DS Forums

 
 

Lawful Killing - Mark Duggan BB1 8.30pm


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 13-12-2016, 12:41
andy1231
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,462
This is the point exactly and it works both ways. Our police force has been judged to be institutionally racist and lied about many of the details in this incident, shouldn't we be glad the there was an inquest and that people are still interested enough to talk about the questions which weren't answered to ensure it doesn't happen again?
Excuse me ! "Our Police Force" has not been judged anything of the kind. The Macpherson report came to the conclusion that the Metropolitan Police was, but not the Police as a whole.
I have tried not to post on this thread as some peoples ideas about the real world just beggar belief The Police are trained to shoot to kill, not to disable or shoot the weapon out of the baddies hand as so many people seem to think they should be. I pity any poor Police Officer who has to make the decision to open fire as he will recieve nothing but complaints from certain sections of the media and members of the public. How anyone can defend such a person as Duggan is beyond belief. All I would say to those people is how would you feel if the Police had taken no action against Duggan or indeed anyone who they knew or believed to be, carrying a gun and that person later shot and killed a member of their family, would you still be apologising for therm (him) I think not.
andy1231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 13-12-2016, 13:06
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,592
Excuse me ! "Our Police Force" has not been judged anything of the kind. The Macpherson report came to the conclusion that the Metropolitan Police was, but not the Police as a whole.
I have tried not to post on this thread as some peoples ideas about the real world just beggar belief The Police are trained to shoot to kill, not to disable or shoot the weapon out of the baddies hand as so many people seem to think they should be. I pity any poor Police Officer who has to make the decision to open fire as he will recieve nothing but complaints from certain sections of the media and members of the public. How anyone can defend such a person as Duggan is beyond belief. All I would say to those people is how would you feel if the Police had taken no action against Duggan or indeed anyone who they knew or believed to be, carrying a gun and that person later shot and killed a member of their family, would you still be apologising for therm (him) I think not.
Why do you see examining the behaviour of the police as defending Duggan? They are responsible for their own actions and accountable for them too. Its irrelevant who the dead man is, what is (and should be in any case like this) up for discussion and the unanswered questions are about the decisions made and actions taken of powerful organsations in this country who should be acting in the publics best interest.

Many of the those decisions and actions do no meet a professional conduct that many of us expect and need to maintain confidence in them. The actual shooting is not the biggest concern in this. Its the conspiracy and lies that have raised the questions and that is their own doing, not Duggans.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 17:57
Eve3275
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,643
The case is closed...
Not quite! The family are being allowed to appeal the lawful killing verdict. That might even be why the BBC decided to show us this oddly timed programme - because it's returning to the headlines in the new year.
Eve3275 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 19:58
Faust
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 8,097
Not quite! The family are being allowed to appeal the lawful killing verdict. That might even be why the BBC decided to show us this oddly timed programme - because it's returning to the headlines in the new year.
Exactly - case closed.
Faust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 20:48
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,592
Not quite! The family are being allowed to appeal the lawful killing verdict. That might even be why the BBC decided to show us this oddly timed programme - because it's returning to the headlines in the new year.
I can't see the outcome changing but I'm glad they showed the programme, it provided a more honest view than the one we had been led to believe.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 21:28
mrtdg82
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,079
I can't see the outcome changing but I'm glad they showed the programme, it provided a more honest view than the one we had been led to believe.
As per the majority on here.

Duggan contributed to his death by putting himself in the situation.

We fortunately live in a country where this kind of incident is rare. However I have little sympathy for someone who decides to carry a firearm. Does/should that mean death? Of course not, but I would fully understand that if I was carrying a gun it would increase the liklihood of me being shot, mistakenly or not.

It was found to be lawful killing, that's how it should be left.
mrtdg82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 21:39
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,592
As per the majority on here.

Duggan contributed to his death by putting himself in the situation.

We fortunately live in a country where this kind of incident is rare. However I have little sympathy for someone who decides to carry a firearm. Does/should that mean death? Of course not, but I would fully understand that if I was carrying a gun it would increase the liklihood of me being shot, mistakenly or not.

It was found to be lawful killing, that's how it should be left.
No questions, who cares what the truth is, no lessons learnt. Closed case and thats it?

The majority on here are not representative of the population. Hillsborough, Rotherham, Stephen Lawrence, dismissive attitudes to the victims and the smear campaigns surrounding them have taught us that you can't believe everything you're told, and thankfully we'll be a better society for it.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 21:43
mrtdg82
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,079
No questions, who cares what the truth is, no lessons learnt. Closed case and thats it?

