Misconduct case against firearms officer W80 in fatal shooting of Jermaine Baker dismissed

The decision by an independently-chaired hearing panel came after an application for the allegations against W80 – that he breached standards of professional behaviour in relation to use of force – to be dismissed.

MPS Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said the outcome was “the right one”.

A public inquiry in 2022 found that “W80 shot Mr Baker because he honestly believed that Mr Baker posed a lethal threat and that it was reasonably necessary for him to shoot in order to defend himself”. It added that “Mr Baker was lawfully killed”.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) directed – against representations from the MPS – that W80 should still face a misconduct hearing.

The misconduct panel on Wednesday (October 15), found there was not enough evidence for the case to continue and dismissed it.

The MPS Commissioner said: “We remain acutely aware of the profound loss experienced by Mr Baker’s family and the enduring impact this case has had on them over the past decade.

“Today’s outcome is the right one. It follows a criminal investigation and a public inquiry that both found W80 acted appropriately during a fast-moving police operation to stop a highly dangerous gang freeing a prisoner.

“But W80 should never have been put in the position – an astonishing ten years after the incident – of having to once again justify his actions to counter the very real threat he believed he and his colleagues faced that day.

“It goes to the very heart of the imbalance in how police are held accountable in this country. Too often I see the trauma of good officers who are prepared to confront dangerous criminals but are then left destroyed by a bureaucratic, slow and broken system of police accountability.

“We must overhaul how policing decisions, which are taken in split seconds, are later reviewed with the benefit of hindsight on freeze frame. The current system allows criminals and their legal teams to weaponise those decisions against officers, undermining their confidence to pursue criminals or use force. In a recent meeting with W80 I was left both upset and angry by the effect this decade of legal madness has had on him and his family.”

Sir Mark added: “A rapid independent review was commissioned last October as part of work by this Government on police accountability, and reported to the Home Office in the spring. This rapid review examined the legal test for use of force in police misconduct cases – the exact issue in W80’s case.

“I hope the Government will now meet their commitment to officers by publishing and acting on the review’s findings and recommendations without delay.

“As I have said before, until we have a more just and timely system, it will continue to crush the spirit and confidence of our good officers to police London and keep us all safe.”

Paula Dodds, chair of the Metropolitan Police Federation, said: “Being a firearms officer in London is one of the world’s toughest jobs. Officers, who volunteer for this role, know the responsibility and accountability that comes with it.

“Our police officers, however, must also have confidence that they have the legal protections needed to do the difficult and dangerous jobs society expects of them.

“The actions and arguments from the IOPC have been questionable from start to finish. We have to ask who holds them to account for putting a courageous colleague through the past ten years of torment?

“Police officers are the most accountable of public services. But how can it be right for a police officer protecting the public from dangerous criminals to have such a case hanging over them for a decade? It’s hugely concerning that this case lasted so long.

“We need those in the criminal justice system making decisions potentially affecting our colleagues’ livelihoods and liberty to have some understanding of the environment we work in and the reality of policing London.”

She added: “Today’s result means our colleague W80 can put this incident behind him with an unblemished character. And we are proud to have supported him throughout the legal process. We ask that W80 and his family are now left alone to get on with their lives.

“We would like to thank W80’s legal team and the Federation representatives who have supported him for the past ten years.”

The IOPC investigation into the shooting of Mr Baker was completed in 12 months. After considering all the evidence and applying the legal framework that governs its work, it found in 2016 that there was “sufficient evidence upon which, on the balance of probabilities, a disciplinary panel could make a finding of misconduct”.

It added: “The threshold which the IOPC must apply is set out in legislation and Home Office guidance and when the case to answer test is met, the officer is required to attend a misconduct hearing.

“It’s important to reiterate that the IOPC does not decide whether an officer’s actions amount to gross misconduct – only a hearing panel can make that decision after reviewing the evidence.

“Unfortunately for everyone impacted by this case, since the completion of our investigation it has been the subject of extremely protracted legal proceedings that resulted in the High Court and Supreme Court both ruling that the IOPC had correctly applied the law when reaching our decision that the officer should attend a misconduct hearing.

