[Closed] Mark Duggan lawfully killed

So the story about Duggan shooting at officers, reported I the press immediately after the shooting didn't come from official police sources? Well they hardly went out of their way to put the record straight, did they?

I wonder where that information did come from then? It's a complete mystery! It's a good job we hadn't just had a massive parliamentary enquiry that exposed a completely unhealthy, cosy, co-dependent relationship between senior met officers and our scrupulously honest tabloid press eh?

I'd hate to be Police firearms officer. The weight of responsibility, the thought of having to shoot someone. The thought that you may kill someone innocent or guilty. The thought that your actions IN A SPLIT SECOND could lead to you or a colleague or an innocent member of public being dead.

[b][u]Imagine - the first you might be aware someone had a gun and has shot you is when you have actually been shot[/u]. [/b]

What a thankless ****ing job.

The Solicitor who was pissed taking shots towards officers and into the street- his family said the Police didn't have to shoot him.

What a thankless ****ing job.

Yes they do and will make mistakes.

moving the taxi away then moving it back before forensic analysis etc make it easy to qustion the police version of the truth

Ah, a conspiracy!

Q. All right. Why was it brought back?

A. I brought it back because I was aware that on 5 August the taxi cab driver was becoming very -- increasingly unhappy. He was making -- he was stating that this was his means to a living, he was certainly very upset with the Metropolitan Police Service, and I thought if there was a way in which we could turn the taxi around in terms of its evidence, then it seemed to me to be a reasonable thing to do. I was aware that if there was going to be a PolSA team to search it, it could possibly take days to get a PolSA team to Perivale, I don't know about the MPS but I think that it would take some time to get the skilled officers to do that. I was aware that there were PolSA officers at the scene and it seemed to me to be a good opportunity to have the taxi cab searched at the scene while there were the trained staff there.

Q. Did you think there would be any harm done by that?

A. I didn't at the time, I have to say in retrospect. Could I just -- I would like to say that I asked when the vehicle was returned to the scene was there any -- anything on the exterior of the vehicle and I was told from a visual -- from having looked at it, there was nothing on there. Had I have known that there was any blood spatter on the vehicle then I just would not have even considered taking it back to the scene. It would have gone to Perivale and then, I think, everything would be different, but certainly that was a decision I made. On reflection, it was the wrong decision frankly and, on reflection, the best thing I could have done was taken the taxi cab back to Perivale, we would have completed the visual search of the vehicle, established the blood spatter and then carried out whatever extra work that we needed to do and I would also add that I wouldn't have returned the taxi cab at any point and I should have retained it for the period of this up until the Inquest.

Q. Is that a lesson learned, as far as you're concerned?

A. Well, it is a lesson learned. It was something I did, I thought I was doing it for the right reasons, on the information I had at that time, and, quite frankly, I would do it differently now.

Still think it was suspicious?

I am very glad that we live in a society where the shooting of a man by armed police still results in headlines and inquiry.

I'm afraid I have little sympathy for Duggan or his family. He chose the lifestyle and the was the resulting cost.

How much can you trust the police version of events when they initially said that he'd fired shots at them?? - Something that seems to have been conveniently forgotten.

A policeman was hit by a ricocheting bullet. Could very easily be perceived as him firing shots. Duggan leaves car, raises arms, maybe has something in his hand, shots ring out, policeman hit in chest by bullet..... initially how would you interpret that? because 'oh, i expect it was a ricochet' is not my first thought.

Carol Duggan on R4, very sensible, let's hope everyone else is as measured and responsible

Agreed - but did pick up on one point, when she was asked about the threats made by members of the public gallery (implied therefore family / friends of Mark Duggan). She was asked of her opinion and she said she wasn't sure there were threats made, it was very tense and stressful with lots of shouting and tempers running high, etc.

So a bit like when a potentially armed man gets out of a car, moving his arms around, maybe with a mobile phone in his hand instead of a gun, I can imagine that's also tense, stressful and difficult to be sure what happened..... but if you 'guess' wrong maybe you're lying bleeding on the ground shortly after. You cannot blame the policeman for making the call he did, it was not an execution, it was a dreadful error with fatal consequences.

erm yes, seems suspicous to me in light of the seriousness of the events (and the small matter the london wide riots following the police failure to communicate with the family)

Id think that the police couldve arranged to offer the cab driver some sort of alternative vehicle or just told him to deal with it as his cab had been involved in a shooting

I think more to the point if I was a black person living in tottenham being constantly harassed by the police because of my race, then it would be even easier to see a conspiracy.

