The Mark Duggan trial.

Sunglasses Ron · 13-01-2014 01:54PM

old hippy wrote: »

I've been on the receiving end of the bravery of some members of the Met. They're no better than the vermin you complain about.

You were minding your own business, walking down the street, no provocation, when some cops jumped out and beat you?

I honestly would like to hear the full story here.

old hippy · 13-01-2014 02:02PM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

You were minding your own business, walking down the street, no provocation, when some cops jumped out and beat you?

I honestly would like to hear the full story here.

I've already recounted it on boards but - I was on an anti war march, I stepped to the side of the march so I could use my mobile. An officer grabbed me and said "are you on the march or not" and pushed me back into the road. A few people saw this and said I should get his number but I couldn't be bothered. It was just a shove. Later, we were kettled into an alleyway and people started running. I was grabbed by a couple of officers and shook up, before being thrown into a load of refuse sacks. They were all laughing.

I decided against making complaints because the Met tend to protect their own. It's no big secret.

Sunglasses Ron · 13-01-2014 02:05PM

old hippy wrote: »

I've already recounted it on boards but - I was on an anti war march, I stepped to the side of the march so I could use my mobile. An officer grabbed me and said "are you on the march or not" and pushed me back into the road. A few people saw this and said I should get his number but I couldn't be bothered. It was just a shove. Later, we were kettled into an alleyway and people started running. I was grabbed by a couple of officers and shook up, before being thrown into a load of refuse sacks. They were all laughing.

I decided against making complaints because the Met tend to protect their own. It's no big secret.

And you regard that as being on an equal scummy level playing field with knife carrying iPhone robbing rudeboys from Tottenham?

Mother of f'ucking christ.:pac: I'm not saying what the police did was right, but get a grip like.

old hippy · 13-01-2014 02:08PM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

And you regard that as being on an equal scummy level playing field with knife carrying iPhone robbing rudeboys from Tottenham?

Mother of f'ucking christ.:pac: I'm not saying what the police did was right, but get a grip like.

I'm saying the Met are not the brave, law abiding lot some here make out to be. In some cases, far from it. Did you read the link to the Independent story I posted last week?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-scotland-yards-rotten-core-police-failed-to-address-endemic-corruption-9050224.html

Gatling · 13-01-2014 02:11PM

Funniest thing I've read on this thread so far

end of the road · 13-01-2014 03:33PM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

You were minding your own business, walking down the street, no provocation, when some cops jumped out and beat you?

I honestly would like to hear the full story here.

where the met is concerned its a very likely outcome

end of the road · 13-01-2014 03:35PM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

And you regard that as being on an equal scummy level playing field with knife carrying iPhone robbing rudeboys from Tottenham?

Mother of f'ucking christ.:pac: I'm not saying what the police did was right, but get a grip like.

she was roughed up a number of times by a police officer and you tell her to "get a grip" no, i'm afraid a police man roughing up somebody for no reason is trashy

catallus · 13-01-2014 04:16PM

end of the road wrote: »

she was roughed up a number of times by a police officer and you tell her to "get a grip" no, i'm afraid a police man roughing up somebody for no reason is trashy

No, the police were trying to control a protest and she went off and thought she could do her own thing by going outside the demarcations of the march on the silly pretence of "having to use her mobile" (in fact trying to disrupt police control of a public protest) and when she was told to get back in she resisted (they had to use physical force to get her back in). And then she throws her hands up in the air and she forever more claims she was the victim of police brutality. The way these criminals twist the truth is sickening.

end of the road · 13-01-2014 04:33PM

catallus wrote: »

No, the police were trying to control a protest and she went off and thought she could do her own thing by going outside the demarcations of the march on the silly pretence of "having to use her mobile"

its not illegal to use a mobile on a march, its not illegal to step out of a march either infact many do for different reasons

catallus wrote: »

(in fact trying to disrupt police control of a public protest)

she stepped out to use her mobile, i've no reason to disbelieve her, if she was lying i'd find out very quick, it was not disrupting police control as that can't happen with proper policing

catallus wrote: »

when she was told to get back in she resisted

did she?

catallus wrote: »

(they had to use physical force to get her back in).

of course they did, because the met know no other way, but they didn't "have" to, they did because they could

catallus wrote: »

then she throws her hands up in the air and she forever more claims she was the victim of police brutality.

