officer /officers concerned are ALWAYS suspended on full pay while investigations are carried out after a police officer shoots someone dead.
But, in this case the officer was suspended as normal, but then 2 days later he was arrested and a murder investigation launched.
As I said at 10.06 on the 19th Dec , there is a possibility that although the dead man was in the suspect car, he was asleep when he was shot.
That , if true, would mean he was not an immediate threat so he was unlawfully killed.
We will have to wait for the results of the full investigation to know the facts.

[Peter Pedant]

I cd be wrong and frequently am

but they say that no officer who was present at the shooting was carrying a video cam....
dear dear

surely this should be standing orders ? why oh why as AOG might wail was such a precaution not taken ? because in the event of confusion or even ( gasp ) lying it would settle so many questions....

[Mamyalynne]

Totally agree Bodycams are vital for many occasions such as this if not all Police work.

It would save so much time and money in the long run and of course angst for those concerned.

[tonyav]

Could be changes soon.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/shoot-to-kill-police-officers-may-be-given-greater-legal-protection/ar-BBnK1nU

[Baldric]

They were not in Uniform so a Bodycam would have been a real give-away.

[Mamyalynne]

In that case then the resultant inquiries into a death will continue to be as lengthy as they are.

[Peter Pedant]

// They were not in Uniform so a Bodycam would have been a real give-away.//

O great I like that - wear mufti and no one will know ever what you have been doing

unlike Sgt Blackmore who got screwed because he sent someone ( an afghani ) to shuffle off this mortal coil on viddie
too educated and too articulate - it is shakespeare and Hamlet by the way
what a pity he wasnt in the police

[EDDIE51]

PP they were plain clothes officers operating under cover from an unmarked car. A body camera might have given the game away!
The reports actually said that there is no body camera suitable for plain clothes operations. Uniformed officers have to wear them but not plain clothes officers for obvious reasons !
They wanted to catch the criminals red-handed, possibly you think it would have been a better idea for uniformed officers to go in marked police cars with the 'Blues & two's' running?

[Peter Pedant]

o please spare me
we cant film what happened because the crims ( asleep apparently ) might wake up and see !

if the public are that gullible they deserve to die in large numbers as the new proposed legislation will ensure

[ not in Downing street of course ]

[Baldric]

Sgt Blackmore is nothing whatsoever to do with this FGS.
Stop trying to muddy the waters.

[Baldric]

B****y H***. the idiots got me at it now, it was Sgt Blackman not Blackmore!!!!

[Peter Pedant]

oops Baldric
so no murder occurred - and no one is serving time for it

fine - I understand what you are trying to say

[EDDIE51]

PP I really do not understand what your argument is.
You are saying that covert / undercover operations by the police should be banned unless it is all filmed with CCTV and body cameras? That would defeat the very purpose of such operations. If these criminals had got the slightest idea of what was about to happen they would have just left the area and tried again somewhere else. This way 2 are in jail and the 3 rd is dead your method would make it certain that they got away.
The problem is that the suspect may have been asleep and he did not have a gun in his hand as it was found on the parcel shelf in the car. Yes body cameras may have shown that but they would also have ensured that no arrests were made.

[Peter Pedant]

hi ev'rybody !

the incomprehensible argument ( wear a body cam when you shoot someone as Blackmore did ) is in the Times today !

so incomprehensible and impossible and off the wall one day
becomes govt policy the next !

I should be a govt adviser ( higher pay than apension )

[Peter Pedant]

none wears body cams when they shoot people
because it puts off their aim puts them in danger blah blah blah

yeah yeah - the you tube footage is faked then