A policeman was hit by a ricocheting bullet. Could very easily be perceived as him firing shots. Duggan leaves car, raises arms, maybe has something in his hand, shots ring out, policeman hit in chest by bullet..... initially how would you interpret that? because 'oh, i expect it was a ricochet' is not my first thought.

The ricochet was caused by the police firing, you do understand that?

In a similar way that anyone accused of a crime has the right to give no comment.

Yes, that is their right. Do you think it's an appropriate course of action from people who are employed to uphold the law?

Presumably the policeman should have checked with this independent witness before shooting?

Or perhaps not shoot someone who isn't pointing a gun at them?

FWIW, I agree with Junkyard: it may well have been reasonable for the policeman to believe Duggan was armed. But the misinfomation and lack of cooperation that followed are good reasons why the Met will continue to have a poor relationship with parts of the communities they serve.

Ps - regards the mobile phone - two mobiles were found at the scene, one in Duggans jacket pocket, and a blackberry which he had been using, found in the back of the taxi.

In a similar way that anyone accused of a crime has the right to give no comment.

Can i see your evidence to support this

and theres been rafts of research done on both post traumatic stress and perceptional distortion that say that the best way of getting an accurate report is for them to be allowed to do it together

I am particularly interested in what real world scenarios they have used to do this, the control and how they actually knew what happened in order to measure the "accuracy" of the reports Could you let us have some of the research then?

The ricochet was caused by the police firing, you do understand that?

Yes. In the initial aftermath, the IPCC made a statement along the lines of shots being exchanged, which based on the evidence at the time (ie as above with a policeman also with a gunshot injury to the chest) was not wholly unreasonable IMHO. They later retracted that statement as more evidence came to light. To use this retraction as a suggestion that you can't believe anything they said about the events is wrong. That's my point here in response to Natrix's post.

Rock and a hard place - as soon as the events happen, the family and media want an explanation of what happened. If the police give their version of events as they believe at the time and they prove to be wrong / need correction afterwards, it's perceived as a cover up. If they don't give any information until full facts are established, it's perceived as them sharing notes in order to concoct a story.

And yes, I am aware that their record isn't unblemished in this regard which in turn means people will (rightly) want to challenge the version of events. That's the purpose of the inquest.

Harry Stanley,
Azelle Rodney,
James Ashley,
Jean Charles De Menezes,
Sean Rigg,
Ian Tomlinson,
Derek Bennet,
Diarmuid O'Neill,
David Elwin
Mark Duggan...

All unarmed, all killed by the police. Most had their names blackened post mortem to manufacture consent for state sponsored murder. We have a police force whose role is essentially to enforce martial law.

We face an attack on our civil liberties and the best some of you can come up with is 'gun carrying thug'? Yeah, and De Menezes was dressed in a bulky coat and running from police.

I feel sorry for the honest cops trying to make the world a better place. And for the victims of the above murders. But when there hasn't been a single successful prosecution (in the Tomlinson case especially it's an outrage) then hard questions must be asked.

did anyone see newsnight?
the Met Comissioner was at great pains to explain how they were trying to be sensitive to the local community and claiming that theyve improved stop and search etc and trust was improved

Duggan family friend and chairman of the harringey stop & search monitoring group: 'actually I was pulled over and searched for 45mins on the way to the TV studio today, threatened to have my car taken away, because of my colour!'
😳

'actually I was pulled over and searched for 45mins on the way to the TV studio today, threatened to have my car taken away!'

He could try dressing like we wasn't a drug dealing pimp.

EDIT to your edit. Colour my arse. Stupid haircut and clothes were his defining characteristic.

p8ddy,

Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale

Armed, clearly dangerous and not killed by the police. Incapacitated, and then given immediate first aid.

It isn't always as black and white as some may wish to portray.

threatened to have my car taken away, because of my colour!'

Wow they actually said that?

The message of "don't carry a 'kin gun" should now be crystal clear at least.

The message of "don't carry a 'kin gun" should now be crystal clear at least.

I would prefer it if people carrying guns were arrested and stood trial.

Honest opinion is that if you carry a gun on these shores without the legal right to do so you should be shot on scene unless you literally surrender immediately, any pissing about at all and that should seal the deal.

With drug dealers turning to celebrity rappers people forget what total and utter low life they really are.

He carried a gun, he had it coming.

