[Closed] Mark Duggan lawfully killed

[quote=p8ddy ]In the interests absolutely of balance - I guess it's possible that he opened the box, grabbed the gun and threw it away (as Crankboy reckons)

Possible? Isn't that by far the most likely thing given the available evidence (not all of which could have been made up by the police)?

The gun wasn't in his possession at the time of the shooting however. I think that much is clear.

Which is still irrelevant if the police thought he was in possession - it seems even you now accept the possibility of him having been in possession shortly before, and given nobody seems to have seen him dispose of it, it's more than reasonable for the policemen to assume he still had it. Anything else is with benefit of hindsight only.

Why? Because in the duggan case it now appears the police were 'used' by a rival gangs 'intelligence'

[quote=derekfish ]The key expression is wether or not Duggan was lawfully killed.
I believe not.

So you're disagreeing with a bunch of people who have far more information on which to make a decision than you, and likely also understand better the legal definition of lawful killing? Well done.

[quote=p8ddy ]Anyway folks - I'm off.

As accurate as the rest of your comments I see...

[quote=p8ddy ]molgrips...

[quote=p8ddy ]derekfish...

The gun wasn't in his possession at the time of the shooting however. I think that much is clear.

Crankboy and Pondo - I may disagree with you on this, but it's been pretty thought provoking and interesting. That's never a bad thing.

Pondo...

Damn your eyes man!! 😀

... You portray the police as a bunch of armed clowns, just running around and having a laugh, popping a cap in anyone they think might be a bit of a risk (or maybe not - hey, let's shoot them anyway and see what happens!!!). For someone who has friends and/or family in the force as you do, that's pretty disgusting. I'd ask you to have a bit of respect for their professionalism, but that doesn't seem likely to happen.

No I'm portraying the cop as someone who lost control. Have you ever known someone who murdered someone else? Or who's been the victim in a murder?

I did. A friend of mine was kicked to death. Started out as a fight (the other guy attacked my mate over a girl), and the other guy just lost control. Kept kicking him in the head. And killed him.

Did the guy set out to murder him? No. But when the fight started he lost control. He got carried away and lost sense of proportionality. He had no idea what he was doing. He murdered my mate. It wasn't an accident. He meant to keep going, but it was a primal thing, he lost his senses.

That doesn't justify it. Nor does it make me hate him less, but I do know that he was badly affected by it. By the understanding afterward of what he'd done.

I think the cop is *human*. And humans are not perfect. I've read a fair bit on how Police prepare for operations - listening to loud music, hyping themselves up. And I think that's what happened. You can draw from that I think cops are conscienceless clowns, but it's far from the reality of what I think.

That's not how it worked though, was it? Presented with far more evidence than we'll ever see, a jury declared that Duggan was not unlawfully killed. "Shooting him on the off chance" was not what happened.

Jury systems are far from perfect. And their conclusions aren't always right. If they were, why are there miscarriages of justice? Why do people brief the press? To influence the jury.

You think they have reached the correct verdict - I disagree.

p8ddy,

You're the one being pedandic about things. I freely admit that spelling is not my forte but that's all you have to come back at me.

You've done well on your back pedalling though.

mk1fan..

Right you are.

You started with the smart arse 'not an IT professional' nonsense because I copy pasted the wrong name from a big list of discussions I was having. When it backfires because you can't copy paste correctly yourself, don't come crying with sad little mea culpas. You can't eat your cake and still have it.

Backpedaling? Yeah. You're about as on the money with that as you are with your ad hominems.

However, regardless - I think there must have been a better way of dealing with this.

I don't think there will ever be a 'right' or 'better' way of dealing with such instances. Such instances can be reviewed and alternative protocols implemented but as time marches on then these will become as redundant as protocols laid down in the 60s. It's harsh / blunt but generally speaking significant improvements tend to need a preceding tragedy to learn from. For example the Bradford City fire.

That's not to say Mr Duggan's death was a tragedy.

