[Closed] Tottenham Riots

Is a fact or journalistic conjecture?

Well the police released the information about the bullet in the radio in the first place to try and build a case in the media, rather than waiting for the facts to be obtained and to present evidence at the appropriate time. No one seemed to view it as "journalistic conjecture" when it was assumed to have been fired by the dead man.

"turns out that bullet lodged in the police radio was police issue....oops

Is a fact or journalistic conjecture?

Remember the last time the Press went rampant ruining lives?
"

seems to be from "a source" according to the guardian.

turns out that bullet lodged in the police radio was police issue....oops

No. Reports were it was a hollow point round. Same as the police use.

Just to add, as we don't know what type of gun it is, whether it was discharged or not, who the source of the "initial ballistics tests" is and who was supposed to have fired what at whom, then all this discussion about the how it started and why the guy was shot is idle speculation.

However, if he had a gun in the minicab, he would have understood the risks associated with that, one of which is if the Police stop him with it, he is likely to have the wrong end of a barrel or two pointing at him.

Once that happens, you're just one wrong move away from being shot yourself.

"The Police"?

Or someone disclosed that information?

Lets wait for the facts to come out instead of inciting hatred. I'd have expected more responsible Journalism from the Guardian but then again no one in Tottenham who takes part in the riots will have a croissant, an espresso and a quick read of the education section before coming incited...

If we want to enter the grounds of conjecture though how about it was shoddy surrounding of the suspects car and an officer shot another officer?

Remember the last time the Press went rampant ruining lives?

http://news.sky.com/home/article/15874586

the police were just as culpable in that, when they had no evidence what so ever so why did they apply for the extensions in the time they could question him ? I wouldn't be surprise if they told the press they had their man (off the record). The police actions even made the family feel they had caught their daughters killer.

Am I the only one who frankly doesn't believe a bloody word the police say? Especially in situations like this. The stories that eventually emerge seem to have little in common with the (mis)information initially divulged by the feds

Innocent until proven guilty though.

I remember the stories going into every aspect of his life. It was disgusting character assassination.

"Home Secretary Theresa May is to return from her summer holiday following a second night of violence in London."

This is getting out of hand now.

those nasty lefty guardian bastards raking up police hatred

oh wait it was the IPCC that said it was a police round

as reported in the guardian..??...!!.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8687804/Tottenham-riot-bullet-lodged-in-officers-radio-at-time-of-Mark-Duggan-death-was-police-issue.html

[devil's advocate]
Even if it was a police issue round, it does not mean it was fired by the police.

Stepping away from the seriousness of the situation, I chuckle every time I see the police referred to as 'feds'! 🙂

Who said this? 'initial tests'.

Who implied this/said this or is it worded to sound controversial so members of the public will run out and buy their papers?

Who implied this/said this or is it worded to sound controversial so members of the public will run out and buy their papers?

I've read two different reports about why he may have been carrying a gun, one said that he was after revenge on the people that stabbed his mate that other said he was paranoid about being attacked after someone stabbed his mate.

Is it only the police bullet story that you've got a problem with people speculating about? The BBC managed to find a picture of him making the 'gun' shape with his hands (heavily cropped as well), I reckon I could find about 20 pictures of people I'm friends with on facebook making that sign. But I suppose it wouldn't have fitted the narrative if they'd have used a pic of him playing with his children etc.

Given each of the officers will have the rounds issued to them counted in and out, unless they're buying ammo on the black market to try to shoot colleagues with, this should be proven or disproved today you'd hope.

I reckon I could find about 20 pictures of people I'm friends with on facebook making that sign.

I wouldn't be able to find one.

So just because the police shoot at somebody and they kill him,does it then make it right for certain members of the feral population, to set fire, loot and destroy peoples homes and buisness, along with injuring the police officers doing their job.

Oh and where this bloody governmnet gone, they where doing so well, and now thrown it all away, along with boris.

Theres been as much leadership as a teddy bears tea party organiser, who is obviously a bear.

One interesting quote was from his brother was that he wouldn't have been as stupid as to point a gun or shoot at police. Fair enough but no statement that he wouldn't have been carrying a gun at all. That said, being a wrong-un with a gun in his jacket isn't enough of an argument to justify him being shot but I guess we'll (hopefully) find out more in the coming days.