The majority on here are not representative of the population. Hillsborough, Stephen Lawrence and the smear campaigns surrounding them have taught us that you can't believe everything you're told, and thankfully we'll be a better society for it.
You cannot compare hillsbrough to this event.

Lessons have been learnt. If he hadn't carried a gun then none of this would have happened.

I also believe most of the population couldn't care less about duggan.
mrtdg82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 21:59
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,592
You cannot compare hillsbrough to this event.

I also believe most of the population couldn't care less about duggan.
Of course you can compare all of it, theres a pattern of behaviour that needs to be addressed. Liverpool fans were painted as utter thugs and it was complete lies. There was a good programme* on about it last night, it was shocking.

*ETA - Exposure, Hillsborough - Smears, Survivors and the Search for Truth.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 22:59
mrtdg82
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,079
Of course you can compare all of it, theres a pattern of behaviour that needs to be addressed. Liverpool fans were painted as utter thugs and it was complete lies. There was a good programme* on about it last night, it was shocking.

*ETA - Exposure, Hillsborough - Smears, Survivors and the Search for Truth.
This was an individual travelling with a firearm. The set of circumstances are far more simplistic.

If there was a pattern of people getting shot by police on a regular basis then you might be onto something.

Also we have to take each incident on its own merits, to not do so would be to show prejudice. It would be wrong of anyone to use the wrong doings of an organisation some 30-40 years ago and apply it to the events that occurred here.
mrtdg82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 23:26
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,592
This was an individual travelling with a firearm. The set of circumstances are far more simplistic.

If there was a pattern of people getting shot by police on a regular basis then you might be onto something.

Also we have to take each incident on its own merits, to not do so would be to show prejudice. It would be wrong of anyone to use the wrong doings of an organisation some 30-40 years ago and apply it to the events that occurred here.

The pattern is in the conspiracy and lies, not to mention the unsubstantiated accusations to deflect from their own errors.We know they lied about some of the details of this incident, why and what else did they lie about?

For all we know that gun was never in Duggan's possession.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-12-2016, 00:11
Eve3275
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,643
I can't see the outcome changing but I'm glad they showed the programme, it provided a more honest view than the one we had been led to believe.
I can't see it changing either and since I'm a legal nerd, I'd be interested to know how Mike Mansfield won the right to appeal since you can't just appeal a verdict because you disagree with it. Maybe they decided that it was in the public interest to take this as far as it can go, because it could have wider implications about how police respond in a situation where someone is (or is thought to be) armed.
Eve3275 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-12-2016, 01:04
VichyTen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 260
I know.

I've watched the traffic cop programmes and they freely admit that they enjoy the chases and the speed. Guns and a position of power would attract a certain type of person, I'm not saying thats whats happened here but its not beyond belief that theres a loose cannon amongst them.

This is why its so important to thoroughly investigate and explain every shooting.
I sympathise with your attempts to educate some of the people on this thread. Unfortunately many on here have an absolute and unwavering blind faith in the police and therefore fail to understand that the police cannot be allowed to act with impunity. Being allowed to shoot someone simply because they are a "wrong'un" or "toe rag" is a slippery slope to something far worse in my opinion.
VichyTen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-12-2016, 04:47
DUHO
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 604
I sympathise with your attempts to educate some of the people on this thread. Unfortunately many on here have an absolute and unwavering blind faith in the police and therefore fail to understand that the police cannot be allowed to act with impunity. Being allowed to shoot someone simply because they are a "wrong'un" or "toe rag" is a slippery slope to something far worse in my opinion.
I have little faith in the police these days however I have even less faith in the scum bags of the world such as Mr Duggan.
DUHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-12-2016, 06:01
Horace Wimp
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 159
For all we know that gun was never in Duggan's possession.
Did you not watch the programme ?

Some posters just say any old guff just to be contrary, it was conclusively proved Duggan was given a gun in the taxi.

Do keep up, or you look a bit foolish .
Horace Wimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-12-2016, 06:08
RegTumbler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 283
I sympathise with your attempts to educate some of the people on this thread. Unfortunately many on here have an absolute and unwavering blind faith in the police and therefore fail to understand that the police cannot be allowed to act with impunity. Being allowed to shoot someone simply because they are a "wrong'un" or "toe rag" is a slippery slope to something far worse in my opinion.
I assume that the police are permitted to shoot someone they believe is going to shoot them, which appears to be what happened in this case or at least what the coroner's jury believed to have happened. For a case where officers in the Met shot an unarmed man one can look at the cases of Stephen Waldorf and Jean Charles de Menezes.