I've read a fair bit on how Police prepare for operations - listening to loud music, hyping themselves up

Where was that then? My experience of waiting for operations (public order ones rather than firearms ones admittedly) both in and with a number of different forces is sitting in canteens or the backs of vans sleeping, farting, playing cards or fighting over the packed lunches so as not to be left with an egg sandwich. I have never seen what you describe in more than a decade of public order policing.

No I'm portraying the cop as someone who lost control. Have you ever known someone who murdered someone else? Or who's been the victim in a murder?

I did. A friend of mine was kicked to death. Started out as a fight (the other guy attacked my mate over a girl), and the other guy just lost control. Kept kicking him in the head. And killed him.

But (there's always a "but", isn't there...) I can't believe that the police on these occasions are in the same category. These are professional people at the very top of their game, they haven't wandered in off the street with an interest in shooting people. Their decisions have been made under extreme pressure, with extreme responsibilities, after years of training - I've no doubt that in all cases the adrenalin has been fast flowing, but while the decisions might in retrospect have question marks raised over them, I've similarly got no doubt that the decisions were made honestly in view of the situationa and intelligence the officers on the scene had at the moment in question.

mk1fan...

Such instances can be reviewed and alternative protocols implemented but as time marches on then these will become as redundant as protocols laid down in the 60s. It's harsh / blunt but generally speaking significant improvements tend to need a preceding tragedy to learn from. For example the Bradford City fire.

Hold on to your hat. But....

I agree. Bad/momentous events have historically been the catalyst for change. Humans are remarkably bad at enacting change without a tragedy or something extreme happening. A lot of health and safety laws were formulated this way after people saying 'never again'... It feeds the appetite for change.

I'd hold my wheesht there for fear of starting a new disagreement. 😉

not an IT professional' nonsense 

Firstly, I made no claim that you don't work in IT. What I said was that there's no such thing as an IT Professional.

The term 'Professional' has a specific meaning and, as I said in my initial post, if you have to ask then you're unlikely to understand. Well done for demonstrating the point.

Again, l freely admit that I'm protective of the term becuase I'm a Professional.

You claim to be an IT Professional in your profile but demonstrate no understanding of the term 'Professional' and it's meaning.

pondo...

Man, I'm so sorry - that's horrific, for you as a friend and for the family. Really, both of the victim AND the perpetrator, because they've all been f***ed up by it.

Cheers. It was a long time ago now, but yeah, it casts a long shadow. And probably also drives my opinions on this here...

But (there's always a "but", isn't there...) I can't believe that the police on these occasions are in the same category. These are professional people at the very top of their game, they haven't wandered in off the street with an interest in shooting people.

You're right. They are - but they're also human. Golfers get the yips, Footballers have stinkers. Experienced pilots misjudge and crash planes and helicopters. It happens. It's human nature. That may sound shallow - but if a relatively low pressure situation can get to an experienced player, why not a cop? We're all fallible. And from there it's 'back up yer mates'. I don't think cops are power crazed murderous lunatics. But I do think people make hella bad decisions in bad circumstances.

Maybe I'm making excuses for bad people, but I don't think so.

Their decisions have been made under extreme pressure, with extreme responsibilities, after years of training - I've no doubt that in all cases the adrenalin has been fast flowing, but while the decisions might in retrospect have question marks raised over them, I've similarly got no doubt that the decisions were made honestly in view of the situationa and intelligence the officers on the scene had at the moment in question.

I agree with most, up till the 'made with honesty'. I think that's the case for the most part (which is why these are rarish occurrences). But beyond that I think sometimes people click into a different mode. Maybe also governed by the knowledge of the people they're dealing with - Rash decisions made because they think they're dealing with a bad guy, or with the enemy or whatever. It does happen. Look at the soldier in Iraq who was tried for killing that guy on camera. A moment of madness in an otherwise distinguished career.

I just don't think that when it happens it should be consequence free.

And this time I AM away! 🙂

I don't think it's a case of humans not implementing things out of 'lethargy'. You don't know what you don't know. A lot of what seems obvious to 'us' now would seem wild fiction to say a Victorian.

mk1fan...