So what excuse was there for attempted rioting in Brixton last night? Or Enfield?

being a wrong-un with a gun in his jacket isn't enough of an argument to justify him being shot

borderline though, maybe just a shot in the foot

nickf - Member
So what excuse was there for attempted rioting in Brixton last night? Or Enfield?

None. Thieving and wanton damage for no reason at all.

You know they broke into Brixton Fire Station and looted kit off the appliances

WTF

So what excuse was there for attempted rioting in Brixton last night? Or Enfield?

I expect we're seeing the reasons for unrest widening somewhat. In fact I reckon the original specific reason could soon be eclipsed by a far wider sense of grievance against the 'authorities'

There are an awful lot of disenfranchised youth out there at the moment. Who have no stake in society, and who's position is extremely unlikely to improve much any time soon. Same as there were in the 80's when this last all went off. In fact the parallels are pretty stark. All that's needed is a catalyst. Which we now appear to have

I suspect that police forces in all the major inner cities are watching this develop and getting pretty twitchy themselves

You know they broke into Brixton Fire Station and looted kit off the appliances

WTF

Am I the only one who frankly doesn't believe a bloody word the police say?

No - I'm sure the usual suspects will be along soon enough with their wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Binners +1

To be honest I have been expecting this since last summer, all it needed was for something to kick it off.

TooTall - they've hardly got a spotless record of releasing accurate information after incidents like this, have they. In fact in the De Menezes and Ian Tomlinson cases there was obviously a policy of deliberate misinformation while people 'got their stories straight'

I imagine this is exactly whats going on now. I reckon in a few weeks time a somewhat different picture will have emerged to the one we're looking at now

There are an awful lot of disenfranchised youth out there at the moment

And the best they can come up with to address their situation is burning and smashing stuff up ?

That'll really help their situation.

🙄

I reckon in a few weeks time a somewhat different picture will have emerged to the one we're looking at now

And lots of pictures of looted shops, burned out cars and people made homeless.

Am I the only one who frankly doesn't believe a bloody word the police say?

I have a healthy cynicism when the police try and build a case in the media, before all facts are in and properly investigated, it makes me wonder why.

hora - Member

[i]I reckon I could find about 20 pictures of people I'm friends with on facebook making that sign.[/i]

I wouldn't be able to find one.

No-one you know done the 'charlie's angels' pose?

project - Member
So just because the police shoot at somebody and they kill him,does it then make it right for certain members of the feral population, to set fire, loot and destroy peoples homes and buisness, along with injuring the police officers doing their job.

No.

But the police would have done a lot better if they'd released details sooner/talked to community leaders. Can't you understand why people feel no respect for the police when they won't even talk to them?

Of course people have taken advantage of this for the own ends, but how long can riots be blamed on 'middle class students out for a jolly' and 'members of the feral population'? I know it makes it easier to ignore when 'the other' is invoked but it just means we'll have these same problems in 10/15 years.

binners - Member
TooTall - they've hardly got a spotless record of releasing accurate information after incidents like this, have they. In fact in the De Menezes and Ian Tomlinson cases there was obviously a policy of deliberate misinformation while people 'got their stories straight'

+1

"I predict a riot, i........ 😆 Are Elfins sawvin mates still at it??

Tell you what Bullheart... that clip is ****in hilarious!

Carry on the rest of you, carry on.

I do hope that those that profess a doubt about what police reports initially state (which I have some sympathy with) and request others wait before casting judgment can apply the same logic to those that rioted. They have caused untold damage (both physical and physiological) to their own neighbourhood on the basis of as few facts and a much rumour as those that sit here and criticise. I would have had more respect for their cause (not the looter tosspots but those actually protesting) if they were to be doing so on reasoned evidence.

We are picking around the edges here though – exactly how he died and how those last few seconds panned out sounds like it’s still to be determined but I don’t think there is any argument that he was an armed known fellon is there?

oldgit - Member

These are very distinct as the Metropolitan Police uses dum dum type hollowed out bullets designed not to pass through an object.

Sorry for the change of subject, but I thought these were outlawed years ago. Designed to expand and fragment on impact to cause untold damage....that's what I thought.