^^^^^^^^^^You have just failed the Turing test

surfer - Member
threatened to have my car taken away, because of my colour!'
Wow they actually said that?

nope thats what he said unless you want to change what ive written

5thelephant I lived in harringey for 4 years with a stupid haircut, never got searched once (even when I may have been carring drugs)

I wasnt actually aware that silly hair was a crime

wonder why they pulled over david lammy his hairs very short?
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/08/mark-duggan-inquest-serious-questions-police-relations ]

In April 2005 I was stopped by the police. It was not the first time. As a young black man, being stopped on the street becomes part of everyday life, but this time was by far the most unnerving. I was on my way home from a constituency event with my older brother – a magistrate – in his Audi, when we suddenly noticed an ominous grey police van right on our tail. Seconds later, a marked police car forced its way alongside.

We pulled over and were immediately surrounded by heavily armed Operation Trident officers, shouting at us not to move and to raise our hands. Hearts pounding and minds racing, we did as we were told. I quickly managed to convince them that I was the local MP. Immediately their manner changed. They apologised, gave a mumbled explanation about mistaken identity, and promptly left. For them, I expect the incident was quickly forgotten and probably laughed off. But I was left with the nagging thought that it would only have taken one wrong movement – one inadvertent raise of the arm – and there is a chance I would not be here today.

Honest opinion is that if you carry a gun on these shores without the legal right to do so you should be shot on scene unless you literally surrender immediately, any pissing about at all and that should seal the deal.

So summary execution, then? Nice.

Armed, clearly dangerous and not killed by the police. Incapacitated, and then given immediate first aid.

On these two - there was 360degrees clear vision/sight around. As could be seen from the footage.

Have the posters on here actually seen a Toyota Previa? Its a big vehicle and if you approach one from the corners/side to the sliding door (and from the otherside) you are never going to have a clear view to ensure YOUR and your colleagues safety.

I also don't think people here have experienced the real outside world beyond being burgulared or maybe bullied at school.

These officers have to deal with some real pondlife on a daily basis non-stop.

Junkyard

http://www.traumaregister.co.uk/Articles/critical_incident_amnesia.htm

5thelephant I lived in harringey for 4 years with a stupid haircut, never got searched once (even when I may have been carring drugs)

Hora, very valid point re the distinction. I suppose the point I was trying to illustrate is that it isn't always a case of 'killing' someone for armed police in the UK. I'm immensely glad that they're not only held to, but operate to, such high standards, and face such high levels of scrutiny every time a shot is fired, regardless of the outcome.

As someone mentioned earlier, far better that any police shooting incident results in an inquest and headlines, than being 'just another'.

So summary execution, then? Nice.

Ninfan Cheers and quite interesting.

Honest opinion is that if you carry a gun on these shores without the legal right to do so you should be shot on scene unless you literally surrender immediately, any pissing about at all and that should seal the deal.

You know this is a comic, right?
[img] [/img]

When the riots happened it brought it starkly to me just how grateful I am to the Police and just how much we take them for granted.

Absolute scum who would never work or want to work who take from society and then scream that its society against them if benefits are removed or questioned thought they could do what they wanted.

I for one, saw the riots (in part) as a positive reinforcement of what members of the Police do for us.

**** the rest of you.

What do you think Duggan was going to do with the illegal handgun he'd bought? Wait for a court verdict before he shot someone with it?

So you're suggesting that the state should summarily kill people to show that killing people is wrong?

So you're suggesting that the state should summarily kill people to show that killing people is wrong?

CaptainFlashheart...

Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale

Armed, clearly dangerous and not killed by the police. Incapacitated, and then given immediate first aid.

It isn't always as black and white as some may wish to portray.

You're right - it's not always black and white. I'm not condemning the entire police force. There are lots of cops whose only intention is to make our lives safer and happier.

Being cynical, I'd also say that the fact members of the public were filming events may have tempered the response of the more zealous officers.

I'm not sure that I follow the first aid comment however - it's not a bonus not be murdered by the police or left to die in the street.

and the small matter the london wide riots following the police failure to communicate with the family

I don't really think that the riots were all down to Duggan's shooting and I'm pretty sure you don't either. Almost nobody who was interviewed said they were out there to redress the balance by burning down furniture shops etc, most just wanted to smash and rob.

Being cynical, I'd also say that the fact members of the public were filming events may have tempered the response of the more zealous officers.

So if they shoot someone they're violent racist murderers and if they don't they're being sneaky. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

I would prefer it if people carrying guns were arrested and stood trial.

I'd prefer it if people just didn't carry guns.

rusty90...

The jury decided that he wasn't summarily killed. It does however highlight the risks of acquiring an illegal weapon - you may intend to kill someone else but end up dead yourself.