Again, l freely admit that I'm protective of the term becuase I'm a Professional.

You're a professional alright.

Not sure you want to hear my opinion at what though.

You claim to be an IT Professional in your profile but demonstrate no understanding of the term 'Professional' and it's meaning.

Because I can't copy paste?

Quoting the wrong person in an internet forum doesn't demonstrate much competence for an IT person.

I'll repeat - is the name on your passport 'mk1fan'? If not, then I'd suggest a little less looking at my profile to come up up with ill judged barbs and a little more on installing a spell checker.

Secondly, if you can find an IT position with a core competency 'posting meaningless bullshit on STW' please direct me to it. Otherwise shut the damn up.

Now, go be a 'Profeesional' (sic) to someone else.

...puts internet down...

steps away from the PC.

Just before you do, can you tell me where you 'read a fair bit on how Police prepare for operations - listening to loud music, hyping themselves up.' I'd be interested in reading it for myself.

thegreatape

Just before you do, can you tell me where you 'read a fair bit on how Police prepare for operations - listening to loud music, hyping themselves up.' I'd be interested in reading it for myself.

My apologies. I'm sure it was a Guardian article (I know, I know) at the time of the debates over kettling. Fairly sure about the student riots and quoted a police officer about Police tactics all the way back to the Miners strike.

I'll see if I can find it again, but can't promise. And of course, it comes with the caveat that just because the Guardian says it, it doesn't mean it's true.

[quote=mk1fan ]Firstly, I made no claim that you don't work in IT. What I said was that there's no such thing as an IT Professional.
The term 'Professional' has a specific meaning and, as I said in my initial post, if you have to ask then you're unlikely to understand. Well done for demonstrating the point.
Again, l freely admit that I'm protective of the term becuase I'm a Professional.
You claim to be an IT Professional in your profile but demonstrate no understanding of the term 'Professional' and it's meaning.

As it seems p8ddy has finally left the room, it seems a good time to pick you up on this. I'd certainly consider myself to be a professional (as in I have a profession which involves a significant amount of training and formal qualifications) and as it happens I work in IT. Maybe you'd like to explain to me why that isn't possible (and whilst you're about it what sort of professional you are)?

the great ape it is in the big book of internet facts which sound vaguely plausible to some but are in fact clearly bollocks

I heard you bump chests and stare each other in the face whilst screaming who the man and headbutting each other. You draw lots for the kill shot [ who then gets first pick on the butties [ no one is ever sure which is the more important ] and then leave screaming lets kill some ****er today in either a Capri or an Audi I forget which it was.

I've read a fair bit on how Police prepare for operations - listening to loud music, hyping themselves up. And I think that's what happened.

FWIW a very sensible viewpoint from somebody who is sadly no longer with us:

[quote=TandemJeremy]I believe in "no fault" investigations for police shootings - so we find out the truth and thus can train tehm better to prevent futrtyher tradgadies

(his spelling - can't be bothered correcting!)

p8ddy - thank you, although if it was the guardian I am no longer interested in reading it 😀

junkyard - it's all about the butties. ALL. (Actually maybe a little bit about the cars too).

aracer - I remember that, it was an interesting proposition. Can't see it ever happening though.

thegreatape...

I can't find any link to it - so probably best to disregard. It's one of those things that runs the risk of becoming an "internet fact" simply through repetition.

If I find anything I'll post - all I could find were links about Police playing loud music [u]at[/u] protesters... which isn't the same thing at all. 😀

No bother at all

aracer,

Certainly. Whilst acting in or having a professional attitude to work applies universally. Being a Professional requires more 'commitment'.

Ultimately, and simply, a Professional backs up their work / advice with independant indemnity insurances that extend a period of time after the advice / work has been completed REGARDLESS of whether the company is still trading. In my case, as / when I retire I have to maintain my PI for x years. Should I die in this time, my estate has to cover the cost of PI for the remaining period.

If I were so minded I could say FI and just let the RICS take the risks but a, I'm a Professional and b, I don't knowingly act negligently.