IIRC Hallowpoint rounds have been 'outlawed' by international treaty re: warfare. As for criminal justice, all fair

Hallowpoint rounds

the reasoning seems sound enough.

Despite the ban on military use, hollow-point bullets are one of the most common types of civilian and police ammunition, due largely to the reduced risk of bystanders being hit by over-penetrating or ricocheted bullets, and the increased speed of incapacitation. In many jurisdictions, even ones such as the United Kingdom, where expanding ammunition is generally prohibited, it is illegal to hunt certain types of game with ammunition that does not expand

from wiki, natch

hallowpoints.....ooops

We are picking around the edges here though – exactly how he died and how those last few seconds panned out sounds like it’s still to be determined but I don’t think there is any argument that he was an armed known fellon is there?

Is that a capital crime?

Who cares about the people who rioted? They aren't shrinking violets or vunerable people.

**** you'd pap yourself if you were even in the same room. So would I. No amount of Youth clubs, fancy parks and Social workers can help them. They are the product of generations of illiterate idiots. They will always exist no matter what you do unless you can stop people taking drink and drugs throughout pregnancy who then go onto claim its the Governments fault for not helping them (give them more money to carry on being ****less).

**** em. Let them rot. They've no interest in being part of our society so why would we spend money keeping them within their lifestyles?

For my two penny worth there is no excuse for rioting.

The underlying facts of this seem to be.

1. Bloke has a firearm in Tottenham.
2. Firearms licence for carrying a concealed weapon is very unlikely to be in the hands of said indiviual! For numerous reasons.

Personally if I was carrying said weapon and did not comply with direct instructions from an authority figure (Police) I would expect to be shot. Whether I was shot and injured or shot and killed is entirely down to luck and the skill of the Policeman with the gun - and how threatend he felt.

This is rather similar to mountain biking - I go out and ride stuff - I make a choice about what I ride and in some instances recognise the opportunity to injure my self. The choice is mine - ride that chute, jump, etc or don't. Similar to 'carry that firearm and then disobey orders'. It is not difficult. People in posession of illegal firearms should be locked up for a very long time.

People looting should be similarly treated - and be expected to work hard while in jail!

People need to take responsibility for their own actions whether that means being shot because you have an illegal weapon, accepting injury because you take a risk too many, or being locked up because you are looting, rioting scum is irrelevant.

OK Rant over.

Nowt unusual about hollowpoint rounds - they're banned from normal FAC holder ownership in the UK, but with a dispensation for hunting/wildlife dispatch - and I've got permission for three different calibres of hollowpoint on my firearms certificate.

To be fair, I'm fairly confident that Gangsta firearms dealers aren't all that bothered about the intricacies of the firearms act or international military treaties either 😉

quality Hora, quality... 😯 🙄

IIRC Hallowpoint rounds have been 'outlawed' by international treaty re: warfare

Banned in warfare in the late 1800s I think. As an aside though, quite an interesting thing to ban things for use in warfare that are too lethal. Seems to miss the objective of shooting someone I'd have thought; surely better to stop shooting people altogether if you're squeamish about the outcome.

Is that a capital crime?

maybe, maybe not - it depends what he was doing with it at the time. But I don't believe any of those rioters would be able to answer that question any better than you or I could at this stange.

To be fair, I'm fairly confident that Gangsta firearms dealers aren't all that bothered about the intricacies of the firearms act or international military treaties either

Valid. Entirely valid.

He had an illegal firearm, why should he use legal ammo?

Banned in warfare in the late 1800s I think. As an aside though, quite an interesting thing to ban things for use in warfare that are too lethal. Seems to miss the objective of shooting someone I'd have thought.

Nope standard practice in warfare, an injured enemy ties up more resources than a dead one.

This is rather similar to mountain biking

it took 8 pages to get to a cycling analogy?
poor
very poor

whilst Hora's mind-dump above is a little reactionary, he's saying what a lot of people are thinking

project - Member

So just because the police shoot at somebody and they kill him,does it then make it right for certain members of the feral population, to set fire, loot and destroy peoples homes and buisness, along with injuring the police officers doing their job.

Of course not. But do you think it's so simple? I doubt it.