A jury also decided that Ian Tomlinson wasn't summarily killed. Didn't make that judgement correct either. Unless you're suggesting that Ian Tomlinson's killing highlighted the dangers of walking home from work? And if you walk home from work you can expect Police to murder you?

Getting on tube trains, while in possession of the wrong hue of skin, can also rightfully lead to being shot 8 times in the head at point blank range

kimbers - Member

surfer - Member
threatened to have my car taken away, because of my colour!'
Wow they actually said that?

nope thats what he said unless you want to change what ive written

So it may not necessarily be true then?

I'd prefer it if people just didn't carry guns.

So would I. That way, we'd avoid unarmed civilians being shot dead.

p8ddy, was more about the standards involved, especially when under intense pressure. I thought the way they handled that situation was exemplary, and should be held up as such.

[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3974461.stm ]Caerful with those table legs![/url]

surfer - Member

So it may not necessarily be true then?

just like a Met police statement !!

CaptainFlashheart...

I agree - from reports, the police did handle it well. This should be standard practice though. Where Police fail to uphold those standards they should face the consequences.

Basically, I'm very wary of it becoming the norm to say 'Well done Police, you didn't execute anyone in the course of your duty!'

I would prefer it if people carrying guns were arrested and stood trial.

However, just shooting them on sight does save a small fortune in legal fees.....

Wont comment on the actual verdict as I dont know all the evidence - however

Why police stopped him in the first place?

Because he was known to be a very naughty boy, was known for carrying a gun, being part of a violent gang, and generally being a nasty piece of work. The car was stopped based on intelligence he was carrying a gun on him at that time.

IMO if Police have evidence that you use a gun, then fairplay that you can expect to get shot... unless of course you have turned up at a Police station and handed the gun over the day before.

Simple fact is that he would have never been shot if 1. He hadnt carried a gun. 2. Been part of a gang.

Simples really isnt it.

Binners...

Harry Stanley - Carrying a table leg whilst sounding Irish? He was asking for it.

I wonder how many times the initial police statement contained 'IRA' before they realised he was Scottish?

I felt a little of the fall out back in the riots that occured after the Duggan shooting. Just down the road where the Appt is is a notorously deprived area of London. We've never had any issues living here, none at all. Yet the riots brought out the bad and angst in folks, we saw cars burned, shops smashed and looted (only a few, but enough to bring it home) It was quite odd walking past a shop with the windows taken out and rubbish everywhere, quite odd. But the damage was caused to local people by local people, so really local people were damaging thier own environment around people they know, families they know.
Really bloody odd way to behave IMO.
As for the Duggan shooting, I'm with the Police. The guy should not have been carrying a gun, to carry a gun IMO means you are either under threat or are about to use threat, he had to opportunity to disarm (he did so) but the threat remained.
It is rather sad that the family have to keep fighting the justice system, the interviews shown on TV clearly showed a man covering his face and head yet supporting the Mother of Duggan, if you have nothing to hide then show your face...

This:

The overwhelming message I get from this is don't have an illegal firearm. All the rest is cobblers really. If you have a gun about your person it's just not going to end well is it?

This:

Mark Duggan is a victim of himself only. He has been arrested before and escaped justice probably through very good free legal advice. It is a classic example of someone who believes they somehow operate outside of consequential behaviour, that their actions do not impact upon themselves, if it does then it's not their fault. Mark Duggan refused to learn from his behaviour and pushed this to the maximum. I know if I was subjected to a hard stop by armed police with the commands of "don't move"' the last thing on my mind would be to jump out and flail my arms about getting rid of the evidence. He gambled, probably for the umpteenth time and lost. If he stayed put, got charged for possession of a firearm we know that he would be out after serving half of his sentence. He made this happen, no-one else.

This:

So the unasked question is: who would Mark Duggan have killed with HIS gun, if the police hadn't stopped him?

Possibly this:

And would there have been a riot if he did kill someone?

This:

but generally if you are stopped by armed police, moving very slowly and doing exactly what they say would be a good idea. So would not being involved in gang crime in London.

This:

What do you think Duggan was going to do with the illegal handgun he'd bought? Wait for a court verdict before he shot someone with it?

Sums things up quite well for me. Don't do bad things or it will end badly for you, and could end very badly if circumstances coincide.

All the rest is 'what if' and conjecture.

Here's another 'what if'. What if the police bullet had passed through Duggan and killed an innocent bystander by chance?

That would be Duggan's fault too - he was the reason that those police were there and were armed. No one else.

