Case dropped against Met police officer who shot unarmed man

"The officer, known only as W80, shot Jermaine Baker as police stopped a plot to snatch two prisoners from a van near Wood Green crown court in 2015. Misconduct proceedings against W80 began last week at Palestra House after almost a decade of legal wrangling over the case. He was eventually accused of breaching professional standards over the use of force. But on Wednesday the case was dismissed after the panel's chair, Chris McKay, ruled there was no case to answer."

"Baker, a father of two from Tottenham, north London, was shot at close range by counter-terrorism specialist firearms officer W80, who thought he was reaching for a gun. Baker, who was sitting in the front passenger seat of a stolen Audi A6, was unarmed. An imitation firearm was later found in the back of the Audi, the misconduct hearing previously heard. W80 was in the highest tier of armed officers in the country and had been trained to carry a gun since 1998."

"Prosecutors said in 2017 that there was insufficient evidence to bring criminal charges over the shooting, but the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) directed that the officer should face misconduct proceedings, prompting a lengthy legal dispute between the watchdog and the Metropolitan police. In 2023, the supreme court found in the IOPC's favour paving the way for misconduct hearing. There was also a public inquiry into Baker's death, that concluded in 2022 that he had been lawfully killed."

Jermaine Baker was shot dead by a counter-terrorism firearms officer (W80) during a foiled prisoner-snatching near Wood Green crown court in 2015. Baker was sitting in the front passenger seat of a stolen Audi A6 and was unarmed; an imitation firearm was later found in the back of the vehicle. Prosecutors in 2017 said there was insufficient evidence for criminal charges, but the IOPC directed misconduct proceedings, prompting a prolonged legal dispute with the Metropolitan Police and a 2023 supreme court ruling in the IOPC's favour. A misconduct hearing began but was dismissed after a panel ruled there was no case to answer. Baker's family said there was no justification and the outcome dented public confidence.

Read at www.theguardian.com