Because of the nature of the IT industry - it's 'rapidly' changing parameters - it would be demonstrably unreasonable to expect an IT consultant to provide similar levels of indemnity.

Because I can't copy paste

No. Because you are not a Professional. Your inability to cut and paste just makes you an inept IT Advisor at best.

What you're describing there might be required for some subset of professionals (independents who are acting as consultants mainly) but certainly not for all. I can envisage surveyors working for a company in a situation where they don't have to provide their own indemnity. I've not come across any previous definition of professional which only applies to consultants and precludes working for a company. Come to that nor do I see why it precludes IT consultants from being professionals because they don't indemnify over a long period - I'd think anybody decent would have insurance to cover any immediate issues if they were working in an area which required that (worth thinking about as it's something I may be doing myself), though you correctly identify things change quickly. That's an aspect of the difference in trades rather than whether one isn't professional.

To be honest I think that definition of yours is a little too wrapped up in your own view of the world from your own particular trade. Normal definition of professional that I was aware of is simply as I stated before that you have a profession, or if you want to formalise it a bit more I think most people would be happy that it applies to any job for which extended study and qualifications are required. Hence professional engineering institutions (the first on the list just happens to be the BCS).

I should have added that the indemnity also covers a third party that it is reasonable to foresee would also rely on the advice.

Any company, practice, individual, corporation, llp and any other type of business giving Professional advice needs PI. Indeed this is a requirement for membership for the Professional body - such as he RICS RIBA GMC etc. Clearly a business with employees has an ongoing policy so the retirement bit doesn't apply as, essentially, the advice is being given by the business.

I have not said that a business cannot be a Professional business.

It may well be an old fashioned view. However, why use the phrase if it didn't imply some form of competency to potential clients?

To put it another way, if the term doesn't carry some 'benefit' then why are people so keen to add it to their title / company blurb?

ETA; I'm not sure the word profession and professional are conected (historically) like that. Hhmmm. Might do some research on this.

For me a profession is a career that requires academic qualification together with admision to a profesional body that regulates and disciplines it's members and provides the necesarry safeguards for the public . So for me law degree followed by Law Society Finals admited to the Roll of solicitors get disciplined and kicked out by the SRA . Dr's have the GMC etc . Also as a Professional i am subject to conduct rules in how i do my job which take precedence over my clients and employers wishes and if i breach those rules i can lose my professional status and so my ability to work . Those rules not only cover my employment and job but also extend into my social and personal life so i can be disiplined for conduct out of work/employment.

i should make it clear that while i have on occasion had my conduct considered by my professional body i have never had a complaint upheld and have not been struck off.

My second post and last, in my honest opinion this whole thread is enough evidence why this once proud country is now ruined, I personally thought that this forum was pretty much visited by working class people who tow the line, pay their taxes know right from wrong ,pretty much the basis of what an ideal society needs, we go to bed get up in the morning get to work , in the mean time get the kids to school , work all day and some how get the kids from school with a parent there to look after them, we then run the kids to various clubs then go and coach footy and rugby for the kids and many other things,,why anyone here would want to fight the corner for someone who is everything we are not beggars belief. I'm 46 and cowboys and soldiers carry guns in my ideal world , the guy put himself on the radar in the position of do my actions today allow me go home to the family , or does the hard working policeman go home to kiss the kids good night?? I will sleep easy knowing the pc has the honour!! I will not be arguing with the idiots on here who will try and drag me down to their level and beat me with experience. Good night!!

You've got to love the internet. I'm not sure if the author of this has read the Daily Wail but the opening paragraphs could have lifted straight from the tabloid. Worth a read through though.

http://www.somegreymatter.com/professional.htm

It is completely off topic though.

crankboy certainly has a better explanation than I.

[quote=smiththemainman ]in my honest opinion this whole thread is enough evidence why this once proud country is now ruined

Personally I reckon that people using things posted on internet forums as evidence for this country being ruined is actually evidence of this country being ruined. Oh, er...

I personally thought that this forum was pretty much visited by working class people

Not professionals then?

