Mark Duggan's scum family

They should be billed for the bullet.

 

They do seem to be inciting unrest. NoJusticeNoPeace.

 

Can you actually appeal against a coroner's courts' decision?

 

...fuelled by the coverage they will get on the beeb.

 

The media want riots don't they. It makes for good headlines and 24hr coverage of it.

 

Apparently, this is the model of pistol that was found *near* the young scamp's corpse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rg0Qo7uHIws

Watch it to the end when it's on 'full auto' to see the chilling reason why he was shot.

 

To be honest a lot of rubbish about the law is being banded about by the Duggan side in an effort to spread confusion and incite outrage amongst their supporters. A prime one is that the officer who shot him must have lied as a direct consequence of the jury deciding Duggan didn't have a gun in his hand at the moment he was shot. Which totally ignores the fact that the jury went on to nevertheless accept that he genuinely believed Duggan had a gun and that his life was in danger and that's all the law needs him to do.

Of course it was always pretty unlikely that his family would issue a statement saying, "We will always miss Mark but accept the decision of the jury that he was a gun toting criminal and that he was as responsible as the officer for his death two years ago. Don't carry guns kids".

Yeah although on pretty narrow grounds - they would either need substantial new evidence to come to light (Hillsborough) or the coroner to have misdirected the jury on the law.

 

It's possible he both genuinely believed he had a gun, and the fact he didn't have a gun in his hand at the time he was shot. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

Sorry simmsy, that first sentence has got me scratching my head...

 

Scum comes from scum.

 

Let me rephrase it. It's possible for both the following statements to be true: He genuinely believed Duggan had the gun. Duggan did not have the gun.

 

Man carries gun, police follow him, he dumps gun, police stop him with genuine concern he's armed, shoot him. Morale of the story, don't be a **** and carry a gun. You will be shot by either another gangster or the police.

 

Yeah that was exactly my point. The family and their lawyer are making statements this evening to the effect that because he didn't have the gun at the moment he was shot the rest of the officer's account is irrelevant. But the law of self defence doesn't need the gun. The gun could have been at home in a drawer for all the law cares - so long as the officer genuinely believed he had one. Now the fact one was found very near to the car, a car which had a box inside which had carried the gun with his fingerprints on it and that a man had already been convicted of providing him a gun 12 minutes earlier can only have helped the jury to decide the officer's belief may have been wrong but was honestly held.

I heard a stat on the radio earlier. 12,000 armed police operations, arrests and spontaneous responses last year nationwide. 2 people shot.

 

I'm pretty sure that's the point UEA was making...?

EDIT: Wow, did it really take me so long to reply that you've both already responded?!

 

Sorry I misread it. I thought you were saying its a lie, and what you were actually saying is that the family and lawyer are spreading ideas that he must be lying.

 

Both Lee Rigbys murderers were shot were they not?

 

No worries. Some of the 'community leaders' I heard earlier on are already parroting the line. Add in the 'they should have shot him in the leg' and 'why didn't they just tackle him to the ground' plonkers and I really do despair of some of my fellow citizens.

 

Yup. I don't know whether the person giving the info, a former police officer, meant 2012 when he said last year as I doubt the 2013 stats have even been compiled yet.

I also see that upstanding pillar of society Keith Vaz MP has been making soundbites:

So apparently we keep banging away at the door until the right answer is given for the dead gang banger, his baby mother and his homies. Honest hardworking taxpayers after the same level of service need not apply.

 

Keith Vaz is a total self-servng t**t of the highest order.

 

Racist windbag Diane Abbot has this to say...
Diane Abbott MP ‏@HackneyAbbott5h
If the #duggan jury believe that he did not have a gun in his hand when he was shot, how can they find it was a lawful killing? #baffled

 

His family seem to of conveniently forgotten his background in gang culture and the fact that he had a gun with him. Perhaps they should think about the fact that if he hadn't just collected a gun then he wouldn't of been shot.

 

She's the worst labour MP, but somehow always gets on question time. She's simply fanning the flames which appeal to her uneducated electorate. She tries to come across as a spokeswoman for the downtrodden working classes, but inevitably just mimics Malcolm X. The fact her own son doesn't want to be educated in her constituency says it all.

 

Former Mayor Of London police "advisor" and racial harmony champion tweeted this

@LeeJasper: 10 little black boys sitting on a wall.

Police thought one of them had a gun

So they shot them all.

#MarkDuggan #OpenSeason"

 

This is pretty big. An MP basically calling into question a court verdict based upon a point of law. Does she feel somehow above the law? If a tory MP had said this people would be calling for their head.

Should be prosecuted for inciting unrest/violence.

Seriously, some people in the public eye need to employ professionals to manage their twitter accounts so that they can cover up the fact they are clueless.

 

Do the Police ever shoot white criminals?

 

Yeah but for some reason the media don't find it as newsworthy. Probably because the 'white community' knows a criminal when it sees one and says good riddance.

 

bingo!

 

What I find abhorrent is that we're seemingly heading for a situation where due process has been followed in a country where the courts are among the fairest and best in the world (not blind patriotism, but reasoned belief) and now it seems that there is a clamour from the media and "community groups" to do whatever it takes to denigrate that decision, simply because they would have preferred a different outcome.

How come the Daily Mail and Daily Express readers didn't take to the streets when the Grillo sisters were found not guilty? Surely we all believed Nigella and so were dismayed to see two forrin types getting away with robbing our lovely Nigella?

Basically, the people of the Broadwater Farm estate hate the police and will use any stick they can to try and beat them with it. Some opportunist politicians therefore try and play into this by showing sympathy for the cause.

The fact of the matter is this isn't about black people being shot. It's about a dangerous, violent criminal who may have been on his way to commit a murder being shot.

 

Is Abbott completely stupid?

 

I agree with all of this. If a court says "We came to this outcome because of 'x' reason", then unless the prosecution has something new which can entirely change the outcome, then that decision should be final. I don't mind them appealing, but if they lose that appeal that should be it, major evidence finds withstanding. (ie: Hillsborough)

This isn't helped by high profile peeps pandering to a minority's cries.

 

Can't remember the last time I read a thread on here where everyone was in agreement. What is the Forum coming to?

 

Well, hell has already frozen over (hurr hurr) so what now?

 

Your first 5 words answered your question.

 

What on earth is Duggan's aunt doing in these photos? Salutes and raising fists at an inquest? Embarrassing.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...shot-dead-marksman-did-not-gun-hand-time.html

 

Just thought of one user that would probably not agree for whatever reason: sharia4watford