Here's a list of British police officers shot in the line of duty, not including those killed during The Troubles. How many of their names do you know, and how many of you are clamouring for justice over their deaths? Gunshot victims only, there's another 180 or so who died through other means, on the course of their normal duties -

Alger, Charles William Alger
Avis, William James Avis, DCM
Barnett, Edward Alexander Barnett, QPM
Barton, Andrew Barton
Baxter, Allan, Allan George Baxter
Bentley, Robert Bentley
Beshenivsky, Sharon Beshenivsky
Bishop, Brian John Bishop
Bone, Fiona Bone
Brereton, Roger Brereton
Broadhurst, Ian Nigel Broadhurst
Brown, Laurence, Laurence Peter Brown
Campbell, James Campbell
Carlton, Gavin Richard Carlton
Choat, Walter Charles Choat
Codling, Raymond Anthony Codling
Coward, Ian Coward, QPM
Crouch, William Frank Crouch
Davies, Evan, Evan Thomas Davies
Dawson, Brian Dawson
Dibell, Ian Dibell
Dunne, Patrick Dunne
Edgar, Nathanael Edgar
Fletcher, Yvonne Joyce Fletcher
Fox, Geoffrey Fox
Fraser, Duncan Alexander Fraser
Goodman, Glenn Thomas Goodman
Gibson, William Gibson
Gray, Richard Gray
Guthrie, Peter Charles Guthrie, QPM
Gutteridge, George William Gutteridge
Haigh, David Ian Haigh
Head, Christopher Head
Hughes, Nicola Hughes
Hutchins, Frederick George Hutchins, QPM
Jagger, Arthur Gordon Jagger
Johnston, Robert Johnston
Kelly, James Kelly
Kew, John William Kew
MacKenzie, Angus MacLeod MacKenzie, QPM
Macleod, John Macleod
Mason, Francis John Mason, QGM
Miles, Sidney George Miles, KPM
Mussell, George Bertram Mussell, KPM
Olds, Philip Michael Olds, QGM
O'Donnell, James O'Donnell, QPM
Pawsey, Philip Pawsey, QPM
Porter, James Brian Porter
Pritchard, Robert Pritchard
Purdy, Raymond William Purdy
Richardson, Gerry Irving Richardson, GC
Russell, George, George William Russell, QPM
Schofield, John Schofield
Shiell, William Ralph Shiell
Smith, Dennis, Dennis Arthur Smith, QPM
Speed, John Richard Speed
Straughan, Matthew Walls Straughan
Taylor, Barry, Barry John Taylor
Thomson, Robert C. Thomson, MBE
Tibble, Stephen Andrew Tibble, QPM
Tucker, Charles Tucker
Tyler, William Frederick Tyler
Walls, Arthur Walls
Walters, Phillip John Walters
Willis, Francis James Willis
Willits, Albert Willits
Winter, David Thomas Winter
Wilkinson, William Adiel Wilkinson
Wombwell, David Wombwell
Woodward, Ian Weir Woodward
Young, Alfred Young, KPM

Does this excuse incidents like those that caused the unlawful deaths of Jean Charles De Menezes or Ian Tomlinson? No, of course it doesn't, nothing does. But for those who think those incidents give them carte blanche to label everything the police does as corrupt or self-serving or bigoted, I've got to say up yours, because those people you're giving sh!t to are out there day and night, risking (and sometimes paying with) theirs lives to protect you from the likes of a Mark Duggan, a Michael Adebolajo or a Michael Adebowale.

Sums things up quite well for me. Don't do bad things or it will end badly for you, and could end very badly if circumstances coincide.

So again, you're advocating summary execution?

Could you explain what de Menezes and Tomlinson did wrong?

bikebouy - Member
the interviews shown on TV clearly showed a man covering his face and head yet supporting the Mother of Duggan, if you have nothing to hide then show your face...

because the Met evan have a rep for coming after the families of genuinely innocent murder victims

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/23/stephen-lawrence-undercover-police-smears ]http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/23/stephen-lawrence-undercover-police-smears[/url]

if you have nothing to hide then show your face..

Yep. Given the frankly marvellous state of relations between the met and the local community, Its absolutely inconceivable that there would be any consequences or repercussions for you being recognised protesting against the police

De Menezes jumped a barrier at Stockwell tube and sprinted down to the platforms and had visible wires protruding from his jacket from a music player. It was at a time of heightened anxiety over bombings on public transport. Did he deserve to die because of these actions? Of course not. Did his actions contribute to the perceived threat he presented? Quite considerably. The people really to blame for this, of course, are the nutters who blew themselves up on 7/7/05.