[quote=mk1fan ]crankboy certainly has a better explanation than I.

The one which includes members of BCS?

you lack empathy and are arrogant enough to label folk who wish one less person dead as idiots
I am not sure what honour there is in killing an unarmed man and I doubt e copper feels as good about it as you do
Mk1 it is true that the 60s and PC gone mad are the cause of the decline though 😉

aracer,

It was clearly not an exhaustive list. If you're a member of a Professional Body that acts /complies / follows the parameters crankboy laid out then I would concour that you are a Professional. I am not aware of an IT body that does.

I have previously stated that everyday is an opportunity to learn so feel free to let me know the body you are a member of.

Oh and to be clear, I do not have a 'trade'.

junkyard,

It certainly did start with the 60s and PC madness. However, the article falls short as they, not once, thought of the children.

Jeez, what a load of shite this thread has turned into. WTF are those guys going on about up there?

soulwood...

mk1fan is trying out himself as a teacher.

That's about it.

I followed this last night without commenting (hard, at times) to see where it went.

Few comments: there are some real and serious issues being discussed here. About whether the verdict is correct, and whether the police can be better at dealing with the situation and the aftermath. I think most are agreed yes on both counts (on here and in the real world). Silly arguments about cut and paste errors or spelling mistakes have no place in deciding whose argument is more valid.

Second; this suggestion that the police prepare for ops like this by playing loud music and frothing their adrenaline levels into the red. I know that was retracted later but I have to comment; I'm not a firearms officer nor do i know any police firearms officers but I know a couple of guys who work in dangerous situations 'akin to' this type of work where at times they are called upon to put themselves and their colleagues at risk. And the last thing they do is pump themselves up to a point where judgement is impaired by adrenaline. The adrenaline comes naturally and needs managing. The time before the operation is more likely spent in reflection. Checking and double checking kit to make sure it'll work properly. Knowing nthat they are very likely about to face a situation threatening life or limb. Hoping they will make the right call when time comes. And hoping they don't let their colleagues down. Right now there are people facing this, and they need our support. I wouldn't swap places with them for the entire contents of a large warehouse in Northern Ireland.

The Times today carries a story about the Jury from the trial - who are now subject to protective measures and have guaranteed anonymity following threats made from the public gallery in the court room.

The article also tells us a bit more about the family and illustrates the difficult job the police have to do - protecting a man who only a week earlier was making threats to kill policemen.

[i]"Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, met community leaders yesterday morning and expressed confidence that progress would be made.

“This is about a relationship. It has much history and many difficult moments over the years. Yesterday was another,” he said. “The positive and constructive way in which we have discussed this challenge gives me great hope for the future.”

The threat to kill two policemen in revenge for Duggan’s death is recorded in two entries in a cache of leaked police documents. A man newly confirmed as one of the six targets of the operation that led to Duggan being shot was reported by an officer to have made the threats.
Less than a week later, police were called on to protect the same man, after intelligence that his life would be at risk should he attend the all-night wake held after Duggan’s burial.

Duggan’s link to the man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, can now be revealed. Police say both were members of the Tottenham Man Dem (TMD), but, like Duggan, he has not been convicted of any violent crime.

Officers from the CO19 firearms unit shot Duggan dead when police rammed a taxi carrying him. The inquest was told a limited account of his web of links to the criminal underworld, extending through London gangs to crime families in Manchester, where he spent his teenage years.

The cache of raw intelligence documents seen by The Times first mentions the suspected gangster — a successful businessman living in a large house in an affluent area — when police in North London tried to arrest one of three known gang members seen acting suspiciously in a black BMW.

An officer was attacked and two further arrests were made for obstructing police and assault on a police officer.
“A large crowd gathered whilst Officers were dealing with the Males,” the report states. “[The alleged gangster] was seen nearby . . . [He] approached Officers and tried to engage them in conversation.
“References were made to the shooting of Mark DUGGAN by Police and mentioned made [sic] that 2 Officers were going to be shot in retaliation.”

