Could anyone please explain (to me), why the jury in the Charles de Menezes case were not allowed to bring in a verdict of Unlawful Killing, and what would the implications have been had they done so? As I understand it, the Open Verdict means that the case can still be investigated. Is that correct?
Because there is an established case law from a few years ago which stated that if police officers use lethal force in the honest and reasonable belief that the threat they faced was genuine, then the killing cannot be unlawful from a legal point of view.