People have described it as a "powderkeg" situation and that's probably quite accurate, since gunpowder doesn't usually go off by itself. So there's 2 seperate issues here- the riots, and the trigger. It's not making excuses for the rioters to say "What was the trigger, why did that happen?"

And from what we're seeing now there seems to be a fair amount of mishandling leading up to it, which if it had been done right might have avoided the whole mess.

convert - Member

"Is that a capital crime?"

maybe, maybe not - it depends what he was doing with it at the time. But I don't believe any of those rioters would be able to answer that question any better than you or I could at this stange

Oh I agree, but the police haven't helped. They must know if he was waving it around or if they found it in the car after they shot him...

So there's 2 seperate issues here- the riots, and the trigger. It's not making excuses for the rioters to say "What was the trigger, why did that happen?"

That's what I was trying to get at.

Some reports say that his gun was in a sock at the time he was shot - if true he clearly wasn't waving it around.

But if the police had reason to believe it was a gun in a sock that he was waving around he is equally guilty.

Some reports say that his gun was in a sock at the time he was shot - if true he clearly wasn't waving it around.

Its not like it was a table leg in a carrier bag either though, is it!

Carry an illegal firearm, you're gonna run the risk of getting shot.

Carry ANY firearm shaped thing, and act in a belligerent, uncooperative or threatening manner whilst undergoing a Hard stop by armed police, and you're almost certain to get shot

And I say that as someone who [b]has[/b] been challenged by armed police, whilst travelling with perfectly legal, fully certificated and responsibly help weapons. (stopped for speeding, plod saw firearms cases in car and radioed for backup)

Believe me - you're left under [b]no illusions whatsoever[/b] as to who is stopping you, and what you're supposed to do - rightly or wrongly, you do what they say, there and then, without hesitation - the only way to get shot by armed police in that situation is to act like a penis!

So there's 2 seperate issues here- the riots, and the trigger. It's not making excuses for the rioters to say "What was the trigger, why did that happen?"
That's what I was trying to get at.

Me too.

This would not have happened in other parts of the country or in other countries. Smashing up your own neighbourhood doesn't happen in affluent areas. It happens where people have **** all to lose. The reversion to lawlessness by a community is a reaction, until we find out why (or are brave enough to admit we already know) then nothing will change. This is not liberal 'pc' bollocks. It's the only ****ing way forward. Until we start treating people equally and actually confronting child poverty and placing community at the heart of society rather than business growth absolutely **** all will change.

In no way am i condoning the looting etc, but I think some people need to wake up and realise how the police are viewed in a lot of poor inner city areas. A lot of people regard them (with some justification) as little more than a militia. Their dealings with the police are universally negative. So when something like this happens they automatically assume the worse.

If a controversial incident resulting in a death had happened in a nice middle class suburb and a couple of hundred polite, white, middle class mumsnetters had arrived at the police station to ask for answers, do you honestly think they'd have been locked out and stonewalled for 5 hours? Of course they wouldn't

The police have to take some responsibility for their appalling, but fairly typical, handling of the initial protest. I think that now this whole situation may have already become self-fuelling. Its started an out-pouring of a lot of legitimate grievences and as such will probably snowball. I certainly don't think last night was the last of it. Which city next then?

the only way to get shot by armed police in that situation is to act like a penis!

Are you for real? Was Charles De Menezes acting like a penis? I was under the impression he was just getting on a tube train

Its not like it was a table leg in a carrier bag either though, is it!

Carry an illegal firearm, you're gonna run the risk of getting shot.

Carry ANY firearm shaped thing, and act in a belligerent, uncooperative or threatening manner whilst undergoing a Hard stop by armed police, and you're almost certain to get shot

And I say that as someone who has been challenged by armed police, whilst travelling with perfectly legal, fully certificated and responsibly help weapons. (stopped for speeding, plod saw firearms cases in car and radioed for backup)

Believe me - you're left under no illusions whatsoever as to who is stopping you, and what you're supposed to do - rightly or wrongly, you do what they say, there and then, without hesitation - the only way to get shot by armed police in that situation is to act like a penis!

So you're saying that the police never get it wrong? Ever heard of Jean Charles de Menezes?

Listen, you don't know what happened and neither do I. What we do know is that there are reports contradicting the official police line. A sequence of events that is depressingly familiar...

