Sadiq Khan, Diane Abbott And Jeremy Corbyn On Chris Kaba.

[Deskdiary]

Is there any chance any of them will apologise for their public support of Kaba now that it is widely known what an utter scumbag he was? 

[naomi24]

I won't hold my breath.

[sandyRoe]

Some may say that even a 'scumbag' is entitled to due process.

[Atheist]

No link?

[curlyfries81]

Some might say "scumbag" is too nice a description for the deceased and some might also say that people should have reserved judgement until they were in possession of all the facts.

[ToraToraTora]

I doubt it, lefties love terrorists and crims.

[Deskdiary]

You been under a rock this week Atheist?

[curlyfries81]

Perhaps these anti-British grovelling apologists should take up residence in a country where they actually like the indigenous population.

[jackthehat]

Absolutely not.

Their whole belief-systems rely on the fact that white-people are oppressors and any act by any person of colour is in response to being oppressed.

They will happily tie themselves in knots to maintain this position no matter what truths they are faced with.

[Untitled]

they should admit their mistake yes. they rushed to judgement without access to all the information and seem to have been determined to make him into a british george floyd... which he wasn't

a lesson for everyone i think. we have seen too many times this year what can happen when people rush to judgement without any information

[Spungle]

Corbyn hasn't ever apologised for being mates with terrorists, so unlikely he'll apologise for supporting the likes of Kaba either.  As for Diane Abbott, she declared that "On balance, Chairman Mao did more good than harm" which rules her out too.  Sadiq Khan is too busy making London the stabbing capital of the world to make apologies, so,the answer to the question is No, No and No.

[DTCwordfan]

Desky - it's a time to get a sense or reality! Not a cat-in-hell's chance of happening, neo-revolutionaries that they are.

[New Judge]

The problem is that in the UK there are many people for whom there is no debate to be had when the police act against black people. Automatically the black people are being oppressed by a racist and oppressive police force. End of (as they say).

It's not quite like that but the root of the problem the police face stems from the ludicrous Macpherson report into the death of Stephen Lawrence. That report was published a quarter of a century ago and the police and the public they serve are still reeling from its effects.

It branded the Metropolitan Police as "institutionally racist". As well as that, among its many (often plainly absurd) recommendations it suggests that racist incidents should be recorded as such if they are perceived to be so by the "victim or any other person". 

It makes recommendations that would see charging decisions and prosecutions operate differently for these perceived racist crimes than for other crimes. There is an overriding impression throughout the report that the police often act in bad faith when dealing with different ethnic minorities. 

So this is why we are where we are. A police officer takes action which he has a split second to decide upon when the safety of him and his colleagues (and possibly members of the public) is threatened. That action results in the death of a black person who was, on every bit of evidence available, clearly intent on causing serious injury or death in order to escape. But we have three politicians (and many more besides, no doubt) automatically taking against the officer when they were, like everybody else apart from the police, unaware of the full circumstances.

We have got here because the Macpherson report, which altthough was designed to ensure all people the police deal with are treated equally, in fact did precisely the opposite.

Many of its 70 recommendations suggest different procedures for dealing with incidents which are perceived to be racist (by anybody, let's not forget). They suggest the diverse cultural sensitivities of different sections of the population are recognised when important decisions are made

Justice is supposed to be blind (to the different characteristics of those brought to it). Many of the statues of Lady Justice show her blindfolded. The Macpherson report tore that blindfold off and burnt it on the bonfire of "culural diversity".

[fbg40]

Jack

Absolutely spot on, well said.

FBG40

[ynnafymmi]

One wonders if the Southport stabbings will also be recorded as a racist crime?If it was a white guy stabbing three little black girls it would be.We will wait and see.

[Peter Pedant]

Some may say that even a 'scumbag' is entitled to due process.

I wont hold  my breath for any  support here for that one ! hur hur hur

Perhaps the demand that any firearm death is referred to a faceless bureaucrat who can stamp the docket - "no further action besides a QPM" was so outrageous that he (Met head) knew it wd be turned down

 

And Cousins and capstick  - are they to be accorded anonymity

[Peter Pedant]

without access to all the information and seem to have been determined to make him into a british george floyd... which he wasn't

isnt any report subject to the context of the journo  -  and the social context of the reader ?

you know like on AB when a supposed immigrant hits some little old  lady over the head - scream scream scream by the usual suspects oh lardy !

 

 

[ynnafymmi]

Once again,thank you for your input Peter.

[Peter Pedant]

no that was my carer hur hur hur

That report was published a quarter of a century ago and the police and the public they "serve" are still reeling from its effects.

erm no I think we are reeling from the effects of Cousins and Garrick - (  my personal reel was having the car stolen and being told " we think first off, you have done it yourself". They did come on the same day tho)

[fripfrip]

Atheist 13:36,sausages.

[youngmafbog]

//like everybody else apart from the police, unaware of the full circumstances.//

Probably true for Abbott and COB but one does have to wonder what Khan knew.