Why we are always unforgiving?

Question

Can someone tell me why we are asking for the head of Met. Police commisssioner, when the woman commandor who was leading the opration, which went wrong and resulted in unfortunate death of an innocent person, got promotion. I know the top man should accept responsibility but surely not not at any price when we rewrad the negligence of one and punish the one who was relying on of one his senior officers, whom is not mention in any report for failing to do her job in the first place.

Answer 1

Legally the top man is responsible, however I agree that it doesn't always make sense for that person to take the blame for his staff, particularly when he would not have had up to the minute knowledge of what was happening, however he did mislead the press and public and tried to prevent an investigation.
Of course, when politics is involved there will always be someone demanding a resignation whether it's justified or not.

Answer 2

How amazing that Mr Spock should not know about the bombings in London and the accidental killing of Jean Charles de Menzies because the armed police thought he was one of the terrorists, when he was a completely innocent man.
With regard to your question, the operation was badly managed and supervised, and the policemen who did the killing acted in blind panic and with a total lack of judgement, or even compassion as there was no indication that JC de M was carrying any explosives. There was nothing remotely unusual in his behaviour: an ordinary man going through a daily routine, catching an underground train.
The female officer in charge should not have been promoted.
It seems customary to carry the blame right up a chain of command in many organisations, as the "head" governs the body and carries the can when there is negligence or deliberate oversight. In this case Ian Blair was only guilty of being the head of an organisation that ,in an excess of zeal, made a disastrous error. The family of the young man is naturally pressing for a head to roll, and his is the obvious one.

Answer 3

The top man should go.

He was the one who was appearing all over the media, bragging about how well his force had handled the situation. His force did NOT handle the situation, they left an innocent man dead. Blair's head should roll.

Answer 4

One has to question the whole operation, but at the end of it he is in charge and should be accountable. Whether he should go is debatable, but no one has formally apologised even for the death of this poor man.

Answer 5

Trouble is he's stuck with the name Blair, which kinda has dodgy geezer connotations these days. Unfair I know, but there it is.

Answer 6

When you write something please tell in which city are you located or the comments refer to where? Otherwise is just dust in the sand

Answer 7

He told lies to the public,,,,therefore cant be trusted,,,,

Answer 8

why in deed