Sergeant Martyn Blake, the police officer who shot Chris Kaba in September 2022, was found not guilty of murder two years later. The court heard how Kaba was a member of London’s “67” gang, known for involvement in gun crime. He was allegedly involved in a nightclub shooting only days before his death, with forensic examination of his clothing revealing traces of firearms residue. After refusing to stop his Audi Q8 for police, video evidence showed Kaba dangerously driving the car in an attempt to escape. Blake testified that he believed Kaba’s actions put lives at immediate risk. With only seconds to make a decision, he shot the suspect once with his Sig MCX carbine.

Blake was charged with murder rather than manslaughter by the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC), which surprised those familiar with police shootings. A murder charge, after all, requires evidence of “malice aforethought”. The case law around similar shootings suggested the charges were at least fanciful, but were they political? Quite possibly — the Crown’s evidence was unconvincing. A jury unanimously found Blake not guilty after 16 minutes of deliberation. Yet now he is reportedly facing a disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct, which may result in his being dismissed and added to the register of people barred from policing.

This process is being instigated by the IOPC, which has a reputation among police officers — especially firearms specialists — for partisanship. Blake’s not guilty verdict would usually signal massive investigative failure, epic prosecutorial misjudgement, or malicious prosecution, but many officers believe the case is a combination of all three. Since police discipline regulations were changed, the IOPC has been allowed to order officers found not guilty of criminal charges to be subsequently investigated for misconduct. This is default double-jeopardy, whereby the IOPC gets two bites of the cherry.

The changes were introduced for good reason, given that there are clear instances where police misbehaviour falls below the criminal threshold but meets that of negligence or bad faith. The question, therefore, is whether Blake shot Kaba negligently or in bad faith. Both these questions were answered at trial. Yet the IOPC is pursuing misconduct proceedings, citing “guidelines”.

As director Amanda Rowe admits, however, “the legal test for deciding whether there is a case to answer is low.” Her comments should be considered in light of the Metropolitan Police’s response. Contrary to received wisdom, senior police management seldom “close ranks”, except for senior colleagues. When expedient, junior officers are thrown under the bus to keep politicians and “community leaders” happy. Yet, in this case, the force is digging its heels in. In 2023 MO19, the Met’s firearms unit, suffered a meltdown after the Kaba shooting. Without an armed capability, the Met cannot realistically police London. In this case, New Scotland Yard is standing by its man.

The Government is introducing legislation in light of the Kaba case to protect armed officers’ anonymity during criminal proceedings. Yet Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, who is also the Met’s police and crime commissioner, has been equivocal about the Kaba shooting. Meanwhile, fellow Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy has questioned the process by which Blake was cleared. British police forces had to prepare for riots in anticipation of the not guilty verdict, and were forced to consider military support in the event of armed officers, who are volunteers, withdrawing their firearms accreditations. Now, as Blake faces career-ending proceedings, an unsettling question lingers: will he be sacrificed on the altar of political expediency?