No it isn't.
Couzens was only able to kill Sarah in the way he did because he was a police officer. Police procedure directly allowed him to carry out his crime. He showed her his police badge to gain her trust, he used police COVID restrictions to force compliance, he used police handcuffs to arrest her, and he stuffed her into the back of a police car. Passers-by have admitted that they didn't act because all they saw was a police officer arresting someone. And before Sarah even walked past him on that night, failure at an institutional level allowed Couzens to continue carrying his badge, his handcuffs, and his weapons despite being under investigation for sex-related offences already.
But even before we knew this, the behaviour of police at Clapham Common was unnecessarily heavy-handed and violent. Now we know the facts of how Sarah was murdered, you have to wonder what's currently going through the heads of the 9 women who were being held in police custody by Couzens' colleagues. Colleagues who knew of Couzens' history of indecent exposure, by the way, and jokingly referred to him as "The Rapist" while he served as a police officer. How are women expected to trust police officers ever again after this? How are women expected to trust the police as an institution when they allowed somebody like Couzens to not only continue working on the force despite his past behaviour, but let it linger long enough that a woman was murdered by him?
Couzens wasn't some random sicko who dragged a woman off the street, he was a police officer who abused power that he knew he had. And the women who were beaten around and wrongfully arrested by male police officers in Clapham, during a fucking candlelight vigil for someone who was murdered after being literally wrongfully arrested by another male police officer in Clapham, had every right to attend that vigil and now have every right to claim any damages they want. You have to be seriously fucking dense not to see the parallels here.
www.bigissue.com
