Skip to main content

The Guardian view on the Westminster attack inquest: the police must change | Editorial

The Met’s reluctance to admit to mistakes that may have contributed to an officer’s death is a worrying sign of a closed mindset

We all make mistakes – as individuals and organisations. The important thing is to admit and learn from them. This matters most when the mistakes are serious ones. And that is why the failure of the Metropolitan police to acccept its share of responsibility for the death of one of its own officers in a terrorist attack last year, until it was forced to do so by a coroner, is so worrying.

In a ruling delivered on Wednesday, Mark Lucraft found that PC Keith Palmer and the other four victims of last March’s attack in Westminster – Kurt Cochran, Leslie Rhodes, Aysha Frade and Andreea Cristea – were unlawfully killed by Khalid Masood, who drove into pedestrians before crashing his vehicle and running at the gates of parliament. There he murdered Mr Palmer, who was unarmed, with a knife before being shot by an armed officer who was guarding the then defence secretary, Michael Fallon. The coroner highlighted police “shortcomings” including in the supervision of two armed officers who were also on duty. Had they been at the gate, he said, instead of patrolling the grounds, “it is possible that they may have been able to prevent PC Palmer suffering fatal injuries”.

Continue reading...

from The Guardian https://ift.tt/2PccFOC

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

REPORT: Furious Spike Lee Paces Aisle, Turns Back To Stage...

REPORT: Furious Spike Lee Paces Aisle, Turns Back To Stage... (Top headline, 5th story, link ) Related stories: REVIEW: Hostless Show Starts With Rock & Rolls Off Rails... Actor knocks borders, walls during speech in Spanish... Stage designed to look like Trump hair? 'GREEN BOOK' OVERCOMES BACKLASH, NABS BEST PICTURE... Top Critics Fume... LIST: WINNERS... Advertise here from Drudge Report Feed https://ift.tt/2SUpIKy

Tiny Love Stories: ‘Who Was I to Deprive Him of Joy?’

By Unknown Author from NYT Style https://ift.tt/2UV7YAG

The Ugly History of Dual-Loyalty Charges

When Representative Ilhan Omar recently complained about “the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country,” many noted accurately that she had deployed a trope—dual loyalty—that had been used against Jews for years. But this accusation has a broader history in the United States, having been used against several religious minorities—including Muslims like Omar. Indeed, many battles over religious freedom have revolved around dual-loyalty claims. [ Read: Ilhan Omar just made it harder to have a nuanced debate about Israel ] In the 19th century, many attacks on Catholics stressed that these immigrants were pawns of a foreign power. In the 1830s, Samuel Morse—then a prominent painter and later the inventor of the telegraph—urged Americans to build “walls” and “gates” to keep out Catholic immigrants, who would always be loyal to Rome. Because these Catholic immigrants were decrepit —“halt, and blind, and naked”—they were easy to co...