Duggan verdict

[Shrimpers are Magic]

Yes I know what the job of a coroner is.

His historic police record (before the fatal incident) was revealed by a senior police officer. I'm pretty happy to take that as fact. He was obviously a bad person who was rightly being closely watched and the attempt to arrest him and seize the gun was perfectly fine. However, it still does not excuse the shooting of an unarmed person, no matter what was on his record or what he'd done 5 mins ago.

Who's going around in circles now?
Previous posts you were implying that police planted evidence but now you are happy to take words of senior police officers, when it suits eh?
Let me close the circle for you, a jury found by 8 to 2 for a Lawful killing.

 

[Pubey]

Who's going around in circles now?
Previous posts you were implying that police planted evidence but now you are happy to take words of senior police officers, when it suits eh?
Let me close the circle for you, a jury found by 8 to 2 for a Lawful killing.

How did the gun get 20ft from Duggan if no one saw it being thrown? The minicab was being followed. There are still unanswered questions. Conspiracy/corruption/incompetence... whatever it is it's a ****up by the Met.

Surely the police would be overstating his record wherever possible? They've said things like 'he was one of the 48 most violent criminals in Europe' - but then had to say (probably after Duggan's family revealed it), that he only had two relatively minor (non violent) convictions, and that the 'evidence' for him shooting someone in a club was the lowest grade of reliability.

An officer lying about a record is pretty dumb because it's hard evidence, easily corroborated.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Let me close the circle for you, a jury found by 8 to 2 for a Lawful killing.

Yes but they seem to have ignored Witness B's evidence:-

"Most surprisingly for the family was the jury's apparent ability to totally disregard the evidence of Witness B, the only independent witness to see the shooting. ... He has no historical links to Tottenham and no links to Duggan or his family. He was adamant that Duggan had a BlackBerry in one hand, and that both of his hands were held above head height in a gesture of surrender as he was gunned down."

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/09/mark-duggan-verdict-relations-police

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

Yes but they seem to have ignored Witness B's evidence:-

"Most surprisingly for the family was the jury's apparent ability to totally disregard the evidence of Witness B, the only independent witness to see the shooting. ... He has no historical links to Tottenham and no links to Duggan or his family. He was adamant that Duggan had a BlackBerry in one hand, and that both of his hands were held above head height in a gesture of surrender as he was gunned down."

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/09/mark-duggan-verdict-relations-police

He was 150 yards away - his evidence was unreliable.

sorry just done a quick conversion - looking on from a window in a flat over 100m away - should have said 109 yards!
still unreliable

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

He was 150 yards away - his evidence was unreliable.

Reliable enough to see than Duggan had a Blackberry in his hand rather than a gun.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25657206

 

[Pubey]

He was 150 yards away - his evidence was unreliable.

sorry just done a quick conversion - looking on from a window in a flat over 100m away - should have said 109 yards!
still unreliable

I agree that from 100m it's pretty hard to see what's in someone's hand.

However he was more accurate that the officer, who was a few metres away!

 

[Jam_Man]

I think whether he was a saint or a convicted criminal the key thing is did the police officer have good cause to think he had a gun with him and was he going to use it.

If they had good intelligence he was travelling with a weapon then you can understand them being on edge, but its clear he didnt have a gun on him at the time he was shot.

So the question really is then is it ok to shoot someone just because they may have a gun.

If the jury ruled he threw the gun before being shot and he was still lawfully killed they must have decided he was a threat, which seems pretty harsh.

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

How did the gun get 20ft from Duggan if no one saw it being thrown? The minicab was being followed. There are still unanswered questions. Conspiracy/corruption/incompetence... whatever it is it's a ****up by the Met.

Surely the police would be overstating his record wherever possible? They've said things like 'he was one of the 48 most violent criminals in Europe' - but then had to say (probably after Duggan's family revealed it), that he only had two relatively minor (non violent) convictions, and that the 'evidence' for him shooting someone in a club was the lowest grade of reliability.

An officer lying about a record is pretty dumb because it's hard evidence, easily corroborated.

They have had a court case for 4 months. The Duggan family had a brief asking all these questions. What bit of this are people not understanding?
You may not like the outcome but that doesn't mean the outcome isn't the correct one.

 

[Jam_Man]

I agree that from 100m it's pretty hard to see what's in someone's hand.

However he was more accurate that the officer, who was a few metres away!

He was pretty accurate, only needed two shots.

 

[ldnfatso]

Scumbag, better off where he is!

 

[Pubey]

They have had a court case for 4 months. The Duggan family had a brief asking all these questions. What bit of this are people not understanding?
You may not like the outcome but that doesn't mean the outcome isn't the correct one.

The outcome is that no one knows how the gun got there. That's not particularly satisfying, and seems pretty remarkable. 11 highlight trained armed police officers can't see when a gun is thrown...:stunned:

 

[KAB]

As with so many cases and especially where there has been a loss of life, the aggrieved seek justice. However, the law and justice are not the same thing and this case illustrates the point perfectly. Was Duggan killed unjustly, probably, did the police act within the law in regards to firearm use, probably. No one wins and another life is wasted.

 

[Pubey]

As with so many cases and especially where there has been a loss of life, the aggrieved seek justice. However, the law and justice are not the same thing and this case illustrates the point perfectly. Was Duggan killed unjustly, probably, did the police act within the law in regards to firearm use, probably. No one wins and another life is wasted.

I think that's a very sensible summing up.

 

[MK Shrimper]

So when can I go on the rampage? I could do with some new trainers. :dim:

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

As with so many cases and especially where there has been a loss of life, the aggrieved seek justice. However, the law and justice are not the same thing and this case illustrates the point perfectly. Was Duggan killed unjustly, probably, did the police act within the law in regards to firearm use, probably. No one wins and another life is wasted.

Law and justice are not the same thing depending on your definition of justice of course.
Just to add to the points you make, did Duggan go and collect a firearm with the intention of killing or seriously wounding another?

 

[Pubey]

Law and justice are not the same thing depending on your definition of justice of course.
Just to add to the points you make, did Duggan go and collect a firearm with the intention of killing or seriously wounding another?

We'll never know, because a trigger happy cop shot him dead when he was unarmed.

Duggan could have been selling it for a quick £100. He could have been about to use it to hold up a shop. He could have been about to use it to shoot a rival gang member. We'll never know...

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

We'll never know, because a trigger happy cop shot him dead when he was unarmed.

Duggan could have been selling it for a quick £100. He could have been about to use it to hold up a shop. He could have been about to use it to shoot a rival gang member. We'll never know...

we'll never know because the police stopped the vile piece of vermin in it's tracks.

 

[GBJ]

it's law abiding citizens 1 nasty gun wielding gangland scum 0

:clap:

The day that an armed Policeman in the UK can execute an unarmed man in the street (American style) and legally get away with it, is a bad day for democracy.

How about Police 1-Democracy 0?

#barnabluegetsitwrongagain

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

So when can I go on the rampage? I could do with some new trainers. :dim:

Best to wait until the summer.I understand Boris will have some new water cannons ready to try out by then.:winking::winking:

 

[KAB]

we'll never know because the police stopped the vile piece of vermin in it's tracks.

Ah, the old vile vermin arguement, we live in enlightened times do we not.