|
||||||||
Lawful Killing - Mark Duggan BB1 8.30pm |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
|
Quote:
TBH I have little time for the Police these days, but facing a firearm situation we can all be so clever after the event. And much of the "eye witness" evidence offered in this programme wasn't challenged.....
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Les Pays-Bas
Posts: 1,468
|
Quote:
people in the area were so sad about his death that they smashed the place up and robbed TV's
![]() It's like accusing the entire attendance of a football match when violence breaks out. |
|
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,410
|
Quote:
Good to know that "crews" aren't the same as "gangs". At least according to the "community leader".
Quote:
Voice over just explained it a bit better perhaps. A "crew" is a group of friends. A "gang" is a group of people together for criminal reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,410
|
Quote:
Yes. He was no angel but I think they tried harder than they should have to to make the evidence warrant their actions which is worse than an error of judgement in my opinion.
Their 'intelligence' was spot on as well, who was that coming from and why weren't they after the big man? |
|
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,410
|
Quote:
I agree, and it seems it was the wrong call. They should have 'held their hands up' instead of trying to cover it up and allowing the media to misreport on the circumstances.
In what way did they cover it up, or 'allow the media to misreport the circumstances'? |
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 53,385
|
Quote:
They explained that. They had intelligence that Duggan would be coming into possession of a gun in order to shoot someone, but not from whom he was obtaining it.
That's the part they won't reveal as they seemingly didn't see the hand over yet were sure he had a gun in the taxi. To me it felt like they were hinting at a source. Could be undercover. Could be an informant. Could be monitored calls. Who knows. They won't say. |
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
|
Quote:
They explained that. They had intelligence that Duggan would be coming into possession of a gun in order to shoot someone, but not from whom he was obtaining it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 53,385
|
Quote:
In what way did they cover it up, or 'allow the media to misreport the circumstances'?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,410
|
Quote:
That's simplistic. There was a genuine protest about his death, it turned into a rampage. Not everyone stole TVs. Some people were just there for the ride.
It's like accusing the entire attendance of a football match when violence breaks out. |
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
|
Quote:
A split second call that could've ended up with an officer being shot by a dangerous criminal.
In what way did they cover it up, or 'allow the media to misreport the circumstances'? Did you watch it? It was all explained. 2 different officers reported 'finding' the gun, how does that happen? And they didn't correct the media report about exchanged shots. Do you think they behaved appropriately in the aftermath? |
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 604
|
Quote:
They spent some time on 'white t shirt'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,410
|
Quote:
Sure but how did they know at that point in the day on that particular taxi journey that he was armed and had to be stopped with force by armed police?
That's the part they won't reveal as they seemingly didn't see the hand over yet were sure he had a gun in the taxi. To me it felt like they were hinting at a source. Could be undercover. Could be an informant. Could be monitored calls. Who knows. They won't say. |
|
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,410
|
Quote:
I agree, and it seems it was the wrong call. They should have 'held their hands up' instead of trying to cover it up and allowing the media to misreport on the circumstances.
Quote:
A split second call that could've ended up with an officer being shot by a dangerous criminal.
In what way did they cover it up, or 'allow the media to misreport the circumstances'? Quote:
Wasn't the original version put forward that the police had been shot? Even if it wasn't intentional miscommunication it caused confusion and resulted in the initial reporting suggesting Mark had fired on police.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 53,385
|
Quote:
That information came from the IPCC though, not from the Police. It was on our TV's less than an hour ago and already people on here are trying to spin things and blame the Police as usual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,202
|
Quote:
That information came from the IPCC though, not from the Police. It was on our TV's less than an hour ago and already people on here are trying to spin things and blame the Police as usual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
|
Quote:
There was innuendo from the forensic scientist saying "he couldn't possibly comment about The police planting the gun-but he did anyway. Innuendo about white t shirt taking the gun from the taxi........Innuendo from "the one independent witness about Duggans manner...........
And the evidence about white tshirt wasn't innuendo it was factual, it was one of the things that was caught on video and partly corroborated the witness statement and the forensic guy couldn't rule out that the gun was planted. I don't remember the innuendo from forensic except to say he couldn't have thrown the gun after being shot and could not rule out the planting of the gun which is fact. |
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
|
Quote:
That information came from the IPCC though, not from the Police. It was on our TV's less than an hour ago and already people on here are trying to spin things and blame the Police as usual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
|
Quote:
Channel 4's Simon Israel says he personally spoke to a Met press officer and was told there had been an exchange of fire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,202
|
Quote:
And would have no reason to lie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,202
|
How is it possible that two police officers independently claim it was them who found the weapon?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 604
|
Quote:
They presented the police statements as a challenge to Duggans demeanour.
And the evidence about white tshirt wasn't innuendo it was factual, it was one of the things that was caught on video and partly corroborated the witness statement and the forensic guy couldn't rule out that the gun was planted. I don't remember the innuendo from forensic except to say he couldn't have thrown the gun after being shot and could not rule out the planting of the gun which is fact. but I think we will have to differ in our opinions. It was IMHO the usual BBC fare |
|
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,202
|
Quote:
there was no proof white tee shirt took the gun and the scientist said "there was allegations about police planting the weapon" "that's outside my area I cant comment on that".......... But his opening sentence offers a comment on that very matter............
but I think we will have to differ in our opinions. It was IMHO the usual BBC fare |
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,410
|
Quote:
And the same programme explained the the police failed to correct that false report despite knowing the facts. Thats not spin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#74 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 766
|
Quote:
An officer was shot, but not by a dangerous criminal.
Did you watch it? It was all explained. 2 different officers reported 'finding' the gun, how does that happen? And they didn't correct the media report about exchanged shots. Do you think they behaved appropriately in the aftermath? Police never informed his family of his death. At the end, it said an officer was sacked for gross misconduct this year, for lying. http://socialistworker.co.uk/art/371...of+mark+duggan www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36112643 |
|
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 766
|
Quote:
Wasn't the original version put forward that the police had been shot? Even if it wasn't intentional miscommunication it caused confusion and resulted in the initial reporting suggesting Mark had fired on police.
The pathologist said that only thing in Marks pocket, was his mobile phone which he seemed to be fumbling for before he was shot.. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:44.




