Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Mark Duggan shooting inquest in London finally starts...

Krishnan Murty just got proper shook (whilst interviewing Ken Hinds and that stupid ex-copper I mentioned earlier) when a few people started milling around them. Think he thought they were gonna kick off.
Hinds stopped and searched for 45 min before doing an interview earlier ...copper looked skyward when this was mentioned.

Not really followed the ins and outs , but how long after the shooting was the gun discovered, and when was gun dealer at the start of the taxi drive raided ?
 
Who cares. He shouldn't not have been carrying a gun. Gun's are bad you know. It's true. I saw it on a documentary on BBC2.
 
The point surely is the gap between people like him and the people they talk about. So saying he's panicking is sort of the point.
I said he probably had somebody panicking in his ear so his apparent speechlessness was not necessarily because he, himself, was scared. But yes, prejudice and censorship on the television, who would have thought?
 
No, this is key. He thought that he saw a gun. You cannot get around that.

Looking back at accounts of V53's evidence it appears that he said, quite clearly and on a number of occasions, that there was a gun, and that it was in Duggan's hand and that Duggan aimed the weapon at V53 etc. The only expressed belief was that the officer believed that Duggan was about to fire the weapon.

Now it would appear that the majority verdict of the jury was that V53's testimony was false. As such, the verdict is a nonsense. Imagine if a civilian victim of crime (maybe defending himself against intruders etc.) attempted to justify a killing with such perjured evidence?

V53 said: "The minicab door opened and Mark Duggan jumped out at pace." He said he was convinced that Duggan was trying to escape.

He said warnings of "armed police" and "stand still" were shouted at Duggan as he was surrounded by officers with guns. The officers were wearing baseball caps that identifed them as police. V53 had an MP5 carbine weapon slung over his shoulder.

V53 said the suspect moved towards another officer, and then he saw Duggan pivot 180 degrees towards him: "It's like a freeze-frame moment," he said. "The only thing I was focusing on is the gun."

At first he assessed Duggan posed no imminent threat: "I'm hoping he's going to drop it," the marksman told the jury.

V53 said he was sure than in Duggan's hands was a gun. It was in a sock, but he could make out the gun's barrel, handle and trigger guard. He said Duggan was holding it in his right arm across his stomach.

V53 said he was now facing Duggan broadly square on: "The next thing he does, he starts to move the gun away from his body.

"He's raised the weapon, moved it a couple of inches away from his body."

That, the jury heard, gave V53 "an honest belief" that Duggan was going to shoot.

Duggan had now crossed "a line in the sand" and V53 said he decided he must open fire: "I'm aiming for the central body mass because I'm looking to shoot to stop."

He said the first shot struck Duggan in the right of his chest, causing him to flinch.

V53 said this caused Duggan's alleged gun to now be pointing directly at him, so he fired a second time, hitting Duggan in the right bicep. He said Duggan fell backwards and other armed officers converged on the suspect.
 
Looking back at accounts of V53's evidence it appears that he said, quite clearly and on a number of occasions, that there was a gun, and that it was in Duggan's hand and that Duggan aimed the weapon at V53 etc. The only expressed belief was that the officer believed that Duggan was about to fire the weapon.

Now it would appear that the majority verdict of the jury was that V53's testimony was false. As such, the verdict is a nonsense. Imagine if a civilian victim of crime (maybe defending himself against intruders etc.) attempted to justify a killing with such perjured evidence?
Yep, agreed : now

white rabbit said:
A gun was found six metres away wrapped in a sock, so regardless of the jury's finding, V53 was lying. Yet they continued to accept that he thought Duggan had a gun and was about to shoot. A very bizarre decision.

Which was not what the jury found at all (which was what i was replying to). So a nonsense all and every ways.
 
yes like hyde park in '94 and the israeli embassy in '08/'09 and tottenham in '85 and the student ones the other year. yes they only happen in the summer :facepalm:
85 was early oct and Israeli embassy was really a scrap. I do think timing was taken into consideration and not wishing to speak for anyone else I doubt the youth were waiting for an outcome today, rather they knew the OB would get off and made that clear at the time.
 
2013: Sarah Bell BBC News
Commander Mak Chishty, responsible for community engagement, says: "It's really important we're seen as being seen, shows we care and it's taking the opportunity to say our sympathies go out to the family members."

Cunts.
 
85 was early oct and Israeli embassy was really a scrap. I do think timing was taken into consideration and not wishing to speak for anyone else I doubt the youth were waiting for an outcome today, rather they knew the OB would get off and made that clear at the time.
whatever you may think there has been an outcome
 
No, but it's simple deduction. The logic runs as follows:

-Gun was found several yards from Duggan
-Police say they didn't plant it there
-Policemen don't lie, ever
-Duggan must have tossed the gun

Q.E.D.

He must have, even though no-one saw him do it, and to be fair it';d have needed to be more than a "toss", he'd have to have hurled the fucker.
 
So it would have all been fine if they'd got a black copper to kill Duggan?

You should let them know for next time.

It's wet and cold, there wont be any backlash to the verdict. they only riot when the weather's good.
 
Back
Top Bottom