Kicking Off In Tottenham

[Spymaster]

No, I agree, I do not buy this collusion nonsense at all - my point was that if an officer was stupid enough to attempt a "cover up" along the lines of Duggan firing at police, then they would surely discharge a round from the weapon found at the scene into the radio or indeed into nothing at all. Hence I refuse to believe that any officer would be stupid enough to fire a police round into a police radio to try to cover this up.

Quite. ANY weapon other than a police one!

An intellectually challenged 5 year old wouldn't fuck that up.

 

[Spymaster]

It's quite likely that the shot that hit the radio was, as is now being accepted, a discharge from the weapon of the same officer who [killed] Duggan.

Ricochet?

Haven't seen that. Got a link?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Once again, the police do not have to show that Duggan FIRED the gun. A police officer can (indeed should) shoot someone before they open fire if that person poses a threat to others.

So this notion that they've colluded to imply that he shot at them, falls down on several levels. Not least because they've now said he didn't!

They do have to show, though, that he was actually armed, able to deploy the weapon, and putting them in jeopardy.

At least, in a criminal justice system that wasn't institutionally biased toward accepting the justifications of its' own personnel, however far-fetched, they'd have to show that. As it is, they'll walk. They always walk.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Ricochet?

Haven't seen that. Got a link?

Earlier in the thread, late last night/early this morning, I think. I'll have a butchers.

 

[noodles]

They do have to show, though, that he was actually armed, able to deploy the weapon, and putting them in jeopardy.

I'm not being pedantic here, I'm genuinely curious to know as I have not a clue about this stuff, but would they only have to show that "they" were put in jeopardy? Surely if a member of the public was in jeopardy then that would also be sufficient for them to open fire?

 

[Spymaster]

They do have to show, though, that he was actually armed, able to deploy the weapon, and putting them in jeopardy.

Absolutely. Or at the very least that the shooting officer reasonably believed the above to be so.

Noodles, they can shoot if they believe the suspect to constitute an immediate threat to them or anyone else.

 

[SpineyNorman]

No, I agree, I do not buy this collusion nonsense at all - my point was that if an officer was stupid enough to attempt a "cover up" along the lines of Duggan firing at police, then they would surely discharge a round from the weapon found at the scene into the radio or indeed into nothing at all. Hence I refuse to believe that any officer would be stupid enough to fire a police round into a police radio to try to cover this up.

Coppers in London must be much cleverer than those in Yorkshire and Derbyshire - I've had dealings with police who would definitely be both stupid and arrogant enough to try this on - although I'd hope such fuckwits wouldn't be let near a gun, ever.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm not being pedantic here, I'm genuinely curious to know as I have not a clue about this stuff, but would they only have to show that "they" were put in jeopardy? Surely if a member of the public was in jeopardy then that would also be sufficient for them to open fire?

Sure, but in this case one of the coppers claimed that he fired because he believed that his (and, we must presume, his colleagues') life was in danger, in which case (as in the Harry Stanley case) they get to top a member of the public and then walk away with barely a mark on their record.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

I don't think its a case that they even needed to cover it up, they knew it would be IPCC as soon as the first shot was fired...

So in the heat o fth emoment make sure he's down and that he's not going to cause any more problems and that's why two shots were fired... not one... this wasn't a case of double tap as the other officer would not have been in the line of fire unless the shot person moved...

so they simply say the following man shot dead after a routine stop. A hand gun was recovered from the scene and a police officer is in hospital after a bullet struck their radio...

No need to say anything else the tabloids and their racist writers will fill in the blanks...

The police then know this will be sufficent to allow the seeds of doubt to be sown sufficiently that were this to ever come to court people will half remember what they've been told and think must be guilty and more importantly the police were justified he did have a gun and a police officer was shot...

The police can then hand over to the IPCC and say well we can't talk about an ongoing IPCC investigation knowing full well the tabloids and their hencemen are putting the word about that a coal faced immigrant of dubious background was gunned down by heroic police...

