DS Forums

 
 

Lawful Killing - Mark Duggan BB1 8.30pm


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-12-2016, 09:15
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
The innocent, who? - am I missing something here? Were you part of the incident, at the scene or are you too just making assumptions. Maybe putting two and two together and coming up with five?
You were suggesting that I (the innocent) have history with the police and that is why I am questioning their actions in the aftermath, and now having an opinion on the information the show gave us must be an assumption.

I think its you coming up with 5
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 07-12-2016, 13:53
Faust
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 8,097
You were suggesting that I (the innocent) have history with the police and that is why I am questioning their actions in the aftermath, and now having an opinion on the information the show gave us must be an assumption.

I think its you coming up with 5
Not at all. I 'asked' if you had a history with the constabulary. I didn't watch the show as I wouldn't waste either my valuable time or the cost of the electricity in doing so. I have total confidence in the outcome the reached by the jury.
Faust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 14:31
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
Not at all. I 'asked' if you had a history with the constabulary. I didn't watch the show as I wouldn't waste either my valuable time or the cost of the electricity in doing so. I have total confidence in the outcome the reached by the jury.
The implication was as obvious as your motives for 'wasting your time and electricity' discussing something which for YOU is a closed case. One of the lead investigators of the case said in interview that she didn't believe that we know the whole truth. The open minded amongst us would agree.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 14:50
DUHO
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 604
The implication was as obvious as your motives for 'wasting your time and electricity' discussing something which for YOU is a closed case. One of the lead investigators of the case said in interview that she didn't believe that we know the whole truth. The open minded amongst us would agree.
By your posts (on this topic) you are HARDLY open minded
DUHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 14:55
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
By your posts (on this topic) you are HARDLY open minded
Well you haven't read MY posts then.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:01
DUHO
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 604
Well you haven't read MY posts then.
I have read all your 30 posts of the 120 on the whole thread- so my comment stands-

your sympathies lie with Duggan and his family-obvious
DUHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:07
Dippydolly
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,060
I have read all your 30 posts of the 120 on the whole thread- so my comment stands-

your sympathies lie with Duggan and his family-obvious
That's kind of how you are coming across though Evie,

I was open minded on it really, i wouldn't lose any sleep over Mark Duggan being off the streets, but i wasn't sure about the shooting. This documentary certainly showed me that there were untruths told on both sides. The supposed eye witness from the window who stated categorically he had his hands up beside his head in surrender, that was proven to be a lie, as was who exactly found the gun over the fence. I do have faith in the jury though, who were given full facts in the court, so i do personally feel it was a justified shooting.
Dippydolly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:09
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
I have read all your 30 posts of the 120 on the whole thread- so my comment stands-

your sympathies lie with Duggan and his family-obvious
Your detective skills are second to none

I sympathise with any family who have lost a loved one in whatever circumstances. Do you view them with contempt and assume everyone else should also?
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:14
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,666
Your detective skills are second to none

I sympathise with any family who have lost a loved one in whatever circumstances. Do you view them with contempt and assume everyone else should also?
I too sympathise with families who lose someone, they do tend to lose some of that sympathy when they choose not to correct deliberate inflammatory rumours that lead to people being involved in disorder , it is not their fault there were riots but they could have and community leaders could have put a stop to blatant lies outside the police station , they all chose not to.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:14
Paulie Walnuts
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,410
You are the one examining the assumptions, red herrings and general disinformation put forward by Duggan's side. The inquest jury examined the facts, and all the other BS thrown at them, and decided that he was lawfully killed.
Who do you mean by Duggans side? Anyone that isn't the police? Witnesses and science must all automatically be presenting lies eh? Do you not think an autopsy report is worth taking into consideration for the facts it reveals rather than assumptions made from it?

You're open minded then Paulie? Juries need people like you.
By Duggan's side I mean the family, the family lawyers, the 3 baby mothers, the rioters and the self appointed 'community representatives' such as Stafford Scott etc.