The man, who was granted anonymity during the inquest under data protection laws, was the subject of further intelligence later that week suggesting that he would be shot or stabbed should he appear at the wake.

It is not clear whether police acted on the intelligence, but there was no violence on the night.

Duggan’s links to known and suspected gangsters extend to his family. He was linked to Manchester’s feared Noonan family via his uncle Desmond “Dessie” Noonan. Noonan’s second wife, Julie, is the sister of Duggan’s mother, Pamela.

Noonan was stabbed to death by a drug dealer in 2005. His brother Dominic, the alleged leader of the gang, was arrested but cleared over allegations that he organised looting when the riots hit Manchester.
Duggan moved closer to the Noonan branch of the family when he was sent to live in the city with his aunt Carole, who has been perhaps the most prominent member of the “Justice for Mark Duggan” campaign, after his behaviour at secondary school became a concern.

On his return to the family home near Broadwater Farm in London, Duggan became involved in the TMD, which the inquest was told had been involved in a string of recent shootings at nightclubs and elsewhere."[/i]

theotherjonv - Member +1

I am not an AFO but I have deployed both with them as a liaison point, driver for Silver commander, deployed in their immediate wake and had firearms teams supporting me when I have been out doing things, there is no hyping or loud music prior to deployment. Firearms briefings I have attended are long, subdued, in depth with regard to roles and responsibilities and unless it is a spontaneous deployment audio recorded. All the AFO's i know (non MPS) are sensible level headed and relatively mature, the whole training and sift system works to weed out those who are hot headed or panic.
If it helps I am not an IT professional. 😉

However, the article falls short as they, not once, thought of the children.

smiththemainman - Member
My second post and last, in my honest opinion this whole thread is enough evidence why this once proud country is now ruined, I personally thought that this forum was pretty much visited by working class people who tow the line, pay their taxes know right from wrong ,pretty much the basis of what an ideal society needs, we go to bed get up in the morning get to work , in the mean time get the kids to school , work all day and some how get the kids from school with a parent there to look after them, we then run the kids to various clubs then go and coach footy and rugby for the kids and many other things,,why anyone here would want to fight the corner for someone who is everything we are not beggars belief. I'm 46 and cowboys and soldiers carry guns in my ideal world , the guy put himself on the radar in the position of do my actions today allow me go home to the family , or does the hard working policeman go home to kiss the kids good night?? I will sleep easy knowing the pc has the honour!! I will not be arguing with the idiots on here who will try and drag me down to their level and beat me with experience. Good night!!

Although I think to a great extent the population of this forum by and large falls into the category working class. Sadly the era you describe is from a time when Police were not armed, Politicians were not caught with their hands in the till, Lawyers did not chase ambulances, where there was blame there was not necessarily a claim, and we could rely on the impression of an avuncular old bill to 'fit up' the bad guys, cos they knew who they were.
We are the victims of American imported values and PC gone mad, plus and I don't want to get drawn into the immigration thing, but with immigrants come immigrant values and lifestyles and we have an upper echelon liberal elite divorced from the realities of day to day existence in the country that has been created.
We have educated an entire generation to feel 'entitled' and fed kids with virtual reality world of shoot em up games and a movie culture where pretty much anything goes.
Even so with all this, put yourself in the shoes of a mother who's kid is sent on an errand by other kids to fetch a replica gun that's been fiddled with in a box (we're not even sure if it was loaded), gets shot dead and she isn't told about it for 4 weeks other than by what she heard on the news media.

kid is sent on an errand by other kids

Yep, that's just what he was doing. An errand. A nice favour for some friends. Then, later in the day, he helped Mrs Smith put her bins out, and fed Old Man McGinty's cat. Such a nice boy.

😐

The gun was loaded and his texts indicated an awareness that he was being followed by police on an anti-gun campaign. So getting out and running when they were stopped was an informed decision, albeit not the right one from my (and probably his, if he was in a position to offer an opinion) point of view.