Basically the law needs changing which says that the police aren't in any case likely to be referred to the IPCC allowed to put out a statement, any officer doing so will be jailed for 3 months instantly... no due process it's this serious.

Time and time again the police have used this tactic to discredit and smear those they execute in cold blood...

JCDM vaulted over the barrier had on a heavy jacket
Stanley had a shot gun and refused to respond when challenged
The Wood Green Fertilizer not Bomber was a peado
Derek Bentley shouted let him have it...

etc etc etc...

Basically if they are involved with any shooting they should be forced by law to shut up instantly...

they can talk to their direct officers they can talk to the IPCC they can talk to the families of the person they've summeraly executed but if they talk to the press then they are jailed instantly... in general populace no fucking grace of favour conditions for the ex cop...

 

[ViolentPanda]

Coppers in London must be much cleverer than those in Yorkshire and Derbyshire - I've had dealings with police who would definitely be both stupid and arrogant enough to try this on - although I'd hope such fuckwits wouldn't be let near a gun, ever.

To be fair, Norm, you'd have to be spectacularly stupid, way more than the average bacon-head, to put a shot out of one of those bored-out pieces of cheap steel that constitute starting pistols, Brococks and "replicas". You've got even odds of the chamber and/or the barrel rupturing and taking part of your hand off. IIRC "The London Programme" did a feature on these converted firearms back around the millennium, when they'd were first become a big problem, that involved using a proofing house to test one with a standard 9mm round, and the fucking thing blew apart.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

tbf it depends on whether it's drilled or machined out ...

and whether it's been decommissioned or was never a live firer in the first place...

pay and sprays round here are still remarkably cheap, when you consider the damage ...

 

[SpineyNorman]

To be fair, Norm, you'd have to be spectacularly stupid, way more than the average bacon-head, to put a shot out of one of those bored-out pieces of cheap steel that constitute starting pistols, Brococks and "replicas". You've got even odds of the chamber and/or the barrel rupturing and taking part of your hand off. IIRC "The London Programme" did a feature on these converted firearms back around the millennium, when they'd were first become a big problem, that involved using a proofing house to test one with a standard 9mm round, and the fucking thing blew apart.

I'm sure you're right really, but at times like this I remember the time when I was pulled over for a drugs search on my way home from work, still wearing my overalls. The copper opened the boot, looked in my tool box, saw my hammer and said, "what's the hammer for." To which I replied, "knocking nails in." It was great watching his not quite so thick partner try not to laugh.

There was also one in my home town who liked to stamp on peoples' fingers when they were being restrained - he was too stupid to realise phones have cameras on them these days, last I heard he'd been suspended.

I'd say it's probably unlikely that a copper trained to use firearms would be so stupid, but I wouldn't put it past some of the normal coppers round here if they were put in that position

 

[redsquirrel]

Nobody thinks firebombing your local pub is a good thing to do! Jeez.

Well apart from one notable exception who's boasted about doing such a thing in the past, but is now arguing for the use of water cannons/rubber bullets against protesters.

BTW VP you're completely wrong about Heaven's Gate, it's a great film.

 

[faux pas]

You have been very rude and aggressive on this thread, and have undermined yourself in the process. Lash out at others all you like, it won't change the impression that you've made a tit of yourself here, and anything you may of had to say of substance has been lost.

Absolutely crazy! Majority all counter-abuse. Roll it back a bit, read and look. Some posters here are literally blind to their own abuse. Perhaps because they're so used to dishing it out. Why should you respond nicely to nasty little abusive comments strewn about the posts directed at you? Please, care to look properly before verbalising this inane conclusion of yours (and bizarrely, not just yours).

 

[elbows]

I took considerable time to read very many of your posts before I voiced my opinion. It was a waste of time, worm.

 

[faux pas]

I took considerable time to read very many of your posts before I voiced my opinion. It was a waste of time, worm.

What do you mean - 'worm'?