He was a good father though apparently, with several children by 3 different women, all of whom he supported. He only had 2 minor convictions as well so wasn't a major criminal - just like the Kray Twins, The Adams Family and most of the top Mafia men.
Paulie Walnuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:29
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
That's kind of how you are coming across though Evie,

I was open minded on it really, i wouldn't lose any sleep over Mark Duggan being off the streets, but i wasn't sure about the shooting. This documentary certainly showed me that there were untruths told on both sides. The supposed eye witness from the window who stated categorically he had his hands up beside his head in surrender, that was proven to be a lie, as was who exactly found the gun over the fence. I do have faith in the jury though, who were given full facts in the court, so i do personally feel it was a justified shooting.
I don't think you've read my posts either. At least we agree that all witness statements are worth of scrutiny but I'm sorry you've lost me on the comment about who found the gun? What is your understanding of it.

And no, if you were watching the same programme I watched then you will know that even the IPCC don't believe all questions were answered.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:33
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
I too sympathise with families who lose someone, they do tend to lose some of that sympathy when they choose not to correct deliberate inflammatory rumours that lead to people being involved in disorder , it is not their fault there were riots but they could have and community leaders could have put a stop to blatant lies outside the police station , they all chose not to.
I don't know what rumours you are speaking of but I imagine you are horrified that the police chose not to correct deliberate inflammatory rumours. They do have a social responsibility and one could argue that inaction from both parties led to unrest.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:37
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
By Duggan's side I mean the family, the family lawyers, the 3 baby mothers, the rioters and the self appointed 'community representatives' such as Stafford Scott etc.

He was a good father though apparently, with several children by 3 different women, all of whom he supported. He only had 2 minor convictions as well so wasn't a major criminal - just like the Kray Twins, The Adams Family and most of the top Mafia men.
So yes, anyone that isn't the police.

As for the rest of it, completely irrelevant and judgemental tosh
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:40
Dippydolly
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,060
I don't think you've read my posts either. At least we agree that all witness statements are worth of scrutiny but I'm sorry you've lost me on the comment about who found the gun? What is your understanding of it.

And no, if you were watching the same programme I watched then you will know that even the IPCC don't believe all questions were answered.
Which police officer actually found the gun i meant.

You sound a little exasperated that people aren't agreeing with you.
Dippydolly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:43
DUHO
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 604
Your detective skills are second to none

I sympathise with any family who have lost a loved one in whatever circumstances. Do you view them with contempt and assume everyone else should also?
You are the one being defensive-may I say not just with me but with everyone who has the audacity to disagree with so- or so it seems

I Feel sorry for Duggans family- but as for Duggan himself no sympathy whatsoever...
DUHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:51
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
You are the one being defensive-may I say not just with me but with everyone who has the audacity to disagree with so- or so it seems

I Feel sorry for Duggans family- but as for Duggan himself no sympathy whatsoever...
Would you like to rephrase your earlier comment then

I have read all your 30 posts of the 120 on the whole thread- so my comment stands-

your sympathies lie with Duggan and his family-obvious


I have no problem with people disagreeing with me but judgement and false information is the essence of the case is it not? If we are interested enough to watch a programme about it why would we not challenge the same behaviour here?
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:55
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
Which police officer actually found the gun i meant.

You sound a little exasperated that people aren't agreeing with you.
Nice try, but if you are going to present 'misunderstandings' then I'm more than happy to ask for clarifications. Thats not exasperation, thats genuine interest,

I'll ask again, from your comment below, what is your understanding of the lie about who found the gun?

The supposed eye witness from the window who stated categorically he had his hands up beside his head in surrender, that was proven to be a lie, as was who exactly found the gun over the fence.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 15:59
DUHO
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 604
Would you like to rephrase your earlier comment then

I have read all your 30 posts of the 120 on the whole thread- so my comment stands-

your sympathies lie with Duggan and his family-obvious


I have no problem with people disagreeing with me but judgement and false information is the essence of the case is it not? If we are interested enough to watch a programme about it why would we not challenge the same behaviour here?
Sorry but being better at Maths than English I have NO IDEA WHAT YOUR POST MEANS-sorry
DUHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 16:03
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
Sorry but being better at Maths than English I have NO IDEA WHAT YOUR POST MEANS-sorry
You're not suggesting an ill conceived bias then? Good
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 16:14
Dippydolly
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,060
Nice try, but if you are going to present 'misunderstandings' then I'm more than happy to ask for clarifications. Thats not exasperation, thats genuine interest,

I'll ask again, from your comment below, what is your understanding of the lie about who found the gun?

