Former IOPC Investigator Defends Decision to Charge Officer in Kaba Shooting Despite Acquittal, Admits Public Disorder Fears Played Role

Amidst Criticism and Acquittal, IOPC’s Lead Investigator Acknowledges External Pressures Shaped Decision to Pursue Murder Charges Against Police Officer

In a recent interview with the BBC’s Panorama, Sal Naseem, former head of the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) investigation into the shooting of Chris Kaba, spoke publicly about the case for the first time. Naseem, now working for ‘The Police Foundation’—a think tank on UK policing—defended the decision to charge Metropolitan Police Sgt Martyn Blake with murder, despite a jury’s quick acquittal and widespread criticism of the prosecution. Sgt Blake, a highly trained member of the specialist firearms unit, was found not guilty of murder last month after a unanimous verdict was reached in just a few hours.

Naseem’s statements in his interview were unequivocal: he said he didn’t believe that Chris Kaba posed a sufficient threat to justify lethal force. This stance is one he maintains, despite the court’s verdict and the support for Sgt Blake from many within the police and the public. His assessment during the investigation also contrasted sharply with the actual circumstances of the night Kaba was shot. In what had been a chaotic incident, police had followed Kaba through South London after linking his vehicle to a shooting the night before. Body-worn camera footage and officer testimony revealed that Kaba’s car was blocked in. Yet, he continued to rev his engine and ram several police vehicles, all while officers repeatedly ordered him to stop.

The case ultimately hinged on Sgt Blake’s testimony and evidence showing that he genuinely believed there was an imminent threat to life. His statement, that he discharged his weapon in a split-second to prevent potential harm to himself and his colleagues, resonated with the jury, leading them to conclude that he acted within his duties as an armed officer.

External Pressures and Short-Term Thinking?

Following Kaba’s death, the IOPC’s rapid classification of the case as a murder investigation has been met with heavy criticism. Many, including former Met Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu, questioned the speed with which the murder classification was announced. Basu suggested that the IOPC may have acted under intense public and political pressure. “To come out so early in an investigation and announce that they are looking at it as a potential murder investigation, it seems remarkable that happened so quickly,” he said. Basu’s statements reflect the feelings of many within the police community that outside pressure—rather than the evidence—may have played too large a role in shaping the IOPC’s approach.

---

---

Worryingly, Naseem admitted that fears of public disorder influenced the IOPC’s quick decision, a concern that the investigation team took seriously as mainstream media outlets demanded swift action against Sgt Blake, and that the officer be publicly identified. This situation was further complicated by the fact that, when Kaba’s criminal history and gang affiliations were finally disclosed after the trial, it became clear that he had been an active member of the violent gang “67,” had a string of prior convictions, and was known to use weapons as a means of settling disputes.

The Reality of Officers’ Split-Second Decisions

In defending his position, Naseem stated that he had a “visceral reaction” to the footage of the shooting. “It’s a split-second decision but for [Sgt Blake] to discharge the firearm there has to be a significant threat to life,” he said. Yet, time and again, officers face extreme, rapidly evolving situations where decisions are made in seconds. According to former Assistant Commissioner Basu, the chaotic scene with Kaba’s car revving, ramming other cars, and failing to comply with orders was nothing short of life-threatening. He noted, “We’re asking a huge amount of police officers to make different decisions to save life in those circumstances.”

To underscore the real-life threats that vehicles can pose, one need only look at a tragic series of cases where officers have lost their lives at the hands of drivers who weaponised their vehicles:

• PC Jon Odell (2000), killed while conducting speed checks in Margate when a suspect deliberately ran him down.

• PC Alison Armitage (2001), killed in Greater Manchester by a driver who ran her over twice to escape arrest.

• PCs Bryan Moore and Andy Munn (2002), killed in Leicestershire when a suspect rammed their patrol car at high speed.

• PC Ged Walker (2003), dragged to death by a suspect’s car in Nottinghamshire.

• PC Phillip Pratt (2009), struck and killed by an oncoming car while managing traffic in Kent.

• PC Phillipa Reynolds (2013), killed in Londonderry after being struck by a stolen vehicle.

• PC Andy Duncan (2013) was struck while on duty during a speed check operation in London.

• PC Dave Phillips (2015), killed while deploying a stinger device when a suspect deliberately veered towards him in Wallasey.

• PC Gareth Browning (2017) was struck during a pursuit in Reading, leading to injuries that ultimately proved fatal.

• PC Andrew Harper (2019), dragged to his death while attempting to apprehend suspects fleeing a burglary.

These cases serve as harrowing reminders of the risks that officers face when suspects use vehicles as deadly weapons. When viewed in light of these tragic events, it becomes clear that an officer’s decision to protect themselves from an aggressive driver isn’t just reasonable—it’s often a matter of survival.

---

Have a story to share? Reach out to our team in complete confidence at: contact@emergency-services.news

---

Changing Narratives and Conflicting Agendas

Many officers feel that public commentary about police use of force reflects a lack of understanding about the realities of armed policing. In response to Kaba’s death, social media and mainstream outlets were quick to condemn Sgt Blake’s actions without seeing the full picture or awaiting a thorough investigation. Public demands were made for armed officers to “deflate tyres” or “pull suspects out of moving cars” rather than using their firearms—tactics that may seem feasible from the comfort of a screen but, in reality, are ineffective or even dangerous in high-stakes situations.

Further complicating matters, Naseem’s change in role—moving from the IOPC to ‘The Police Foundation,’ a think tank—raises questions about consistency and impartiality in oversight. His defence of the IOPC’s early murder investigation is starkly at odds with the evidence presented in court and the jury’s findings, leaving many in the police community questioning how much weight was given to external pressures rather than facts on the ground.

Conclusion: A Clear Need for Understanding and Support

The jury’s rapid decision to acquit Sgt Blake highlights the disconnect between courtroom findings and the IOPC’s initial handling of the case. In the field, officers do not have the luxury of hindsight or endless deliberation. In high-stakes situations like Sgt Blake’s, an officer’s priority is to stop a threat and ensure the safety of themselves and their colleagues. With a verdict reached in just a few hours, the jury’s stance on Blake’s decision was clear—his actions reflected a genuine response to the perceived danger.

As this case shows, the pressure on police officers to act in life-threatening situations is immense, and scrutiny from those who do not face these realities often distorts public perception. While oversight is essential, so is a grounded understanding of the real, immediate threats police officers confront daily.

The Briefing Room: Insider Insights for Subscribers

Step into The Briefing Room—our exclusive space where we dive deeper into this story and more. With firsthand experience in both the emergency services and armed forces, we deliver reporting grounded in real-world expertise. Paid subscribers gain not only our unfiltered insights but also access to an exclusive chat where they can connect, share thoughts, and engage directly with our team.

As a reader-supported publication, we invite you to become a paid subscriber. Your support helps sustain our work and gives you access to the perspectives we reserve for insiders.

Seconds Count: The Reality of Split-Second Policing Decisions

The case of Sgt Martyn Blake and the shooting of Chris Kaba has brought into sharp relief the often misunderstood and highly scrutinised world of armed policing. Sal Naseem's recent interview with Panorama, where he defended the IOPC's decision to charge Blake with murder, serves as a stark reminder that the public's court of opinion can be far more unforgiving and less informed than the court of law.

Let's cut to the chase: The decision to charge an officer with murder, especially in such a short timeframe and under the shadow of potential public disorder, smacks of