Mark Duggan shooting inquest in London finally starts...
- Thread starter TopCat
- Start date
You're being very kind. But I don't see how several people could "re-construct" a scenario in ways that are internally consistent. Which they must have noticed when they compared notes.
This is jury nullification or I'm a Dutchman.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Too kind. It is a simple case of getting together afterwards and making sure their lies matched.
It's standard police 'coverupafuckup' practice.
It's standard police 'coverupafuckup' practice.
I was referring to the jury.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
They (the team deployed to stop Duggan) were allowed to spend an entire work day together writing their statements about events.
Of course, being honest coppers (sarcastic laugh, retching sounds) they didn't consult one another or agree a "party line".
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
someone leaked the fantasy land version of this to the sun journo. And even now we've still got people giving it 'live bythe gun die by the gun' and similar. Goes to show how effective getting your version out first, and on the biggest platform is.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Serotonin
history of all hitherto existing society is BLANK?
Ive given that issue some consideration (the statements and collaboration) after my initial thoughts, and as someone whos written quite a few statements for Coroners inquests, its a very different approach from say giving evidence for a criminal trial. Theres a time limit for submission of statements and of course they are legal documents, but its nothing like giving a statement for the police or a criminal trial, you just write a document, which is usually scrutinised by your organisation (in my case th NHS Trust legal team) and then its sent to the Coroners officer. Theres nothing stopping you collaborating with anyone during the process (ie I might confer with a colleague about the issue while writing it) Thats not defending the cops in this situation, but it does make me wonder if its a bit of a red herring in this case.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
By jury nullification, do you mean that the jury knew it was an unlawful killing by the word of the law but felt Duggan had it coming anyway and acted accordingly?
8ball
Decolonise colons!
I know - I'm jusy speculating about how the jury managed to come to to the conclusion they did, rather than trying to come up with scenarios that realistically exonerate the police.
Ga heen en vermenigvuldigt u, Dwyer
Anyway, the thing that it isn't is a "perverse verdict" in English English.
That is my suspicion.
My suspicion would be deepened if I knew that, for example, the jury was composed entirely of posh white people.
But I do not know that. Does anyone?
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
I doubt it if most of them came from Tottenham.
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
Favelado
J'adore South Shore
Shameless considering they published this too.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ooting-incident-involving-police-officer.html
And James Ashley and Azelle Rodney. The Barrister guy was armed iirc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_use_of_firearms_in_the_United_Kingdom#Notable_incidents
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
barrister had a shotgun. Press very sympathetic to him. Right colour and class I suppose.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Even the Kensington and Chelsea riots were little more than a few middle class people tutting over the morning papers.
el-ahrairah
forward communism, forward gerbils!
why are so many people you thought were sensible turning out to be massive pricks with chode-like erections for the police? fucksake.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
When something like this happens the only silver lining I can think of it that it helps a lot of us trim down the Facebook friends list.
Also, and I'm not sure if this has already been covered, how was he able to describe in such detail a gun and sock which he hadn't in fact seen in Mark Duggan's hand? Why was that not picked up? No, I know WHY, of course. Cunts.
Last edited:
scalyboy
They’re taking the piss now
That Littlejohn article (posted upthread) said the jury was mostly young people and some were mixed race. But, y'know, that was what Littlejohn said, so...
scalyboy
They’re taking the piss now
He said he'd seen it in Duggan's hand, but other evidence (e.g. lack of DNA on the sock or gun), the testimony of witness B (looking at the scene from nearby flat) would suggest otherwise. The jury didn't believe him on this point, either.
That's what I'm saying. His 'lovely view' of the gun and sock in Mark's hand could not have been anything other than a big fat lie, given it was found later, without any DNA on it.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Judge's directions remind me of Peter Cook
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Because that was what it said on the fucking flipchart in the briefing room where they all sat down to write their statements, three days after the fact.
Aye. It's fucking astounding how they can get away with such huge lies. And as for that being allowed to fucking well confer - speechless about that.
Totally led themJudge's directions remind me of Peter Cook
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
I rather thought any form of expanding ammunition was internationally banned for military use.
Similar threads
