Police officer charged with murder

ches

LE
If he deployed his taser & is found to have been using it against his guidance & he gets done then fair one. Rulez is rulez. Am not going to second guess any verdict based on media reports but if he was giving it big licks with the taser for no valid reason then he gets what he deserves.
 

BlackDyke

War Hero
Murder is about 'intent' and is a deliberate premeditated act.
Has the CPS found evidence that the officer intended to kill Mr Atkinson with his taser?
I suspect a CPS balls up.
 
Murder is about 'intent' and is a deliberate premeditated act.
Has the CPS found evidence that the officer intended to kill Mr Atkinson with his taser?
I suspect a CPS balls up.
It always used to be that they charged for the highest possible crime and then it is stepped down as the case proceeds, or during sentencing.

On the face of it someone killed someone and it may have been pre-planned and with intent, you don't know until the evidence is collected.

Same here in the US, they all twaddle on about shooting burglars in their houses, but the reality is that the first thing that will happen in most cases is that they are charged with murder to detain them and then it moves on from there.
 
Murder is about 'intent'.
Has the CPS found evidence that the officer intended to kill Mr Atkinson with his taser?
I suspect a CPS balls up.
I did wonder about that, but I think that the charges may relate not from the use of the Taser, but - to quote the IPOC:

The investigation gathered evidence which indicates that police contact with Mr Atkinson involved the use of a Taser, followed by a period of restraint and other uses of force​
I imagine that the investigation into the ‘period of restraint and other uses of force’ is what led to the murder charge, although Effendi’s point about starting with the most serious charge and then downgrading it may be applicable - there is an alternative charge of manslaughter which may be brought into play, I note.
 
It always used to be that they charged for the highest possible crime and then it is stepped down as the case proceeds, or during sentencing.

On the face of it someone killed someone and it may have been pre-planned and with intent, you don't know until the evidence is collected.

Same here in the US, they all twaddle on about shooting burglars in their houses, but the reality is that the first thing that will happen in most cases is that they are charged with murder to detain them and then it moves on from there.
You think so? I know of a few locals and one of my customers who have actually shot and killed burglars. Not one was charged, although one went to an interview room overnight.

Edit: Seems to be a CA thing.

C.D. Michel, firearms law attorney and spokesman for the California Rifle and Pistol Association—the official state association of the National Rifle Association founded in 1875—explained that there is a law in California that creates a legal presumption that when you use deadly force to defend yourself against an intruder in your home, you’re presumed to be acting in lawful self defense.
 

BlackDyke

War Hero
I did wonder about that, but I think that the charges may relate not from the use of the Taser, but - to quote the IPOC:

The investigation gathered evidence which indicates that police contact with Mr Atkinson involved the use of a Taser, followed by a period of restraint and other uses of force​
I imagine that the investigation into the ‘period of restraint and other uses of force’ is what led to the murder charge, although Effendi’s point about starting with the most serious charge and then downgrading it may be applicable - there is an alternative charge of manslaughter which may be brought into play, I note.
This case has been floating about in the West Mids for quite a while now.
I hope the CPS have got their evidence lined up properly.
Personally I would have expected a Manslaughter or Sec 18 GBH charge in the first instance.
Of course it could be premeditated murder but somehow I think not especially as the alleged perpetrator would have had zilch chance in getting away with it and to be honest our police officers aren't known for actually murdering suspects.
I believe Mr Atkinson showed signs of mental illness and dealing with an out of control one can be very dangerous.
 
From what I can gather, Tazer is used as a last ,less than lethal option when dealing with a violent or armed suspect.
I know a couple of coppers and it's not something that is used for shits & giggles. If it's deployed, even just "Red Dotting" someone it's a ton of paperwork justifying why you've had to do it.
 
I did wonder about that, but I think that the charges may relate not from the use of the Taser, but - to quote the IPOC:

The investigation gathered evidence which indicates that police contact with Mr Atkinson involved the use of a Taser, followed by a period of restraint and other uses of force​
I imagine that the investigation into the ‘period of restraint and other uses of force’ is what led to the murder charge, although Effendi’s point about starting with the most serious charge and then downgrading it may be applicable - there is an alternative charge of manslaughter which may be brought into play, I note.
The BEEB, of course, forgot to balance the piece with a reminder of Atkinson being out of his head on drink and drugs, trying to kick the door in of his dad's house and dad wouldn't let him in because he was obviously afraid for his own safety.
He was tasered up to three times according to early reports but we will have to wait and see what comes out in the trial.

(I was never taser trained, nor even saw one, so I couldn't comment on procedures and use.)
 
Murder is about 'intent' and is a deliberate premeditated act.
Has the CPS found evidence that the officer intended to kill Mr Atkinson with his taser?
I suspect a CPS balls up.

"The intent for murder is an intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (GBH). Foresight is no more than evidence from which the jury may draw the inference of intent, c.f. R v Woollin [1999] 1 Cr App R 8 (HOL). The necessary intention exists if the defendant feels sure that death, or serious bodily harm, is a virtual certainty as a result of the defendant's actions and that the defendant appreciated that this was the case - R v Matthews (Darren John) [2003] EWCA Crim 192. "

Or to paraphrase.. If you can convince the Jury that he must have known what he was doing....

Chances are that it'll end up as a "reckless" or "careless" manslaughter rap...
 
To quote the BBC

An alternative charge of an unlawful act manslaughter has also been put forward by the CPS for the officer charged with murder, known as "Officer A".




Archie
 

Joshua Slocum

LE
Book Reviewer
he had health issues !!!!


and a heart problem

a great pity as he was once a very talented footballer, and catalyst for many other young men to work hard to succeed in the game

but his drug use contributed to his medical condition, sad really as footballers tend to stay fit into old age
 
he had health issues !!!!


and a heart problem

a great pity as he was once a very talented footballer, and catalyst for many other young men to work hard to succeed in the game

but his drug use contributed to his medical condition, sad really as footballers tend to stay fit into old age
Drug use.
Just another junkie off his tits then.
 
It always used to be that they charged for the highest possible crime and then it is stepped down as the case proceeds, or during sentencing.

On the face of it someone killed someone and it may have been pre-planned and with intent, you don't know until the evidence is collected.

Same here in the US, they all twaddle on about shooting burglars in their houses, but the reality is that the first thing that will happen in most cases is that they are charged with murder to detain them and then it moves on from there.
Pretty much as it should be, or the easy route to getting away with murder is just shoot the victim in your house having made it look like someone broke in.


That nails old geezer who killed a coked up pikey a couple of years ago was arrested on suspicion; quite right too.


No charges, but you can't just have people killing each other and saying "it was a burglary/I'm a copper/I thought it was Piers Morgan*".






*... if you're genuine on that one, not a jury in Christendom will convict.
 
he had health issues !!!!


and a heart problem

a great pity as he was once a very talented footballer, and catalyst for many other young men to work hard to succeed in the game

but his drug use contributed to his medical condition, sad really as footballers tend to stay fit into old age
Irrelevant. You take your victim as you find them.

If you want to read more about this search for eggshell skull rule.
 
Apparently the family are up in arms because it has taken so long to press charges. It whiffs a bit political.

The other point that occurs to me is that police constables have been reduced in both numbers and stature, making it (imho) more likely that baton, pepper spray or tazer is deployed.
 
It's ridiculous that cases like this can't be fast- tracked......... if you've got something like this on your plate, it can ruin your life and career, if it's dragged on for years.
 

Latest Threads

Top