By Ben Kerrigan-
Suella Braverman is under fire for interfering in a live prosecution by seemingly criticizing the decision to charge the officer charged for the murder if Chris Kaba.
On Sunday, the home secretary said she had ordered a review into armed policing, stating that “we depend on our brave firearms officers to protect us”.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
Unarmed Mr Kaba was killed by a single gunshot through the windscreen of a vehicle in Streatham Hill in September 2022.
Since the charge was announced, more than 100 armed police officers have turned in their permits allowing them to carry firearms, leaving the Ministry of Defence now offering the support of armed soldiers to London police.
Ms Braverman said she had launched a review “to ensure they [armed officers] have the confidence to do their jobs while protecting us all” – although it is not clear who is to carry out the review, and what it could lead to exactly.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
“We depend on our brave firearms officers to protect us from the most dangerous & violent in society,” she said. “In the interest of public safety they have to make split-second decisions under extraordinary pressures.
“They mustn’t fear ending up in the dock for carrying out their duties. Officers risking their lives to keep us safe have my full backing & I will do everything in my power to support them.”
Former shadow business secretary John Denham asked on social media: “Has there ever in modern times been a worse, more ill-judged interference by a home secretary in the course of a criminal prosecution?
Met commissioner Sir Mark Rowley and senior officers have held a series of meetings with around 70 firearms officers this week to discuss officers’ concerns over the murder charge. On Sunday he welcomed the review announced by the Home Secretary.
“There is a concern on the part of firearms officers that even if they stick to the tactics and training they have been given, they will face years of protracted legal proceedings which impact on their personal wellbeing and that of their family,” he said. “While previous reviews have been announced, they have not delivered change.
“Carrying a firearm is voluntary. We rely on officers who are willing to put themselves at risk on a daily basis to protect the public from dangerous criminals, including terrorists. Officers need sufficient legal protection to enable them to do their job and keep the public safe, and the confidence that it will be applied consistently and without fear or favour.”
A Met Police spokesperson added: “Many are worried about how the decision impacts on them, on their colleagues and on their families. They are concerned that it signals a shift in the way the decisions they make in the most challenging circumstances will be judged.
“A number of officers have taken the decision to step back from armed duties while they consider their position. That number has increased over the past 48 hours.
“The Met has a significant firearms capability and we continue to have armed officers deployed in communities across London as well as at other sites including parliament, diplomatic premises, airports etc.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar