The Mark Duggan trial.

wicklowstevo · 16-01-2014 01:53AM

old hippy wrote: »

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

I do . you seem like you have no idea what your talking about in general in any thread.

old hippy · 16-01-2014 01:40PM

Zambia wrote: »

Did you lodge a complaint about the officer?

Officers. No, as I have said, there wasn't much point in doing so. They tend to close ranks.

wicklowstevo wrote: »

I do . you seem like you have no idea what your talking about in general in any thread.

Good for you, stevo. Good for you. Anyways, we're way off topic here, so let's leave aside unprovoked attacks on members of the public and my contributions on other threads. How do you feel about the Duggan shooting? Was it justified?

wicklowstevo · 16-01-2014 03:48PM

Lets stay on topic . was the behaviour of duggens supporters justified ? after the killing or at the press conference ?
" hey our scumbag friend got killed and its really hot , lets go steal a load of runners and flat screen tvs and kill some people" and please dont start with the under educated young black masses held down by whitie and the pigs bs . i didnt hear of any book shops getting looted did you.
Im not going to engage with you either hippy because you are to ridicules and person to waste time on

old hippy · 16-01-2014 06:09PM

wicklowstevo wrote: »

Lets stay on topic . was the behaviour of duggens supporters justified ? after the killing or at the press conference ?
" hey our scumbag friend got killed and its really hot , lets go steal a load of runners and flat screen tvs and kill some people" and please dont start with the under educated young black masses held down by whitie and the pigs bs . i didnt hear of any book shops getting looted did you.
Im not going to engage with you either hippy because you are to ridicules and person to waste time on

Well, I don't know about the rest of you but that well thought out essay on the Duggan incident, the riots and the ethnic background of Londoners really swayed me.

As for bookshops, perhaps Kindles are more the rage these days and aren't as heavy as a load of books?

Interesting article here, stevo

http://www.thewire.com/global/2011/08/its-pattern-london-rioters-are-leaving-bookstores-untouched/41142/

Thanks for engaging.

wicklowstevo · 16-01-2014 06:34PM

o what a stinging come back, thank you for allowing me to use your moral compass to correct my wayward morals i am so fortunate ,

old hippy · 16-01-2014 06:37PM

wicklowstevo wrote: »

o what a stinging come back, thank you for allowing me to use your moral compass to correct my wayward morals i am so fortunate ,

Did you actually read the article stevo? I ask this because you seem pretty concerned about our reading habits, over in London. What did you think of it, do you agree with any of it?

wicklowstevo · 16-01-2014 07:37PM

sorry cant see into the bubble of over the top liberalism that your living in. still maybe some day it ll pop and you ll find your self in the real world getting caught in the cross fire between the likes of duggan and his homies ( o wait thats properly racist now isnt it )

Foxhound38 · 16-01-2014 07:54PM

If you choose to live by the sword, you don't get to complain when you die by the sword. If he was carrying around a gun, he was a clear and present danger to everyone around him including police. Would have been nice if he could be disarmed and arrested non-violently but one less armed scumbag walking around is no bad outcome either...

Mike747 · 16-01-2014 08:06PM

Foxhound38 wrote: »

If you choose to live by the sword, you don't get to complain when you die by the sword. If he was carrying around a gun, he was a clear and present danger to everyone around him including police. Would have been nice if he could be disarmed and arrested non-violently but one less armed scumbag walking around is no bad outcome either...

But it's society's fault he went down the path that he did! Seriously though, it's good there's one less degenerate scumbag on the street.

end of the road · 16-01-2014 10:00PM

Foxhound38 wrote: »

If you choose to live by the sword, you don't get to complain when you die by the sword. If he was carrying around a gun, he was a clear and present danger to everyone around him including police. Would have been nice if he could be disarmed and arrested non-violently but one less armed scumbag walking around is no bad outcome either...

any death is a bad outcome and a failure, specially when the police told lies afterwords

Zambia · 16-01-2014 10:25PM

end of the road wrote: »

any death is a bad outcome and a failure, specially when the police told lies afterwords

I asked you this before.

What officer is lying ? You ignored it i do not recall any mention in the judges summation regarding lies. There would have been if their was proof.

You clearly have some anti police agenda. The ruling was, given all the circumstances the shooting was a reasonable action.

Do you believe if Duggan remained in the car and did not act like a ****ing pork chop he would have been shot?

end of the road · 17-01-2014 12:15AM

Zambia wrote: »

You clearly have some anti police agenda.

lol, exactly why i can't be bothered engaging with some on this thread

Zambia wrote: »

Do you believe if Duggan remained in the car and did not act like a ****ing pork chop he would have been shot?

maybe, maybe not

Zambia · 17-01-2014 03:35AM

end of the road wrote: »

lol, exactly why i can't be bothered engaging with some on this thread

maybe, maybe not

Whatever answer the question, which officer is lying?

old hippy · 17-01-2014 01:18PM

wicklowstevo wrote: »

sorry cant see into the bubble of over the top liberalism that your living in. still maybe some day it ll pop and you ll find your self in the real world getting caught in the cross fire between the likes of duggan and his homies ( o wait thats properly racist now isnt it )

Sounds like you're wishing ill on me, stevo. And why do you keep bringing race up? Does it irk you?

Anyways, did you actually read the article stevo? I ask this because you seem pretty concerned about our reading habits, over in London. What did you think of it, do you agree with any of it?

R P McMurphy · 17-01-2014 01:34PM

Zambia wrote: »

Whatever answer the question, which officer is lying?

officer V53

Zambia · 17-01-2014 08:03PM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

officer V53

That's the officer who fired the shots, how did he lie?

He believed Duggan had a firearm and his belief was accepted by the jury.

R P McMurphy · 17-01-2014 08:13PM

Zambia wrote: »

That's the officer who fired the shots, how did he lie?

He believed Duggan had a firearm and his belief was accepted by the jury.

He said that duggan had pointed a gun at him in a threatening manner. The jury did not accept this only that the officer may have believed him to have a gun not that he was pointing it at the police.

The met even initially contended that Duggan had been firing shots at the police. This was definitely proven to be false. If you are asking what officers made up this lie, I don't know but was passed by whatever section deals with the independent police complaints commission.

It is likely that the police officers present may have believed him to be in possession of a firearm as they probably didn't witness him discarding it but does that justify them opening fire when he could not have been firing at them or indeed pointing a gun at them

Zambia · 17-01-2014 09:09PM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

He said that duggan had pointed a gun at him in a threatening manner. The jury did not accept this only that the officer may have believed him to have a gun not that he was pointing it at the police.

So where is the lie?

Do you have a link to when and where v53 said that?

Here is his account

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19732298

While. It's unlikely Duggan had a firearm at that moment, it's well within the bounds of possibility a firearm was in his hands.

R P McMurphy · 17-01-2014 09:18PM

Zambia wrote: »

So where is the lie?

Do you have a link to when and where v53 said that?

Here is his account

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19732298

While. It's unlikely Duggan had a firearm at that moment, it's well within the bounds of possibility a firearm was in his hands.

Just Google it, practically any link will deal with the initial claim that he pulled a gun and pointed it in a threatening manner as well as the initial lies from the met that he was firing shots at the officers.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-25321711

Gatling · 17-01-2014 09:25PM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

Just Google it, practically any link will deal with the initial claim that he pulled a gun and pointed it in a threatening manner as well as the initial lies from the met that he was firing shots at the officers.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-25321711

Sorry but the witness statement is bull****

Across the road and 9 stories up in an apartment block looking through an open window clearly claims to have witnessed a police execution ,

I'd love to see that account independently tested and verified that a witness several hundred feet away could 100% identify a gun ,phone or dildo being waved around

end of the road · 17-01-2014 09:44PM

Gatling wrote: »

Sorry but the witness statement is bull****

Across the road and 9 stories up in an apartment block looking through an open window clearly claims to have witnessed a police execution ,

I'd love to see that account independently tested and verified that a witness several hundred feet away could 100% identify a gun ,phone or dildo being waved around

your right the accounts were bull, nobody saw a gun on him yet an officer claimed he did when he didn't, that to me, is a lier

R P McMurphy · 17-01-2014 09:45PM

Gatling wrote: »

Sorry but the witness statement is bull****

Across the road and 9 stories up in an apartment block looking through an open window clearly claims to have witnessed a police execution ,

I'd love to see that account independently tested and verified that a witness several hundred feet away could 100% identify a gun ,phone or dildo being waved around

There is not need to be obtuse regarding the article, it does the discussion no good.

The claim that he was not brandishing a firearm does not hinge on that witness testimony, more so on the probability of him not being able to dispose of the weapon once he was shot

Gatling · 17-01-2014 10:01PM

end of the road wrote: »

your right the accounts were bull, nobody saw a gun on him yet an officer claimed he did when he didn't, that to me, is a lier

R P McMurphy wrote: »

There is not need to be obtuse regarding the article, it does the discussion no good.

The claim that he was not brandishing a firearm does not hinge on that witness testimony, more so on the probability of him not being able to dispose of the weapon once he was shot

You stand several hundred feet away and 9 stories up and tell me you could clearly identify a firearm consealed in a sock in a persons hand

end of the road seriously your view and claims of events are on different intergalactic plain to the real worlds

B_Rabbit · 17-01-2014 10:01PM

wicklowstevo wrote: »

sorry cant see into the bubble of over the top liberalism that your living in. still maybe some day it ll pop and you ll find your self in the real world getting caught in the cross fire between the likes of duggan and his homies ( o wait thats properly racist now isnt it )

stevo you have a bad attitude and I think a chat with yourself is in order.

Santa Cruz · 17-01-2014 10:17PM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

There is not need to be obtuse regarding the article, it does the discussion no good.

The claim that he was not brandishing a firearm does not hinge on that witness testimony, more so on the probability of him not being able to dispose of the weapon once he was shot

Did they consider the man on the grassy knoll?

Zambia · 17-01-2014 10:52PM

end of the road wrote: »

your right the accounts were bull, nobody saw a gun on him yet an officer claimed he did when he didn't, that to me, is a lier

You can't prove what v53 saw in front of him. So if you see something (possible not a unicorn) and nobody else saw it then you are lying.

Jonny7 · 17-01-2014 11:11PM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

The jury did not accept this only that the officer may have believed him to have a gun not that he was pointing it at the police.

I would expect the jury to have a far better picture than any commentators here on the issue. The specifics are not black and white, however they deemed the killing was lawful.

R P McMurphy · 17-01-2014 11:25PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

I would expect the jury to have a far better picture than any commentators here on the issue. The specifics are not black and white, however they deemed the killing was lawful.

I think that within the narrow confines of what the jury were told to deliberate on, they made the correct decision. This is pretty far from exonerationing the met though in this particular shooting. The fact that he did not have a gun on him when he was shot is bad news but the lies told in the aftermath were damning.

Zambia · 18-01-2014 12:24AM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

He said that duggan had pointed a gun at him in a threatening manner. The jury did not accept this only that the officer may have believed him to have a gun not that he was pointing it at the police.

The met even initially contended that Duggan had been firing shots at the police. This was definitely proven to be false. If you are asking what officers made up this lie, I don't know but was passed by whatever section deals with the independent police complaints commission.

It is likely that the police officers present may have believed him to be in possession of a firearm as they probably didn't witness him discarding it but does that justify them opening fire when he could not have been firing at them or indeed pointing a gun at them

Oh and the IPCC said he was shooting at police not the met.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-25776826

old hippy · 20-01-2014 01:25PM

Another interesting article on corruption in the Met

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-police-corruption-cannot-be-eliminated-admits-head-of-specialmet-unit-following-independent-stories-9070682.html

"When asked about some of the inexplicable features of the Met’s repeated investigations into the murder of Daniel Morgan, a private detective found in a south London car park with an axe embedded in his skull in 1987 amid claims he was about to blow the whistle on links between the Met and organised crime, Mr Bonthron is sensitive."

The Mark Duggan trial.

Comments