Ok, lets try again: Majority all counter-abuse. Roll it back a bit, read and look. (This means not my posts) If you can't see that it's majority counter-abuse, God only knows!

 

[Streathamite]

Absolutely crazy! Majority all counter-abuse. Roll it back a bit, read and look. Some posters here are literally blind to their own abuse. Perhaps because they're so used to dishing it out. Why should you respond nicely to nasty little abusive comments strewn about the posts directed at you? Please, care to look properly before verbalising this inane conclusion of yours (and bizarrely, not just yours).

by any reckoning, you started the abuse, and have contributed the lion's share. if you don't see this, you're massively self-delusional, but I can assure you just about every other poster on this thread does.
(bet you reply to this with abuse, btw)

 

[Santino]

What do you mean - 'worm'?

Ok, lets try again: Majority all counter-abuse. Roll it back a bit, read and look. (This means not my posts) If you can't see that it's majority counter-abuse, God only knows!

You're a cock, you're a cock, you're a cock.

 

[faux pas]

by any reckoning, you started the abuse, and have contributed the lion's share. if you don't see this, you're massively self-delusional, but I can assure you just about every other poster on this thread does.
(bet you reply to this with abuse, btw)

Delusional - wow. Okay, had to finally check it out! Okay, these are all the abusive, ad hominem attacks directed at me on this thread, from what I could find. Interesting you claim 'I started the abuse' as the last one is yours, right at the beginning when you started to insult me, remember?

Okay, hopefully the following will put the bullshit claims about me being unjustifiable abusive to rest, and illustrate your own blindness to the nasty ways you conduct yourselves on these boards. Yes, I've been abusive, of course, who wouldn't when faced with this:

Are you going to stick a crayon up your nose? Maybe soil your underwear in an attempt to get attention?​

You project your own crassness and stupidity onto others​

you sure as hell need to get an intellect.​

So you don't have a life? Interesting but unsurprising​

I'm too busy pimping your mother and female relatives, obviously.​

Fucking hell, it's like listening to a village idiot gibbering.​

or will you be sitting behind your keyboard, masturbating?​

you cheese-witted bore​

Christ you're a thick wanker​

You ignorant prick.​

i don't assume you are an idiot because I disagree with you; i think you are an idiot because you clearly, patently are one, with the capacity for rational thought processes of a pot-plant, and all the well informed understanding of our society's problems of the average gibbon.​

run along, cretin, there's a good little neanderthal, go and wank over your copy of the police gazette.​

You're understanding less n less with each comment. At this rate you'll be back in the womb before you get to 100 posts!​

It seems my other prediction is rapidly coming right tho, you are understanding less n less each post, even basic English is beyond you now.​

wow, truly thou art clueless​

you don't even realise what a prize dick you've made of yourself ​

you sir, are such a complete and utter brain-damaged moron that such things would be wasted on you. go and crawl back under your rock with your copy of the Sun and your Janet & John guide to modern society, there's a good chap, reasoned, adult debate is not for you.​

 

[faux pas]

You're a cock, you're a cock, you're a cock.

 

[Santino]

Delusional - wow. Okay, had to finally check it out! Okay, these are all the abusive, ad hominem attacks directed at me on this thread, from what I could find. Interesting you claim 'I started the abuse' as the last one is yours, right at the beginning when you started to insult me, remember?

Okay, hopefully the following will put the bullshit claims about me being unjustifiable abusive to rest, and illustrate your own blindness to the nasty ways you conduct yourselves on these boards. Yes, I've been abusive, of course, who wouldn't when faced with this:

Are you going to stick a crayon up your nose? Maybe soil your underwear in an attempt to get attention?​

You project your own crassness and stupidity onto others​

you sure as hell need to get an intellect.​

So you don't have a life? Interesting but unsurprising​

I'm too busy pimping your mother and female relatives, obviously.​

Fucking hell, it's like listening to a village idiot gibbering.​

or will you be sitting behind your keyboard, masturbating?​

you cheese-witted bore​

Christ you're a thick wanker​

You ignorant prick.​

i don't assume you are an idiot because I disagree with you; i think you are an idiot because you clearly, patently are one, with the capacity for rational thought processes of a pot-plant, and all the well informed understanding of our society's problems of the average gibbon.​

run along, cretin, there's a good little neanderthal, go and wank over your copy of the police gazette.​

