The basic facts around the death of George Nkencho are not in dispute. However, lest there be any question that this news platform might offer a biased, or Garda-friendly version of those facts, I will let you read the summary provided by our distinctly more progressive friends over at The Journal:
Mr Nkencho was shot dead in the front garden of his house in Clonee, Dublin during a stand-off. He was armed with a kitchen knife and had allegedly assaulted a worker in a shop. He was 27 years old at the time.
During the incident, Mr Nkencho appeared to lunge at gardaí before being shot multiple times by the Garda Armed Support Unit. Gardaí had used pepper spray and tasers against Mr Nkencho in the lead up to the shooting.
Post-mortem results revealed Mr Nkencho died as a result of multiple gunshot wounds to the torso.
His family claim he was suffering from mental health issues for several months before his death and that the level of force used against him by gardaí was disproportionate.
Mr Nkencho’s death was followed by protests and an increase in racial tensions in the suburb.
The Gardaí, and the armed forces, are entrusted with a monopoly on the use of force in the Republic of Ireland. This means that outside the legal defence of self defence (if you kill somebody who is threatening your life) only the Gardaí or the Army can legitimately and legally deploy lethal force and take somebody’s life if they determine that circumstances require it.
That is an awesome power. That it should be deployed almost never is obvious, and that when it is deployed there should be significant investigation and oversight is also self-evident. It would not be in anyone’s interests for Gardaí not to be hesitant when pulling the trigger. The use of lethal force by the state should always and everywhere be the absolute last resort.
The Nkencho family, naturally enough, are of the view that in the case of their son, there were other options available to Gardaí. That is the reason why the Garda who fired the lethal shots has been under investigation, and subject to potential criminal prosecution, for a number of years. By virtue of the decision taken this week not to prosecute that Garda, we can reasonably surmise that the investigation into his actions concluded that his use of lethal force was reasonable and justifiable, and therefore not a matter for criminal prosecution.
Indeed, the facts as reported by the Journal (and indeed every other outlet) tend to support this conclusion: That Mr. Nkencho was armed is not in dispute. That he was suspected of assaulting somebody earlier that same day is not in dispute. That he lunged, with a knife in his hand, towards Gardaí is not in dispute. That Gardaí had already tried non-lethal methods to subdue him, including pepper spray and tasers, is not in dispute.
What is in dispute, in essence, is whether there were further non lethal measures that might have been taken which might, in hindsight, have saved Mr. Nkencho’s life. His family and loved ones will, self-evidently, have every motivation to believe that had Gardaí done something differently, their son might still be alive. This is, I think, to place unreasonable expectations on human beings in a highly stressful environment.
One of the reasons that guns are not legal in Ireland in the way that they are in the United States is that human beings who are armed with a gun will be inclined to use it, especially in highly stressful situations. That is to say, if somebody is charging at you armed with a knife, and you believe you are at risk of serious injury, your instinct will be to stop that person. If you are armed yourself with a baton, you may use the baton. If you are armed with a gun, you are likely to use the gun. The instinctive human reflex towards self-preservation will trump every other consideration. Since guns tend to be more lethal than batons, legal gun ownership will increase the homicide rate.
In this case, then, the decision to deploy officers with guns was arguably a more proximate cause of Mr. Nkencho’s death than the decision of one of those officers to discharge his gun. Had he been armed with a baton instead, perhaps things might have been different.
However, the decision to deploy armed officers was also, very clearly, understandable and logical: Here was somebody armed, and dangerous. Suspected of already doing harm to a civilian. With known mental health issues. The Gardaí had no reasonable way of being sure, once they received that information, that they might not be dealing with a hostage type situation, or a situation where somebody posed an immediate threat to the lives of other people in his vicinity. They did not know, for example, that they would not arrive at a property and find a person with a knife to somebody else’s throat, potentially requiring the kind of intervention that only a gun can reliably provide. Deploying armed officers was a reasonable and obvious decision, in the interests of public safety.
In the midst of this situation, it is not in dispute that Mr. Nkencho ultimately chose – whether in the fullness of his mind or otherwise – to charge or lunge with a knife at an armed garda. That decision, and no other decision, is ultimately why he is no longer with us today.
It is right and proper that there should have been a lengthy investigation into this matter, and that all the circumstances should have been investigated, however stressful that process undoubtedly was for the unfortunate Garda at the centre of it. The public need to know, and be confident, that a Garda that abuses or misuses their right to use lethal force would be held to account.
For now, and pending appeal, that process has concluded. It has found no cause to prosecute the Garda involved. That should be the end of what is, undoubtedly, a very regrettable matter for all involved. Justice, in this matter, has already been done.