Ian Tomlinson was very unlucky. He went along for a bit of a 'look-see' at some riots. I would not have made a beeline for any likely riots as I would be wary of being caught up in something involving a large crowd not acting rationally. He was not summarily executed, though. His death was a by-product of what was probably assault, aggravated by unknown health issues.

If people didn't do bad things then innocent people wouldn't get dragged in either would they?

De Menezes jumped a barrier at Stockwell tube and sprinted down to the platforms and had visible wires protruding from his jacket from a music player

He didn't jump the barrier that was police misinformation, and it clearly works as some still believe it despite the many many times it has been exposed as a complete lie.

[i]Menezes entered the Tube station at about 10:00am, stopping to pick up a free newspaper. He used his Oyster card to pay the fare, walked through the barriers, and descended the escalator slowly. He then ran across the platform to board the newly arrived train. Menezes boarded the train and found one of the first available seats.[/i]

Fair enough - I didn't know that.

Still ultimately down to the actions of the 7/7 bombers though.

De Menezes jumped a barrier at Stockwell tube and sprinted down to the platforms and had visible wires protruding from his jacket from a music player.

No he didn't. That just what the police initially said to try and cover their arses! It all turned out to be lies. As verified in court by independent witnesses.

What they said happened to Ian Tomlinson was a pack of lies too, as disproved by independent video evidence

Can you see a pattern emerging here?

Still ultimately down to the actions of the 7/7 bombers though.

Christ on a bendybus. Whats it like, being you? Is that some quantum karmic thing? Butterflies wings and earthquakes in China type stuff?

pondo - Member
Here's a list of British police officers shot in the line of duty, not including those killed during The Troubles. How many of their names do you know, and how many of you are clamouring for justice over their deaths? Gunshot victims only, there's another 180 or so who died through other means, on the course of their normal duties -

Alger, Charles William Alger
Avis, William James Avis, DCM
Barnett, Edward Alexander Barnett, QPM
Barton, Andrew Barton
Baxter, Allan, Allan George Baxter
Bentley, Robert Bentley
Beshenivsky, Sharon Beshenivsky
Bishop, Brian John Bishop
Bone, Fiona Bone
Brereton, Roger Brereton
Broadhurst, Ian Nigel Broadhurst
Brown, Laurence, Laurence Peter Brown
Campbell, James Campbell
Carlton, Gavin Richard Carlton
Choat, Walter Charles Choat
Codling, Raymond Anthony Codling
Coward, Ian Coward, QPM
Crouch, William Frank Crouch
Davies, Evan, Evan Thomas Davies
Dawson, Brian Dawson
Dibell, Ian Dibell
Dunne, Patrick Dunne
Edgar, Nathanael Edgar
Fletcher, Yvonne Joyce Fletcher
Fox, Geoffrey Fox
Fraser, Duncan Alexander Fraser
Goodman, Glenn Thomas Goodman
Gibson, William Gibson
Gray, Richard Gray
Guthrie, Peter Charles Guthrie, QPM
Gutteridge, George William Gutteridge
Haigh, David Ian Haigh
Head, Christopher Head
Hughes, Nicola Hughes
Hutchins, Frederick George Hutchins, QPM
Jagger, Arthur Gordon Jagger
Johnston, Robert Johnston
Kelly, James Kelly
Kew, John William Kew
MacKenzie, Angus MacLeod MacKenzie, QPM
Macleod, John Macleod
Mason, Francis John Mason, QGM
Miles, Sidney George Miles, KPM
Mussell, George Bertram Mussell, KPM
Olds, Philip Michael Olds, QGM
O'Donnell, James O'Donnell, QPM
Pawsey, Philip Pawsey, QPM
Porter, James Brian Porter
Pritchard, Robert Pritchard
Purdy, Raymond William Purdy
Richardson, Gerry Irving Richardson, GC
Russell, George, George William Russell, QPM
Schofield, John Schofield
Shiell, William Ralph Shiell
Smith, Dennis, Dennis Arthur Smith, QPM
Speed, John Richard Speed
Straughan, Matthew Walls Straughan
Taylor, Barry, Barry John Taylor
Thomson, Robert C. Thomson, MBE
Tibble, Stephen Andrew Tibble, QPM
Tucker, Charles Tucker
Tyler, William Frederick Tyler
Walls, Arthur Walls
Walters, Phillip John Walters
Willis, Francis James Willis
Willits, Albert Willits
Winter, David Thomas Winter
Wilkinson, William Adiel Wilkinson
Wombwell, David Wombwell
Woodward, Ian Weir Woodward
Young, Alfred Young, KPM

Does this excuse incidents like those that caused the unlawful deaths of Jean Charles De Menezes or Ian Tomlinson? No, of course it doesn't, nothing does. But for those who think those incidents give them carte blanche to label everything the police does as corrupt or self-serving or bigoted, I've got to say up yours, because those people you're giving sh!t to are out there day and night, risking (and sometimes paying with) theirs lives to protect you from the likes of a Mark Duggan, a Michael Adebolajo or a Michael Adebowale.

