Was I wrong?
What we do know is that the CPS have decided to proceed with a prosecution based on the evidence they are in possession of.We don't. Anyone who says they do is full of shit.
At present there's zero evidence avaialable to the public so any rational person would be letting the judicial process take place without assuming the firearms officer was right to shoot him or not.
What we do know is that the CPS have decided to proceed with a prosecution based on the evidence they are in possession of.
The only reason I can see for that decision is that the officer acted outside of their VERY STRICT rules of engagement (RoE).
The RoE are designed to give the firearms officer a set of rules which are clear and unambiguous, and more importantly compliant with legislation as to when the use of lethal force can be applied. If they act outside of the RoE, then they are on very shaky ground.
That's true, but the point about the RoE is still extant.Thousands of people over the decades have been charged by CPS and found not guilty, or had charges dropped later, so you can't really infer anything from that other than it's not clear cut that he did nothing wrong.
They arent on strike, they have gone to duties that dont involve carrying firearms.The police need to let the investigation take place. If the officer broke the law he broke the law. If the perpetrator needed shooting he needed shooting.
There needs to be a proper investigation not the police going on strike if someone does something potentially illegal. And certainly not riots from people who hate the police.
They arent on strike, they have gone to duties that dont involve carrying firearms.
There isnt any extra payI assume any pay increment for being a firearms officer will be stopped too? Their refusal to continue as a firearms officer not only endanger Joe Public it endangers their colleagues too.
There isnt any extra pay