I kind of get the feeling he was a 'mule' or 'runner' for the weapon in question, not that he was carrying it for his own use. A father of 4 with limited prospects, undertaking an illegal activity in desperation simply to raise some cash for his family - doesn't seem to me that he was a hard-ass drug dealing bank robbing gangster? Cops get wind (under Operation Trident) that someone is moving a weapon, hence the raid, as there's a gun involved they use the 'Special Forces' (or whatever they're called), something goes wrong and the guy ends up dead... Family is understandably pissed off at this, demands answers from the Police, not forthcoming (and it appears the Police were rather recalcitrant in there actions in fact), crowd gets angry, a few hotheads do something stupid and it escalates from there...

MSP - Member

Banned in warfare in the late 1800s I think. As an aside though, quite an interesting thing to ban things for use in warfare that are too lethal. Seems to miss the objective of shooting someone I'd have thought.

Nope standard practice in warfare, an injured enemy ties up more resources than a dead one.

a dead soldier means one less gun pointing at you....a wounded soldier takes away two or three....maybe 5 or 6 if they get the litter out

Threads like this make me wish I was right wing. Life would seem so much simpler.

Threads like this make me wish I was right wing. Life would seem so much simpler.

+1... I wish I didn't have to think so much about things 😆

Threads like this make me wish I was right wing. Life would seem so much simpler.

True dat. Who needs nuance and the need for creative inclusive solutions when knee-jerk reactionary rhetoric is all that's actually required 😀

I kind of get the feeling he was a 'mule' or 'runner' for the weapon in question, not that he was carrying it for his own use. A father of 4 with limited prospects, undertaking an illegal activity in desperation simply to raise some cash for his family

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8687403/London-riots-Dead-man-Mark-Duggan-was-a-known-gangster-who-lived-by-the-gun.html ]Really ??[/url]

I kind of get the feeling he was a 'mule' or 'runner' for the weapon in question, not that he was carrying it for his own use. A father of 4 with limited prospects, undertaking an illegal activity in desperation simply to raise some cash for his family - doesn't seem to me that he was a hard-ass drug dealing bank robbing gangster? Cops get wind (under Operation Trident) that someone is moving a weapon, hence the raid, as there's a gun involved they use the 'Special Forces' (or whatever they're called), something goes wrong and the guy ends up dead... Family is understandably pissed off at this, demands answers from the Police, not forthcoming (and it appears the Police were rather recalcitrant in there actions in fact), crowd gets angry, a few hotheads do something stupid and it escalates from there...

Be funny if a a looter came home to find their flat burnt out and the place where they work looted. They wrecking there own areas, seems a bit pointless to me, go up the city and have a good old riot there, like the Stop the City marches in the 80's.

I think all this riotin' 'n' lootin' needs a tried and tested approach as seen in that fantastic film Zulu (although the mention of that film and the circumstances may get some people excited for the wrong reasons) Several lines of officers firing rubber bullets, one line kneel take aim and fire, next line step forward, kneel, aim, fire and so on. If the "natives" use some ingenious attempts to block said rubber bullets then lets not be afaird of using some more conventional techniques of water cannon, which can be "ratcheted" up by electrifying it with 50,000 volts. When all is said and done, the UK (or London) is NOT a police state. What we have here is a bunch or people used to gorging themselves at the teats of the state, but never feeding the state. Now the state has less food to eat and the milk is drying up. So the underclasses are revolting (pun intended) and this won't be the last time this happens. Nowt to do with the babylon or the po-po. Best arm up, 'pocalypse is a comin.

From what I have read, he is the cousin of someone else who was killed in a gangland incident and he was being watched by the police as they thought he was going to launch a revenge attack.

Well there you go, I didn't know that 😳

The facts of the matter are not what's driving this situation. Its the [i]perception[/i] of what's happened, as viewed by the population of the area that is the issue. And the police refusing to give straight answers is hardly helping matters

And the police refusing to give straight answers is hardly helping matters

So, they give rushed answers, that turn out to be wrong, and its all a police conspiracy and deliberate misinformation!

but if they wait till they can give us the facts to get a complete picture, then its all a cover up, and they've got something to hide!