The supposed eye witness from the window who stated categorically he had his hands up beside his head in surrender, that was proven to be a lie, as was who exactly found the gun over the fence.
You're getting so defensive you don't realise when someone is agreeing with you. I don't think the police were telling the truth, in that 2 separate police officers said they both found the gun.
Dippydolly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 16:27
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
You're getting so defensive you don't realise when someone is agreeing with you. I don't think the police were telling the truth, in that 2 separate police officers said they both found the gun.
Yes thats my understanding of it as well but it wasn't clear from your post that you were aware of that fact.

Ftr, calling someone defensive and stating as fact how THEY are feeling, can be a little patronising and doesn't usually signify agreement.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 16:35
Dippydolly
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,060
Yes thats my understanding of it as well but it wasn't clear from your post that you were aware of that fact.

Ftr, calling someone defensive and stating as fact how THEY are feeling, can be a little patronising and doesn't usually signify agreement.
Nice try, but if you are going to present 'misunderstandings' then I'm more than happy to ask for clarifications. Thats not exasperation, thats genuine interest,

I'll ask again, from your comment below, what is your understanding of the lie about who found the gun?


Ftr, and your BIB comes across as defensive, argumentative and generally not very nice.
Dippydolly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 16:47
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,666
I don't know what rumours you are speaking of but I imagine you are horrified that the police chose not to correct deliberate inflammatory rumours. They do have a social responsibility and one could argue that inaction from both parties led to unrest.
The rumours being shouted out as accusations at the police were disputed the crowd refused to believe them . The rumours being spread and shouted were that :

The family new nothing and had had no contact at all , now whilst the MET and IPCC say they did not attend the house on the 4th August MET FLO's were told by Miss Wilson and Miss hall that they wanted to be the ones to break the news to Mark Duggans parents the FLO's repeatedly stated they wanted to do this, the ladies stated that the parents were fragile and insisted they be the ones to do it , the FLO's state they did not visit out of respect for the family members wishes they had met with , neither lady disputes the meeting and discussions that evening , though they say they never said that the FLO's should not go.

The IPCC took over FLO duties on the 5th

On the 6th Aug 2011 during the day the IPCC were with 14 members of the family as they viewed and officially identified Mark Duggans body , the IPCC had also met with Community Leaders

At the police station people were shouting that the police had blown off Mark Duggans head , Darcus Howe also repeated this publicly and online stating they had blown his head off but they wouldn't admit it.


Now these accusations were being used to whip up the crowd , the police denying them had no effect at all, but the family and community leaders were there as well and both knew the rumours to be untrue, they could have calmed things down by putting the record straight. they may not have been happy with the progress but they knew the rumours were untrue and could see the effects they were having , they only called for calm the day after the riots.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 16:47
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,595
Nice try, but if you are going to present 'misunderstandings' then I'm more than happy to ask for clarifications. Thats not exasperation, thats genuine interest,

I'll ask again, from your comment below, what is your understanding of the lie about who found the gun?


Ftr, and your BIB comes across as defensive, argumentative and generally not very nice.
Which police officer actually found the gun i meant.

You sound a little exasperated that people aren't agreeing with you.


And rather than discussing the programme and the case and clarify your post you were patronising and personal, what do you expect?
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 16:51
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,666
You're getting so defensive you don't realise when someone is agreeing with you. I don't think the police were telling the truth, in that 2 separate police officers said they both found the gun.
On that I don't see how allowing two statements both claiming that are 100% lies automatically, I mean it asks more questions than it answers . Is it possible ( and I haven't looked into this bit ) that both could be telling what they see as the truth ? Could they have approached from different directions and both called it out ? I am not saying that is true or what happened but just looking at another angle.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:36.