Headline

UK Police Dismiss Nigerian-British Officer For ‘biting’ Colleague

Published

11 months ago

October 30, 2024

The Metropolitan Police Service of the United Kingdom has dismissed a Nigerian-British officer, Shola Balogun of Bromley Police Station, for biting a colleague (name withheld) at a birthday party in Bexleyheath, Kent.

This was disclosed in a hearing that was held from October 21-23, 2024, and chaired by a high-ranking officer, Christopher McKay, with IPM Amanda Harvey and Assessor-Detective Superintendent, Kirsty Mead as the panel members.

The document of the hearing notice sighted by our correspondent revealed that Balogun, a Police Constable, had attended a 40th birthday party of another police officer with about 70 other persons in attendance at Goals Sports Bar, stressing that he and the officer (victim) were the two police officers present at the event aside from the celebrant.

The document also explained that the incident happened on April 22, 2022, as a result of a light-hearted horseplay between them in the past but with no significant falling out.

It read, “On the 22nd of April 2022 about 70 people attended a 40th birthday party for a police officer at Goals Sports Bar in Bexleyheath, Kent. Among those attending were members of her work team, ERT C, who were based at Bromley Police Station. PC Shola Balogun and PC (name withheld) were two of those police officers who were present at the party. The officers knew each other well as work colleagues, having been based at Bromley Police Station together since June 2018.

“There had been light-hearted horseplay between them in the past but no significant falling out. Both describe a good friendly working relationship. The victim said he arrived at the party at about 9 pm after meeting other officers in a nearby pub. PC Balogun arrived after the victim and he admitted that had been drinking alcohol before his arrival. There is a dispute about the incidents that took place between them during that evening.

“The victim says that at around 23.30 he walked up a flight of stairs from the dancefloor and found PC Balogun in front of him. PC Balogun was about an arms-length away when he reached out and grabbed the victim’s spectacles off his face and dropped them on the floor. This surprised the victim and he claimed to have then approached PC Balogun in a friendly manner whereupon PC Balogun responded by pushing him with his right hand to the victim’s throat area. When the victim then complained about PC Balogun’s actions in a conversation at a time when they were only a foot apart because the music was so loud, PC Balogun is alleged to have leaned forward and bitten the victim on the right side of his face.”

However, Balogun’s account of the event was different from that of the victim as he claimed to have only knocked the victim’s glasses off by accident.

He also denied pushing the victim or biting him in the face as alleged but medical reports and diagnosis revealed that the victim was bitten.

The findings in the document read, “The Regulation 30 Notice alleges that by acting in the way described PC Balogun brought discredit to the police service and undermined public trust in the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). This is alleged to have been a breach of the standard of Discreditable Conduct.

“Discreditable Conduct is explained in the College of Policing Code of Ethics as not behaving in a manner, whether on or off duty, which brings discredit to the police service or undermines public confidence in policing. This is further explained as being a requirement that police officers must keep in mind at all times that the public expects police officers to maintain the highest standards of behaviour. Police officers are instructed to always think about how a member of the public may regard their behaviour, whether on or off duty. The Panel is satisfied that PC Balogun breached this standard by biting the victim. Assaulting a fellow officer is clearly unacceptable and discreditable behaviour.”

Meanwhile, the panel claimed to have spoken to people including an inspector who had been his line manager for close to five years about Balogun’s behavioural history and they all spoke highly of him and his qualities as a police officer, adding, “To counter-balance the evidence of his good character the Panel has received evidence of his previous disciplinary history.”

“The Panel bears in mind the words of Lord Justice Maurice Kay in the well-known case of Salter v Chief Constable OF Dorset [2012] EWCA Civ 1047 when he said, “As to personal mitigation, just as an unexpectedly errant solicitor can usually refer to an unblemished past and the esteem of his colleagues, so will a police officer often be able so to do. However, because of the importance of public confidence, the potential of such mitigation is necessarily limited.”

The panel further agreed on dismissal without notice as the outcome of Balogun’s action.

“In the present case, PC Balogun does not have an unblemished past and the previous misconduct proved against him is serious. In the present case, he committed a deliberate assault on a colleague without any explanation or justification. He humiliated PC Final Written Warning is not appropriate in this case. The only appropriate and proportionate outcome in this case is Dismissal Without Notice,” the document added.

Headline

Israel-Palestine Conflict: Nigeria, 141 Countries Endorse Two-State Solution

Published

35 minutes ago

September 13, 2025

Editor

Nigeria on Friday joined 141 other countries to endorse New York Declaration on two-State solution between Israel and Palestine at the UN headquarters in New York.