Good post.

Take into account the officer who was shot in the face by Raoul Moat and lived....there are others like him who dont make the list above because they didnt die in the line of duty but have been horribly disabled by scum with guns.

I used to want to join the Police but after 14 years as a Paramedic and having seen their job up close its not something i would consider now.

They deal with an underclass who operate with a different set of morals to the rest of us, for a huge amount of their clientele there is a massive amount of kudos seen in resisting the Police when asked to do something....even something reasonable like 'please stop swearing and go home' can and does result in a confrontation and then the scum scream foul when the end result is an arrest and a night in the cells.

Basically when the Police identify themselves and issue an instruction you should comply, the hows-whys-and wherefores can be sorted out later, unfortunately these idiots try to resist, argue the toss at the time and wonder why the Police resort to force....

....if you thought Duggan had a gun and you told him to raise his hands and put himself on the floor (a reasonable request) and instead he ignored this instruction and started to turn towards you, what would you do?....

This is the kind of split second decision making the armed officers make, i dont envy them.
I would always prioritise my own safety too.

He had a gun but threw it away, could the officers be sure of that?....what if he had a second gun?....like i said, horrible situation for all concerned but as others have said; dont carry a gun and if the Police stop you try to be polite and comply with their instructions, playing billy-big-bollocks when armed officers are pointing a gun at you is not the time or place.

An idiot took himself out of the gene pool is how i view this incident.

dannyh nicely illustrates the power of the Police spreading misinformation, its been widely reported that demenezes didnt jump the barrier for years now, yet the myth persits

David Rathband R.I.P.

Mendez- yes remember the bombings? Binners in Hollywood movies the good guys never shoot an innocent by accident in the heat of the moment.

In real life, sadly it does happen.

If the people protecting us make the odd mistake in difficult circumstances then I for one, am prepared to accept this.

Its hardly Brazil and its death squads ffs.

Christ on a bendybus. Whats it like, being you? Is that some quantum karmic thing? Butterflies wings and earthquakes in China type stuff?

It's quite easy being me, because I stick to the rules (mostly), certainly stick to rules that would wind up with me being hurt or killed, and try to stay away from people who don't.

Are you seriously suggesting that fifty odd people being blown to smithereens on publich transport has no causal link to the De Menezes case?

In that case, I think you might be deluding yourself......

It's quite easy being me, because I stick to the rules (mostly), certainly stick to rules that would wind up with me being hurt or killed, and try to stay away from people who don't.

So did De Menezes.

If the people protecting us make the odd mistake in difficult circumstances then I for one, am prepared to accept this.

I think many of us would be more accepting of it if the perpetrators weren't quite so keen on covering it up.

Did the Jury/inquest use the word cover up or are you a plastic-anarchist who has taken recreational drugs in your life? 😉

So did De Menezes.

Yes, and it is a crying shame that what happened did.

If there hadn't been a heightened state of tension owing to the 7/7 attacks it probably wouldn't have happened.

Police lying (I am reliably informed by my fellow posters) is not acceptable, even if a cock-up has resulted in the death of someone. That's a bad thing too. And you know what - that also contributes to some of the attitudes towards police.

You see, it is always a minority spoiling it for a majority.

[img] https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTYo2LmIBvF72pTfiHo5Ck_8sHsZxpUQp4qRPlHF0nJ6Cr47nOEyQ [/img]

Here's a list of British police officers shot in the line of duty, not including those killed during The Troubles. How many of their names do you know, and how many of you are clamouring for justice over their deaths? Gunshot victims only, there's another 180 or so who died through other means, on the course of their normal duties -

Is there any evidence that any of their murders were mishandled by the investigating authority? If the authorities handled the cases correctly and to the best of their abilities, then how are we meant to clamour for further justice?

You are also making the mistake of having serious misgivings for the process of the shooting and then it's investigation, to "clamouring for justice" in some sort of bad way.

It's quite easy being me, because I stick to the rules (mostly), certainly stick to rules that would wind up with me being hurt or killed, and try to stay away from people who don't.

I had to run the last 50 metres to catch a tram this morning, thank god no armed police saw me break the rules.

