Hart continues that "I would need to be able to specifically prove that Mr Mubenga was held in a 'severely splinted position' – that is bent over with his head either on or below his knees and his diaphragm restricted - for a sufficient period of time to show that it was the actions of the security guards – and nothing else – which was the more than a minimal cause of Mr Mubenga’s death."
He also cites "conflicting witness accounts", that "no witness had an unrestricted or uninterrupted view of what happened", a defence that was repeatedly laughed out of overnight courts during rioting last year.
Hart has furthermore ruled out a charge of corporate manslaughter for G4S. Despite accepting that the guards' training had "shortcomings", he maintains that the training had previously been found “safe and fit for purpose”.
There has been no shred of evidence to suggest that Mubenga died of natural causes or that his death was not intrinsically linked to his deportation and treatment. Nonetheless, because the abuse was spread across so many agencies and people, the blame will lie with no one and everyone involved will walk away free. The salt in the wound is that, in health and safety Britain, G4S training is judged as acceptable and "safe" despite its shortcomings having contributed to a death. Presumably normal standards of safety don't apply to foreigners.
Mubenga's widow, Makenda Adrienne Kambana, says "he was crying for help before he was killed. We can't understand why the officers and G4S are not answerable to the law as we or any other member of the public would be".
The full CPS statement can be read at http://blog.cps.gov.uk/2012/07/cps-decision-on-death-of-jimmy-mubenga.html