Have you considered going to the Daily Mail for they also share your sadness at the demise of this once great nation and also like to blame america [ foreigners eh] PC gone mad - I mean if you cannot call a Black person the N word then what is going on with the world RIGHT?] immigrants and of course a liberal elite and kids

Face palm its just paranoid ramblings . I hate to break this to you but everything changes each generation will be different from the last, the world will move on. You can stay stuck in some rose tinted version of the halcyon days of blighty [ that never really existed] blaming foreigners for its demise but really you need to get a grip
Despite all this ramblings you then have an outpouring of empathy for the "poor kid" rather than the know gangster that he was.

I am struggling to see your moral code here or consitency tbh
Your spinning a yarn here rather than describing a reality the vast majority of us recognise

why anyone here would want to fight the corner for someone who is everything we are not beggars belief

Wow. That is a truly shockingly bad thing to say!

I do think when it kicked off he lost control and decided Duggan was getting it

Why do you think that?

Or, if he has really left the thread - I wonder why he thought that?

Well I thought about Mark Duggan and his milieu and the people he "worked" with and I paused to see if I could feel sorry for him. Ummmmm....

Nah.

That doesn't surprise me at all.

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.

At the inquest the IPCC's lead investigator, Colin Sparrow, revealed that he knew Duggan had not fired any gun long before the IPCC began briefing the media that he had shot at police first. It then took three weeks for them to correct a 'fact' that they knew to be false.

IMHO that is completely unreasonable.

I worked in the met some 13 years ago, I'll never forget the experience of stopping cars with 3-4 black males inside as the car either reeked of cannabis (yep you can smell it in another car it's that strong) or there was intel that it contained drugs or weapons. You had to get another vehicle to assist as soon as the car was stopped all the males would leap out and be extremely aggressive and threatening inches from your face calling you racist etc. It would often end up with persons detained sometimes arrested before you even got to search the car. Surprisingly there would be drugs or weapons in the car. Often you would be joined by one or two extra cars of black extremely aggressive males, they were the back up cars. There would usually be complaints of racism, excessive force all spurred on by criminal solicitors ( if you've seen breaking bad you'll know what that means) what I'm trying to explain is that this behaviour is a tactic to discourage police attention, the ongoing noise by the Duggans and their extended families is part of this tactic also. Of course they don't want to be stopped while they transport drugs and weapons, of course they don't want the risk of being shot doing what 99 percent of the rest of the population don't do. Everybody else who is naively sucked into this noise should take note of the saying "be careful what you wish for" I'm not saying the mechanism we have for dealing with crime is perfect, but it is acknowledged the world over it be the best.

This. ^^^

Indeed.
the legal and court system we have has been built up over centuries and whilst far from perfect is the best we have got to.
cases such as this may mean that the law is tested and things change. I don't have much sympathy that a fellow such as this had to die for arguments to be raised.

the protesters on here were no doubt represented on the jury panel- 20% did not agree lawful killing (given the evidence presented, must have been based on similar 'hunches' that the coppers were all lying).

unlike forums, you don't have the option to basically claim the law is an ass if you're a juror, you must decide on the options given to you by the judge.

BTW- does anyone know whether the cab driver stood as a witness, and if not why?

It then took three weeks for them to correct a 'fact' that they knew to be false.

Pondo - your source is the Guardian online, my source was todays Guardian (paper version)..................

the protesters on here were no doubt represented on the jury panel- 20% did not agree lawful killing (given the evidence presented, must have been based on similar 'hunches' that the coppers were all lying).

Point of order - 8 of the ten jurors voted 'lawful killing', two 'open verdict' and nobody voted 'unlawful killing' Which would suggest that rather than think the coppers were lying, they were not convinced either way.

Natrix;

I don't think the IPCC 'briefed the media' that Duggan had shot at the police first. As said elsewhere, the rush for the media to get the story into print first creates this rock and a hard place situation. Statements were made based on information available / believed to be true at the time, but to my mind were not presented as 100% fact.

From the Guardian a few days after the event, not 3 weeks after..

The IPCC's first statement about Duggan's death, issued four hours after he was pronounced dead, made no reference to shots fired at police.