because she was, been thrown onto rubbish sacks and being laughed at is not the way a proper police officer will behave, its the way somebody who is only there for the pension will.

catallus wrote: »

The way these criminals twist the truth is sickening.

sickening because police brutality happens and you can't except it. so theirs no such thing as police brutality? it couldn't be the case that some "criminals" could actually be telling the truth no? the police would never rough up anyone innocent because the police are squeeky clean yes? i suppose only criminals would clame police brutality even if it actually happened which i suspect it did infact happen in hippys case? (which if it didn't which i except it did i would find out) sorry, but you really are delusianel aren't you

old hippy · 13-01-2014 06:17PM

catallus wrote: »

No, the police were trying to control a protest and she went off and thought she could do her own thing by going outside the demarcations of the march on the silly pretence of "having to use her mobile" (in fact trying to disrupt police control of a public protest) and when she was told to get back in she resisted (they had to use physical force to get her back in). And then she throws her hands up in the air and she forever more claims she was the victim of police brutality. The way these criminals twist the truth is sickening.

I'm a he, btw.

Your post reads like the Daily Mail got hold of my words and mangled them to suit their own agenda.

What sickens me is how some people will defend police brutality, no matter what.

And I'm not a criminal. Not unless you count being opposed to war (I was on anti-war march) or opposing corruption "criminal".

catallus · 13-01-2014 06:25PM

Hey nobody likes war or corruption and these are things that need to be stood up against and I say fair-play to most protesters who actually get up off their arses and go and march, seriously, but to twist police-action when they try to control a potentially lethal crowd-control situation and to then use that against police in the defence of criminals just doesn't sit well with me. It is a blatantly obvious attempt to blacken the name of the forces of law and order which do their best to protect the likes of you and me and everyone else; it has to be admitted that more than a few of the attendees at these marches go for the sole purpose of starting a fight, usually with a cop, and then they scream bloody murder when they get a well deserved whack across the head!

EDIT: And what the hell is your problem with that august tribune which is the Daily Mail, btw? The unacknowledged paper of record in this land and beyond?

old hippy · 13-01-2014 06:30PM

catallus wrote: »

Hey nobody likes war or corruption and these are things that need to be stood up against and I say fair-play to most protesters who actually get up off their arses and go and march, seriously, but to twist police-action when they try to control a potentially lethal crowd-control situation and to then use that against police in the defence of criminals just doesn't sit well with me. It is a blatantly obvious attempt to blacken the name of the forces of law and order which do their best to protect the likes of you and me and everyone else; it has to be admitted that more than a few of the attendees at these marches go for the sole purpose of starting a fight, usually with a cop, and then they scream bloody murder when they get a well deserved whack across the head!

I'm stating what happened and you happen to be the one twisting words here.

I went on the march as a peaceful protesters, as I've always done. Not to start a fight or make a name for myself.

It was those individuals in the Met who blackened their own name, not me.

It's interesting how you have me down as some kind of criminal or trouble starter, though.

Galwayguy35 · 13-01-2014 06:39PM

Saw bits of this story on Sky News, from what I gather Duggan had purchased a gun earlier on in the day, he was no innocent victim, granted he hadn't the gun on him, he had dumped it beforehand, but his relatives are trying to make him out to be totally blameless.

Going around shouting "no justice no peace" doesn't do them any favours either, as words like that could lead to people starting trouble on the streets.

end of the road · 13-01-2014 07:22PM

catallus wrote: »

to twist police-action when they try to control a potentially lethal crowd-control situation and to then use that against police in the defence of criminals just doesn't sit well with me.

if people are genuinely twisting the polices actions then thats a different story, however its a known fact that the met police have a very bad history for various reasons that we could be all year looking at if we really wanted to, they don't have a very bad reputation for no reason

catallus wrote: »

It is a blatantly obvious attempt to blacken the name of the forces of law and order which do their best to protect the likes of you and me and everyone else

nobody is blackening any force of law here, if your a police force who is involved in corruption, racism, and all sorts of other criminal stuff, then you deserve to be blackened and to not have the trust of the people your supposed to be protecting, it doesn't sit well with you because you can't or won't except that police brutality or corruption happens.

catallus wrote: »

it has to be admitted that more than a few of the attendees at these marches go for the sole purpose of starting a fight, usually with a cop, and then they scream bloody murder when they get a well deserved whack across the head!

well for a start nobody is disputing some will go to protests to cause trouble, however nobody "deserves" a wack accross the head, only violent trash would do that and state people "deserve" it, legs or arms is what they should be going for, if i hit somebody on the head i'd be before the courts and rightly so for being a piece of violent vermin

Mike747 · 13-01-2014 09:24PM

old hippy wrote: »

I'm stating what happened and you happen to be the one twisting words here.

