Mark Duggan lawfully killed

  • This topic has 468 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by  ninfan.
Viewing 40 posts - 401 through 440 (of 469 total)
  • Mark Duggan lawfully killed
  • Premier Icon aracer
    Member

    George Walker wrote:

    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.

    Premier Icon pondo
    Subscriber

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

    No – one source (a media source) made that claim. Said claim was known at the time of the inquest and it seems no creedance was given to it, nor has any evidence emerged since to give it any further credit.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Member

    derekfish wrote:

    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.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Member

    George Walker wrote:

    Anyway folks – I’m off.

    As accurate as the rest of your comments I see…

    George Walker wrote:

    molgrips…

    George Walker wrote:

    derekfish…

    Premier Icon pondo
    Subscriber

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

    Well – I think the only thing that is clear is that he wasn’t holding the gun after the shooting.

    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.

    Ditto! Good chatting with you, despite our differences of opinion. 🙂

    p8ddy
    Member

    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.

    mk1fan
    Member

    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.

    p8ddy
    Member

    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.

    mk1fan
    Member

    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.

    Premier Icon pondo
    Subscriber

    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.
    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. 🙁

    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.

    p8ddy
    Member

    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. 😉

    mk1fan
    Member

    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.

    p8ddy
    Member

    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! 🙂

    mk1fan
    Member

    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.

    p8ddy
    Member

    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.

    p8ddy
    Member

    …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.

    p8ddy
    Member

    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.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Member

    wrote:

    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)?

    Junkyard
    Member

    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 **** 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.

    I am more interested in what you can prove – can you prove either that this routinely happens or that it did this time?
    My bet is you write a lot when the word No would suffice. Obviously the lack of evidence for your account wont sway you from it. You will then either say you are leaving or argue about semantics whislt telling us you wont argue about semantics

    Premier Icon aracer
    Member

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

    tandemjeremy wrote:

    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.

    p8ddy
    Member

    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 at protesters… which isn’t the same thing at all. 😀

    No bother at all

    mk1fan
    Member

    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.

    mk1fan
    Member

    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.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Member

    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).

    mk1fan
    Member

    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.

    crankboy
    Member

    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!!

    mk1fan
    Member

    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.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Member

    wrote:

    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?

    Premier Icon aracer
    Member

    wrote:

    crankboy certainly has a better explanation than I.

    The one which includes members of BCS?

    Junkyard
    Member

    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 😉

    mk1fan
    Member

    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’.

    mk1fan
    Member

    junkyard,

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

    soulwood
    Member

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

Viewing 40 posts - 401 through 440 (of 469 total)

The topic ‘Mark Duggan lawfully killed’ is closed to new replies.