The days of George Dixon and the Blue Lamp for the British bobby have sadly drawn to a close and whilst I agree that the police should not shoot someone for being a toe rag or wrong'un equally they should not be expected to be shot at by gangsters, wannabe or otherwise, which Duggan undoubtedly was. I would not take the risk, and I don't see why those acting on my behalf and on behalf of law abiding folk, the police, should either.
RegTumbler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-12-2016, 06:19
RegTumbler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 283

For all we know that gun was never in Duggan's possession.
If you don't believe that the gun was in his possession then you must also believe that he was not supplied a gun by Kevin Hutchinson-Foster yet he has been convicted of supplying a gun to Mark Duggan and is doing a 7 year stretch for his troubles. As nothing can be done to bring Mr Duggan back, and as you clearly believe that the gun was planted on Duggan post mortem, then it must follow that Hutchinson-Foster's conviction is unsound and you should direct your energies into procuring Mr Hutchinson-Foster's release.
RegTumbler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-12-2016, 09:11
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,592
If you don't believe that the gun was in his possession then you must also believe that he was not supplied a gun by Kevin Hutchinson-Foster yet he has been convicted of supplying a gun to Mark Duggan and is doing a 7 year stretch for his troubles. As nothing can be done to bring Mr Duggan back, and as you clearly believe that the gun was planted on Duggan post mortem, then it must follow that Hutchinson-Foster's conviction is unsound and you should direct your energies into procuring Mr Hutchinson-Foster's release.
Kevin seemed to evade punishment for far worse crimes prior to this, an officer was dismissed because of it. On the day they say the driver took a route on which they lost him and didn't see the handover. The taxi driver denies it and his sat nav proves he didn't. Had the situation not become as serious I suspect that that the provider of the gun would ever have been properly identified. Why did all this happen?
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-12-2016, 09:19
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,592
Did you not watch the programme ?

Some posters just say any old guff just to be contrary, it was conclusively proved Duggan was given a gun in the taxi.

Do keep up, or you look a bit foolish .
I think it was proven he was handed a shoe box - the taxi driver saw it and it had his prints. There was nothing at all linking him to the gun, no prints, no dna, with ? eyes on him no one saw him throw it.

My point here being that the only information we have about a gun is directly from the police and a man who for some reason had been getting away with much worse than carrying a gun in a shoe box.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 23:19
Ted_Head
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: On the couch
Posts: 9
There's just been another man shot (murdered?) by the police on a motorway ship road and I'm gobsmacked that in 2017 we still find that armed officers are conducting operations without body cameras.

If our normal beat bobbies can wear them while they're dealing with their mundane duties and everyday incidents, why aren't they recording serious incidents such as these (potentially controversial) shootings?
Ted_Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 23:35
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,666
There's just been another man shot (murdered?) by the police on a motorway ship road and I'm gobsmacked that in 2017 we still find that armed officers are conducting operations without body cameras.

If our normal beat bobbies can wear them while they're dealing with their mundane duties and everyday incidents, why aren't they recording serious incidents such as these (potentially controversial) shootings?
That has been front page new the last few days (happened 2nd Jan) and has a thread on it. One dead , some on bail and one charged and will appear in court tomorrow as they had a semi-automatic handgun and ammunition with them in the car.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 00:12
lundavra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 25,455
There's just been another man shot (murdered?) by the police on a motorway ship road and I'm gobsmacked that in 2017 we still find that armed officers are conducting operations without body cameras.

If our normal beat bobbies can wear them while they're dealing with their mundane duties and everyday incidents, why aren't they recording serious incidents such as these (potentially controversial) shootings?
They are rolling out body cameras and several areas are using them. Firearms officers wear different kit so they will need to develop camera to fit and that don't get in their way.

I suspect that a lot of the time they will not show much. If they shot the drug dealer from inside their car then the camera would likely be obstructed and if the were out of the car then they would probably be behind the car to get some protection from the drug dealer's firearm so again the camera would be obstructed.
lundavra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 00:51
Brendan Mulcaky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Wild West Midlands
Posts: 158
One less scumbag walking (more like driving his very expensive car) on the streets.
Not a very nice character by all accounts.
I won't lose any sleep over him being slotted. Same goes for Duggan. He got what was coming to him & his acolites took it as an excuse to murder & loot the country.
Plod were too soft on them then. Water cannons, then live rounds would've worked wonders.
Brendan Mulcaky is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:45.