You're understanding less n less with each comment. At this rate you'll be back in the womb before you get to 100 posts!​

It seems my other prediction is rapidly coming right tho, you are understanding less n less each post, even basic English is beyond you now.​

wow, truly thou art clueless​

you don't even realise what a prize dick you've made of yourself ​

you sir, are such a complete and utter brain-damaged moron that such things would be wasted on you. go and crawl back under your rock with your copy of the Sun and your Janet & John guide to modern society, there's a good chap, reasoned, adult debate is not for you.​

Missed me out, you dick.

 

[faux pas]

Missed me out, you dick.

You can't win. Hypocrisy is there for all to see, so it's now just a laugh ROFL

Fine by me prick!

 

[Spymaster]

you cheese-witted bore​

​

<Like>​

Whose was that?​

 

[faux pas]

<Like>​

Whose was that?​

Someone who claims I'm abusive.

 

[Maidmarian]

<Like>​

Whose was that?​

I think it was Pickman's , but I may be wrong .

 

[Streathamite]

Delusional - wow. Okay, had to finally check it out! Okay, these are all the abusive, ad hominem attacks directed at me on this thread, from what I could find. Interesting you claim 'I started the abuse' as the last one is yours, right at the beginning when you started to insult me, remember?

Okay, hopefully the following will put the bullshit claims about me being unjustifiable abusive to rest, and illustrate your own blindness to the nasty ways you conduct yourselves on these boards. Yes, I've been abusive, of course, who wouldn't when faced with this:

Are you going to stick a crayon up your nose? Maybe soil your underwear in an attempt to get attention?​

You project your own crassness and stupidity onto others​

you sure as hell need to get an intellect.​

So you don't have a life? Interesting but unsurprising​

I'm too busy pimping your mother and female relatives, obviously.​

Fucking hell, it's like listening to a village idiot gibbering.​

or will you be sitting behind your keyboard, masturbating?​

you cheese-witted bore​

Christ you're a thick wanker​

You ignorant prick.​

i don't assume you are an idiot because I disagree with you; i think you are an idiot because you clearly, patently are one, with the capacity for rational thought processes of a pot-plant, and all the well informed understanding of our society's problems of the average gibbon.​

run along, cretin, there's a good little neanderthal, go and wank over your copy of the police gazette.​

You're understanding less n less with each comment. At this rate you'll be back in the womb before you get to 100 posts!​

It seems my other prediction is rapidly coming right tho, you are understanding less n less each post, even basic English is beyond you now.​

wow, truly thou art clueless​

you don't even realise what a prize dick you've made of yourself ​

you sir, are such a complete and utter brain-damaged moron that such things would be wasted on you. go and crawl back under your rock with your copy of the Sun and your Janet & John guide to modern society, there's a good chap, reasoned, adult debate is not for you.​

I can't speak for other posters, but ALL of my ones there were in response to YOU starting with the insults. If you can't take it, don't dish it out.
and stop trying to play the injured little martyr; no-one is fooled

 

[Streathamite]

I think it was Pickman's , but I may be wrong .

nope, not picker's, think of something large, black and white, of the bear family, eats bamboo and the first name begins with a 'V'

 

[Maidmarian]

nope, not picker's, think of something large, black and white, of the bear family, eats bamboo and the first name begins with a 'V'

Ooooh ---er ------ Voice mail ???

Nah VP ---- you are right ! Apols.

 

[Maidmarian]

Someone who claims I'm abusive.

Which , tbf , you are .

Selective quoting---- we ALL already know that trick.

 

[Streathamite]

Ooooh ---er ------ Voice mail ???

Nah VP ---- you are right ! Apols.

I really don't do cryptic well.