Damned if you do, damned if you don't - If you wait till you can give the facts then the press start insinuating and making up "facts", and publishing unverified stories - like the one about the bullet in the radio, from unnamed, unknown "sources" - that inflame the situation and make things worse, and people claim that the police were behind all sorts of misinformation. Just like happened with De-Menezes, and Tomlinson, and pretty much every other case!

why can't the press just STFU till the facts are known? hows about that for a radical idea.

Just like happened with De-Menezes, and Tomlinson, and pretty much every other case!

With Tomlinson they only changed their story once the video taken by a protester was released by the guardian.

Believe me - you're left under no illusions whatsoever as to who is stopping you, and what you're supposed to do - rightly or wrongly, you do what they say, there and then, without hesitation - the only way to get shot by armed police in that situation is to act like a penis!

So you were there and saw what happened? Otherwise you're just

insinuating and making up "facts"

The problem isn't the police giving rushed answers. The problem is the police giving NO answers to some perfectly understandable questions. You don't have to be Kofi Annan to relise that point-blank refusing to talk to the family is a pretty ****ing stupid attitude to adapt. And immediately looks like you've got something to hide.

And frankly, its asking for people to put 2 and 2 together and get 97

Lifer - Which proves my point - they made announcements to the press before the investigation was complete!

damned if they did, damned if they didn't!

(edit, cause of your edit)

Are you suggesting that the police shot this bloke without issuing a challenge?

There's press reports from the day, in which independent witnesses say he was repeatedly challenged before the shooting occurred - which ties in with a normal police hard stop.

like I said, when the police are shouting "ARMED POLICE, ARMED POLICE, STAND STILL" you do what they ****ing well say... it seems in this case, he didn't.

Binners - I have not seen any suggestion that the people outside the police station demanding "justice" on Saturday included any members of the family, or that the police refused to talk to the family, I'd suggest to you that you're extrapolating "community" to include "family" Well, sorry, but as far as I'm concerned the correct reaction from the police would be "we have nothing to say until our investigations are completed" - which is clearly the way to avoid confusion, rumours or accusations of a cover up!

A father of 4 with limited prospects, undertaking an illegal activity in desperation simply to raise some cash for his family

Perhaps he should of sold some of his jewellery instead? See photo in Really ?? link above.

From what i've read on here and seen on the news, yes the police reacted wrong to the family and friends who went to the police station initially. They should of had a proper meeting with them - and them alone. Not the other 100+ people who had walked down with them. The police ****ed up here.

But as for that woman pushing her trolly full of swag down the road, don't tell me she only stole that because she was upset with how the police had gone about things. There were a load of people there on the night who just wanted to go out on the rob and what better than a riot to cover their tracks. Why else go to a retail park (thats not even on the same road) and go on the snaffle there?

I feel sorry for alot of people there who had nothing to do with it, those that are trying to build bridges between the police and the community, and to the family of the man that was shot (not him if he was carrying an illegal gun or shooting at people).

I do not feel sorry for those who set about destroying peoples lives with their nights on the rampage. You didn't make me feel bad for you or even make me want to help you. You just made me think your a waste of a life.

They should of had a proper meeting with them

I'm sure the police had their reasons;
the rioting and looting was inevitable

A father of 4 with limited prospects

He created the block to a world of prospects himself.

The bit I struggle to understand is the original catalyst to the riots starting. 300 people descended on the police station [i]demanding[/i] answers. I could understand immediate family wanting to know what was going on, and I would have assumed the police would have spoken to them.

But 300 people? Who were they all? Why did they think the police would speak to them all? Did they not think that perhaps the police would have seen it as a potentially explosive situation and tried (badly) to diffuse the situation perhaps?

The bit I struggle to understand is the original catalyst to the riots starting

Robbing, plain and simple.

apparantly messages like this...

Everyone in edmonton enfield woodgreen everywhere in north link up at enfield town station 4 o clock sharp!!!! Start leaving ur yards n linking up with you ****. Guck da feds, bring your ballys and your bags trollys, cars vans, hammers the lot!! Keep sending this around to bare man, make sure no snitch boys get dis!!! What ever ends your from put your ballys on link up and cause havic, just rob everything. Police can't stop it. Dead the fires though!! Rebroadcast!!!!!"

are doing the rounds this afternoon. more riots tonight!

apparantly messages like this...

I knew there must be a use for BBM.