However, at least one spokesman from the watchdog appears to have misinformed journalists, leading to reports that Duggan was killed by police after "firing first".

The Evening Standard said Duggan had been involved in a "shootout", adding that a "spokesman for the [IPCC] said it appeared the officer was shot first before police returned fire".

The Mirror quoted an IPCC spokesman saying: "We do not know the order the shots were fired. We understand the officer was shot first, then the male."

An article in the Independent made a similar claim. It reported: "It is understood that the officer was shot first, but this is not known for certain, an IPCC spokesperson said."

The IPCC statement said: "Analysis of media coverage and queries raised on Twitter have alerted to us to the possibility that we may have inadvertently given misleading information to journalists when responding to very early media queries following the shooting of Mark Duggan by MPS officers on the evening of 4 August."

Conceding it was possible it had issued information suggesting shots were exchanged, the IPCC added: "This was consistent with early information we received that an officer had been shot and taken to hospital. Any reference to an exchange of shots was not correct and did not feature in any of our formal statements, although an officer was taken to hospital after the incident."

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/aug/12/mark-duggan-ipcc-misled-media

Pondo - your source is the Guardian online, my source was todays Guardian (paper version)..................

I'd take them to task over misleading / conflicting information. Clearly can't be trusted. Next..... 😉

Well that's just political wordplay to give themselves enough wriggle room later to cover their arses. An IPCC spokesman said an officer was shot first then winked and tapped the side of his nose.

natrix - Pondo - your source is the Guardian online, my source was todays Guardian (paper version)..................

Yes, its often easy to mistake media supossition for official police statements, or where the line between the two lies.

does anyone know whether the cab driver stood as a witness, and if not why?

Yes, he did - its on the transcript for 14th Oct - essentially he confirms the meeting with H-F, the handing over of a shoebox, and then the stop, but misidentifies which policeman fired, and stated that he witnessed Duggan shot in the back.

Which was widely reported as a rumour at the time

IIRC there was another 'eye witness' at the time who reported that Duggan was pinned down on the ground and then shot, and the eye witness in the flats states that he was standing up with his hands up and palms forward, but supposedly holding a what he first thought was a gun, but after reading the newspapers then later decided was a Blackberry because it was shiny, and that at one point he said 'went flying' when he was shot, but we know was later found to be still inside the taxi.

Metropolitan police, in response to a Freedom of information Act request, say that they are not confirming **OR DENYING** that they unlawfully kept tape recorded material concealed from Mark Duggan inquest jury.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/your_conspiracy_with_the_ipcc_to#outgoing-326473

And you are surprised?, i lost all confidence in the police and the judicial system 23 odd years ago when i got convicted and sentenced to jail on nothing but pure lies backed up by senior officers as retold in court, thankfully video evidence surfaced within a week that proved my innocence and i was released pending appeal, however nothing was done to those that lied to put me in jail as apparently "evidence was recorded and observed in traumatic circumstances or words to that account" - Utter **** bollocks imho. From recent interactions with the police over the past few years my prejudices have been reinforced still further.

I'm sure there are decent officers within the force but unfortunately i have not met them.

Hang on Emlyn Welsh says she spoke to the met the met taped that conversation she then does a FOI request alleging that details of that conversation were really important and did the met give the details to the inquest? If it is that important why didn't Emlyn Welsh give the information to the inquest and why isn't. Emlyn Welsh releasing the information rather than the Mets refusal to comment, l hate the met but this is just childish posturing.

Crankboy - I read it as if she was referring to intercept intelligence that was not disclosed in open court - there were certainly discussions in the court where the judge and barristers were taking great care to stay within whatever boundaries were agreed so as not to reveal the capabilites available to SOCA - however there were pretty extensive discussions in the pre-inquest hearing, contained in the 9th September transcript, that state that all relevant and marginal relevance material had been disclosed, and that both teams of barristers had been working with SOCA to ensure everything that could be revealed was.

Given that Mansfield was involved, I'm sure that if there was an inkling anything had been suppressed, we would have heard about it!