“We are pleased the matter has finally reached a conclusion.”

IOPC Director Amanda Rowe said: “Our thoughts remain with Jermaine Baker’s family and friends and everyone impacted by his death.

“This case highlights the complexities of the police accountability system, which leave it open to legal challenges and lengthy delays that have a detrimental impact on the confidence of both the public and the police officers involved. We do not underestimate the impact these delays have had on Mr Baker’s family, the officer involved, and everyone affected.

“We have long called for a review of end-to-end processes and said that the complaints and disciplinary system need fundamental reform – to reduce complexity and delays and ensure the system carries the confidence of both the public and police.

“The Government has announced its intention to commission a review to address systemic barriers to timeliness in the misconduct system and we look forward to supporting that important work. We also welcome new measures being put in place by the Government as part of its police accountability review that will improve timeliness and provide much-needed clarity on the legislative framework.”

Mr Baker was shot dead by W80 on December 11, 2015, during a planned intelligence-led police operation to prevent an organised criminal gang breaking a dangerous criminal out of lawful custody.

W80 shot and killed Mr Baker as he sat in a vehicle with others in Wood Green.

Mr Baker was not in possession of a firearm. An imitation firearm, in the style of a black Uzi sub-machine gun, was recovered from the rear of the car.

The shooting of Mr Baker was referred to the then Independent Police Complaints Commission (now the IOPC) on the day of the incident.

On December 16, 2015, W80 was suspended from duty.

In June 2016, the criminal gang which took part in the plot was jailed for a total of 27 years.

In November 2016, the Independent Police Complaints Commission investigation concluded that W80 had a case to answer for gross misconduct for his use of lethal force.

In June 2017, the Crown Prosecution Service decided not to charge any police officers, including W80, with any criminal offence. W80’s suspension was lifted and he returned to work. That decision was confirmed on March 19, 2018, after Mr Baker’s family requested a review under the Victim’s Right of Review Scheme.

In March 2018, the IOPC recommended that W80 should face misconduct proceedings. The MPS did not agree and did not follow the recommendation. The force disagreed with the IOPC as to the correct self-defence test that applied in respect of police disciplinary proceedings. The MPS contended that the criminal law test of self-defence applied. The IOPC maintained that the civil law test applied.

In May 2018, the IOPC directed the MPS to start disciplinary proceedings. That direction was challenged by W80 in a judicial review claim that was taken all the way to the Supreme Court. At the first hearing of the case, the Divisional Court decided that the criminal law test applied. The Court of Appeal decided that neither the criminal law test nor the civil law test applied and that the test was simply the wording of the use of force standard in the police Standards of Professional Behaviour, ie, was the force used reasonable, proportionate and necessary in the circumstances. In its judgment on July 5, 2023, the Supreme Court decided that the civil law test applied.

An independent public inquiry commissioned by the Home Secretary heard detailed evidence about the circumstances in which W80 shot and killed Mr Baker. In July 2022, the inquiry’s report was published and included a narrative conclusion. It found that “W80 shot Mr Baker because he honestly believed that Mr Baker posed a lethal threat and that it was reasonably necessary for him to shoot in order to defend himself” and that “Mr Baker was lawfully killed”.

In September 2022, the MPS wrote in detail to the IOPC making strong representations and inviting t to review and reconsider their direction.

On September 29, 2023, the IOPC maintained tits direction that a gross misconduct hearing for W80 should be held.

In November 2023, the MPS announced that given the significant impact on all concerned of the lengthy processes to date, it was in “everyone’s interests we proceed to the misconduct hearing and conclude this matter”.

The date for the hearing was set as quickly as possible in liaison with all parties and legal teams involved.

The misconduct hearing was chaired by independent barrister Chris McKay, sitting with Chief Superintendent Darren O’Callaghan from Hampshire Constabulary and Mark Dent, an independent panel member appointed by MOPAC.

W80 has remained in the MPS’s firearms command while awaiting the hearing but is not deployed operationally. He is not suspended, the force said.