In a comment piece (The police say they support Black Lives Matter. Tell that to people in Tottenham, 12 June), Stafford Scott stated that police officers had been found to have “no case to answer” in relation to the deaths of a number of individuals, including Jermaine Baker. The Independent Office for Police Conduct has valued Mr Scott’s contributions on these issues and the challenge he rightly provides to this organisation. Mr Baker was fatally shot by a Metropolitan police officer in north London on 11 December 2015.
The IOPC independently investigated Mr Baker’s death and the firearms officer involved (W80) was arrested and criminally interviewed by our investigators. A file was then sent to the Crown Prosecution Service to consider homicide offences. After the CPS decision to take no further action, we decided there was a case to answer that W80’s use of force was excessive; the Metropolitan police disagreed but we directed them to hold gross misconduct proceedings.
This decision was challenged by the officer and the high court quashed our direction; we have appealed against that decision because we believe this raises broader issues about police use of force and police accountability. Next month, the court of appeal will hear this landmark case to determine whether or not a police officer should face disciplinary proceedings where they are relying on an “honestly held” (but mistaken) belief to justify using excessive force.
We believe, in line with other jurisdictions, that the defence that they honestly believed they needed to use that force – including restraint, Taser or a firearm – no matter how unreasonable that belief may be, sets the bar too high.
We will be arguing that, to maintain public confidence in how the police use their powers and are held to account, any honestly held belief must also be reasonable. Now more than ever we need to strengthen, not weaken, police accountability.
Sal Naseem
Regional director for London, Independent Office for Police Conduct