Applause rang out in the UN General Assembly Hall as countries endorsed the declaration on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine and implementation of the two-State solution with Israel.

The New York Declaration is the outcome of an international conference held in July at UN Headquarters, organised by France and Saudi Arabia, which resumes later this month.

The General Assembly comprises all 193 UN Member States and 142 countries voted in favour of a resolution backing the document.

Israel voted against it, alongside nine other countries: Argentina, Hungary, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Tonga and the United States, while 12 nations abstained.

Prior to the vote, French Ambassador Jérôme Bonnafont recalled that the New York Declaration “lays out a single roadmap to deliver the two-State solution”.

This involves an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, release of all hostages held there, and the establishment of a Palestinian State that is both viable and sovereign.

The roadmap further calls for the disarmament of Hamas and its exclusion from governance in Gaza, normalisation between Israel and the Arab countries, as well as collective security guarantees.

Headline

I Won’t Allow His Movement To Die, Charlie Kirk’s Widow Vows

Published

1 hour ago

September 13, 2025

Editor

Erika Kirk, widow of prominent right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, has vowed to continue her husband’s work after US authorities confirmed the arrest of his alleged assassin.

A grieving Erika, in a live video on Friday, paid tribute to her late husband, describing him as “the perfect father…the perfect husband.”

“The evil-doers responsible for my husband’s assassination have no idea what they have done.

“The movement my husband built will not die. It won’t. I refuse to let that happen,” she added.

Tribune Online reports that the suspected killer of Kirk has been identified as 22-year-old Tyler Robinson.

Earlier, US President Donald Trump confirmed that a suspect had been arrested after a massive manhunt.

“Somebody very close to him turned him in,” Trump told Fox News in a live studio interview.

“The person was involved with law enforcement, but was a person of faith, a minister, and brought him to a US Marshal who was fantastic.

“They drove into the police headquarters, and he’s there now.”

He added: “We have the person that we think is the person we’re looking for.”

Kirk, 31, who was known for rallying youth support for Trump, was shot dead on Wednesday during an appearance at a Utah university.

Headline

California Lawmakers Approve Ban On Face Masks For Authorities

Published

2 hours ago

September 13, 2025

Editor

California lawmakers in the United States have approved a bill that would prevent most law enforcement officers from covering their faces while on duty.

According to ABC News, the measure follows a series of immigration raids in Los Angeles.

This is the first bill of its kind to pass a state legislature, though similar proposals have been introduced in Congress and in states such as Tennessee, Michigan, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.

The California Legislature, controlled by Democrats, passed the bill on Thursday as part of a broader response to immigration enforcement actions.

If signed into law, the bill would prohibit local and federal officers, including immigration agents, from using neck gaiters, ski masks and other facial coverings while carrying out official duties. Exceptions include undercover work, protective medical masks and tactical gear.

Gov. Gavin Newsom of California has about a month to decide whether to sign it. He has criticised the use of masks by federal agents but in July questioned whether the state has the authority to regulate them. His office said Friday it does not usually comment on pending bills.

According to supporters, the legislation is needed, especially after the Supreme Court this week allowed the federal government to continue large-scale immigration operations in Los Angeles.

Assemblymember Juan Carrillo, vice chair of the Latino caucus, said the ruling is “effectively allowing federal agents stop suspects based solely on their race, language, or job.”

“How is anyone supposed to reasonably believe that they are law enforcement officers and not masked individuals trying to kidnap you?” he said before the vote. “Imagine the absolute fear of being pulled over at gunpoint by a group of masked individuals.”

Backers also cited constitutional law expert Erwin Chemerinsky of the University of California, Berkeley, who argued that federal employees must still follow state laws unless doing so prevents them from performing their duties. “ICE agents have never before worn masks when apprehending people, and that never has posed a problem. Nor have other officers of local, state and federal law enforcement faced dangers from the public because they don’t wear masks in the streets,” he wrote in an opinion piece for the Sacramento Bee.

Republicans and law enforcement groups strongly opposed the bill, saying it puts officers at risk.

“Bad guys wear masks because they don’t want to get caught. Good guys wear masks because they don’t want to get killed,” said Republican state Sen. Kelly Seyarto on Thursday.

The use of masks by immigration agents has deepened the divide between those who oppose Trump-era enforcement policies and those who support them.

Trump administration officials defended the practice, saying agents have faced growing harassment in public and online. They argue covering their faces helps protect officers and their families. Democrats and several state attorneys general counter that the masks cause public fear and should be banned.