I went on the march as a peaceful protesters, as I've always done. Not to start a fight or make a name for myself.

It was those individuals in the Met who blackened their own name, not me.

It's interesting how you have me down as some kind of criminal or trouble starter, though.

How come you're so concerned with Duggan? You've said before you've been the victim of violent crime. Duggan is the kind of thug who'd stomp you just for looking at him.

It wasn't right the way you were treated on the march I agree, and there are bad cops out there, same with any profession. Ultimately though my sympathies lie with the police not some 'hardcore nigga' who got shot down.

I've been mugged and assaulted. I genuinely wouldn't care if any of those people were killed.

end of the road · 13-01-2014 09:55PM

Mike747 wrote: »

How come you're so concerned with Duggan? You've said before you've been the victim of violent crime. Duggan is the kind of thug who'd stomp you just for looking at him.

It wasn't right the way you were treated on the march I agree, and there are bad cops out there, same with any profession. Ultimately though my sympathies lie with the police not some 'hardcore nigga' who got shot down.

I've been mugged and assaulted. I genuinely wouldn't care if any of those people were killed.

all that means nothing in relation to the discussion as really the discussion is about how this whole incident and the aftermath were handled by the police, you can easily not care about somebody but still question how an incident where one dies was handled

Grand Moff Tarkin · 14-01-2014 12:35AM

old hippy wrote: »

If you believe in law and order, you should be outraged over the endemic corruption within the Met and the institutionalised racism, the deaths in custody etc.

I've been on the receiving end of the bravery of some members of the Met. They're no better than the vermin you complain about.

They are the thin blue line the defend the people and have to deal with major hardcore scum.

Saying that I am also sorry that you had such a nasty experience.

end of the road · 14-01-2014 01:03AM

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

They are the thin blue line the defend the people and have to deal with major hardcore scum.

doesn't mean they have carte blanche to behave with impunity though, their are standards and people expect and are entitled to the highest possible of such standards and rightly so

CuriousG · 14-01-2014 09:07AM

old hippy wrote: »

Not at all surprised - you've got form for supporting that kind of malarkey.

Frankly the fascism espoused on this thread scares me more than some dick acting the gangster.

Stating facts about a known criminal is fascism now? That seems strange to me

Zambia · 14-01-2014 09:59AM

end of the road wrote: »

doesn't mean they have carte blanche to behave with impunity though, their are standards and people expect and are entitled to the highest possible of such standards and rightly so

There was an inquiry the facts were examined and the officer was exonerated. Pretty high level of scrutiny, can anyone else say a split second decision they made at work was examined for nigh on 2 years. Then put to a jury.

old hippy · 14-01-2014 01:36PM

Mike747 wrote: »

How come you're so concerned with Duggan? You've said before you've been the victim of violent crime. Duggan is the kind of thug who'd stomp you just for looking at him.

It wasn't right the way you were treated on the march I agree, and there are bad cops out there, same with any profession. Ultimately though my sympathies lie with the police not some 'hardcore nigga' who got shot down.

I've been mugged and assaulted. I genuinely wouldn't care if any of those people were killed.

I'm concerned when police officers act above the law. I'm concerned about fatal shootings.

I've been mugged and assaulted too - I'd like to see the perps brought to justice (no matter what side of the law they operate on) but that's not going to happen now.

CuriousG wrote: »

Stating facts about a known criminal is fascism now? That seems strange to me

Does it? I'm calling it fascism when officers of the Met rough you up and gets a round of applause from people here who then accuse you of being a "criminal".

Zambia · 14-01-2014 09:42PM

So how would you police a demonstration?

old hippy · 15-01-2014 07:56PM

Zambia wrote: »

So how would you police a demonstration?

I wouldn't inflict violence on members of the public who have done nothing against the law. Kind of obvious, like.