Did the Jury/inquest use the word cover up or are you a plastic-anarchist who has taken recreational drugs in your life?

In the cases of de Menezes and Tomlinson, we know the police told lies. In the case of Duggan, the police account conflicts with some of the other evidence heard. Is it really surprising that people are reluctant to take what the police say at face value?

I think peoples concern is that when someone loses their life, then you would expect the behaviour of the police to come under the closest possible scrutiny, and investigated in the minutest detail. Yet repeatedly it has been demonstrated that under these very circumstances, the Police were quite comfortable colluding, fabricating evidence, feeding false stories to the press, deliberately smearing peoples names, etc, etc

Which begs the question, if they're comfortable and confident (suggesting being well practiced) in doing all that while being under that amount of scrutiny, then what are they getting up to when there isn't that much attention on them

Relationships between the met and some of the communities it is supposed to serve were at an all time low prior to Duggen being shot. Have you stopped to think why that is?

[img] [/img]

hora - Member
Did the Jury/inquest use the word cover up or are you a plastic-anarchist who has taken recreational drugs in your life?

the judge in his summing up stated that the police had colluded to lie about the circumstances around the death of de menezes afterwards

Relationships between the met and some of the communities it is supposed to serve were at an all time low prior to Duggen being shot. Have you stopped to think why that is?

because some people are dicks..like those that idolise the likes of Raoul Mote as a "folk hero"

I hate the police with a passion, but in this instance the Jury have decided that based on all the evidence, cross examination of witnesses and police involved and the balance of probability, that is was most likely by a significant majority decision that the rozzers acted correctly based on the information and actions at the time of the incident. You can never apply "eagle eyed hindsight" to a situation like this.

If the people protecting us make the odd mistake in difficult circumstances then I for one, am prepared to accept this.

We may have to accept they happen but we cannot really accept that it is EVER ok to kill some innocents and we must do all we can to make sure it does not happen
i doubt STW will have any practical suggestion

We may have to accept they happen but we cannot really accept that it is EVER ok to kill some innocents and we must do all we can to make sure it does not happen

An honour to be able to copy and paste the Copy and Paste King himself when he's made such a valid point.

Well put, sir, well put.

My child doesn't carry a gun.

Hora, neither did many of those shot so are you prepared to pay the price with your loved ones or just someone elses?

Accidents happen but people end up dead
Its not acceptable but I have not seen a workable solution to help us minimise this - humans make mistakes, armed humans arresting a person they think is armed or wired to bombs make mistakes and shoot folk [ that is far worse IMHO than this one tbh]

Tomlison, in my opinion, the copper should have done some time for that one and the coppers/force are responsible for allowing him to remain in the force and for not ensuring he followed his orders. He was clearly a bad apple who assaulted an individual for no reason. i dont think he meant to kill him - if his actions did kill him

All the cases are not identical and of course the force will make mistakes. What do we do though to minimise this
Has anyone got a serious solution?

junkyard lets create a world where 4 young men are never told on the basis of hard intelligence that they have to go underground and identify and stop a ready to go suicide bomber before he detonates his bomb. Seriously would you follow a suicide bomber into his target in the hope you could stop him before he detonates? And if you did would not a quick kill be high on your list of things to do to save the situation.

Many of the things that put the armed officers in that situation in the DeMendes case were flawed (perhaps the difference between relief and theoretical exercise, the key error occurring when a surveillance officer had a piss) the way the aftermath was handled was flawed(cos it was the met) but the actions of the officers in the tube were heroic .

I agree with you 100% about the Tomlinson case.

As noted, there are no winners here.

An unpleasant man from a deeply unpleasant family, Uncle Noonans..., meets unpleasant end at the hands of the police. Death is seized upon as an excuse for widespread criminality.

Shouts for justice from said family seem somewhat incongruous though, given their history.

Well one solution would be for the 'community' to be subject to as much intense investigation as the Police, and see how many of them come out as the innocent victims, they say they are. Gang culture, violence and drugs are rife in certain areas of London, yet the 'community' accept it and even shelter those involved. There needs to be a bit more honesty on their side.

I still can't work out why the Guardian in particular seem to want to support these thugs, the Chartist movement they definitely aren't.

Junkyard

High stress situation, no not a lathe order. I mean death.

You shoot someone and its investigated that you were right in that split second. Fine.

You shoot someone and it proves it was a fatal mistake - we jail you.

Would you do that job?

Its not hollywood, no one is saying yippy-kay-yaaa mutha fuka running around in a white vest shooting foreign-sounding blonde-haired guys.