15Pete · 15-01-2014 08:36PM

It is interesting that Duggan's family claim he was not a "gangster". Illegally transporting an illegal weapon qualifies one as a gangster in any able-minded person's opinion. His boasts about "bussin" shots and related carryon just confirm our suspicions.
In any case, the people who seem to be attacking the police's actions and policies would seem to be of the lesser-educated variety; judging by their poor grasp of the English language; which we can be thankful for in the knowledge that they will not attain any real level of responsibility or power. They can continue to blame the police/system/government for their own failings while the rest of us continue with our lives, thankful that the vast majority of policemen and policewomen do their best every day to keep scum like Duggan away from us.
In my eyes it is very simple, if one does not wish to be shot by police they should not be messing around with guns. If you play with fire, you could get burned. And I am thankful that the police will use any means necessary to keep violent thugs away from the general public to whom they could cause harm. This will also send out a message to prospective gangsters that they will face justice should they choose a life of crime over that of the hard-working man on the street.
I would wager that the silent majority could not care less that there is one more hoodlum who is no longer a threat to society.

Zambia · 15-01-2014 08:42PM

old hippy wrote: »

I wouldn't inflict violence on members of the public who have done nothing against the law. Kind of obvious, like.

So you don't know, thanks.

old hippy · 15-01-2014 08:43PM

Zambia wrote: »

So you don't know, thanks.

So you condone the violence that was done to me on the demo, thanks.

end of the road · 15-01-2014 08:57PM

S0crates wrote: »

the people who seem to be attacking the police's actions and policies would seem to be of the lesser-educated variety; judging by their poor grasp of the English language; which we can be thankful for in the knowledge that they will not attain any real level of responsibility or power. They can continue to blame the police/system/government for their own failings while the rest of us continue with our lives, thankful that the vast majority of policemen and policewomen do their best every day to keep scum like Duggan away from us.

many will be uneducated, others will be educated and will see some things in relation to the police that need dealing with, to make sure that standards are upheld, also, its usually those who are "uneducated" who are the victims of police brutality when it happens, the rest of this little bit sounds to me like the usual "the police are perfect" type of post who makes out that anyone who questions the police must be uneducated and doesn't deserve any responsibility yet your happy that they dare to maybe say that not enough is being done in relation to opportunities for the less educated to improve themselves

S0crates wrote: »

it is very simple, if one does not wish to be shot by police they should not be messing around with guns. If you play with fire, you could get burned.

some were shot even though they didn't have guns so that statement can't be blanket even though i agree to an extent with it.

S0crates wrote: »

I am thankful that the police will use any means necessary to keep violent thugs away from the general public to whom they could cause harm.

any means? we can't have them behaving how they wish, their has to be standards, yes we can all be thankful that many will agree with having a high standard for operations in relation to policeing and will strive to meet them, its those who don't who need to be sacked

S0crates wrote: »

This will also send out a message to prospective gangsters that they will face justice should they choose a life of crime over that of the hard-working man on the street.

oh this crap again, the "this will send out a message" nonsense has been proven to be untrue and delusianel, many people choose different things over the "hard working man on the street" which these days a hard working man on the street is nothing or nobody special

S0crates wrote: »

I would wager that the silent majority could not care less that there is one more hoodlum who is no longer a threat to society.

its not about caring about him, its about saying how the police handled it and then apparently lied afterwords shouldn't be tolerated or allowed as it brings standards down for those working in the police who strive to operate as correct as possible who's names end up being blackened because of those who don't or aren't bothered

Zambia · 15-01-2014 09:02PM

old hippy wrote: »

So you condone the violence that was done to me on the demo, thanks.

Of course not but understand that you can't control a crowd unless you are prepared to physically stop them.

old hippy · 16-01-2014 12:59AM

Zambia wrote: »

Of course not but understand that you can't control a crowd unless you are prepared to physically stop them.

Ok, this is going off topic a bit. I remain of the opinion that you don't push and shove an ordinary member of the public on a peaceful demo. That you don't throw a citizen to the ground and laugh about it with your mates. That is not something I like to experience at all.

One is not a troublemaker or a criminal if one objects to corruption and officers who act above the law.

Zambia · 16-01-2014 01:11AM

old hippy wrote: »

Ok, this is going off topic a bit. I remain of the opinion that you don't push and shove an ordinary member of the public on a peaceful demo. That you don't throw a citizen to the ground and laugh about it with your mates. That is not something I like to experience at all.

One is not a troublemaker or a criminal if one objects to corruption and officers who act above the law.

Did you lodge a complaint about the officer?

The Mark Duggan trial.

Comments