Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Thu Jan 09, 2014 10:09 am  

Chris28 wrote:

I'm no expert on firearms, and like others haven't read the full details of the case, but I do wonder why, based on the fact that he may have had a gun (or may not have) at the time, the highly trained coppers didn't seek to incapacitate him (instead of using lethal force) with a shot to the shoulder of the arm carrying the alleged weapon, then one to the leg to knock him down. Why shoot him in the chest?

I thought he was in the back seat of a car wasn't he? And the police were in another car that pulled up alongside. Which would make it very difficult to shoot him in the leg.




If it hadn't been for the thing about the gun being found over a hedge on the street and not on Mark Duggan's body or in the car then I'd have much more sympathy for the Police's position on this.

I understand that if you're an armed police officer following a man you believe often carries a firearm, is a member or leader of a gang responsible for several murders and shootings, you've got information he had a gun earlier today and then when you stop the car he starts bending down or appears to be reaching for something that you've got a very difficult decision to make very quickly. Hesitate and you, your colleagues or a passerby could be shot. Fire and you could be shooting when you don't have a reason to. So the actual officer that shot him I don't have any reason to doubt did it for the "right reasons" so to speak.

What worries me is this gun found over a hedge. It might well be the case that Duggan did actually throw it out of the car window, which might be why the officer shot Duggan as he thought Duggan was going to use rather than throw the gun. But unfortunately there are too many cases of the police closing ranks and lying or misleading for me to just instantly believe them when something like this happens.

I also think the family and some members of "the community" have been pathetic on this. The scenes outside and inside the court were ridiculous. I'm sure they're upset at their loss, but in the end if he hadn't been known to carry a gun and wasn't a member of a violent and vicious gang then armed police wouldn't have even been there.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Thu Jan 09, 2014 10:42 am  

The story is a perfect illustration of one huge difference between UK and US, though. The incident wouldn't have merited half a column inch over there. I agree largely with Him, but we should all be grateful that life, and the right to it, is held in so much greater regard over here.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Thu Jan 09, 2014 10:57 am  

Him wrote:

I thought he was in the back seat of a car wasn't he? And the police were in another car that pulled up alongside. Which would make it very difficult to shoot him in the leg.

You see that’s my issue with it, I agree with what you said regarding the gun being over the hedge. But my worry is how the police, knowing how difficult incapacitating him in that vehicle would be, and knowing all they knew about the threat he caused, ever expected that situation to end any differently to what it did. What was the outcome they hoped for by pulling up alongside in the car?

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Thu Jan 09, 2014 11:21 am  

What I can't reconcile is the account of the shooter with the finding that Duggan was not holding a gun:

The officer who shot Duggan, referred to in court as V53, earlier in the case described the moment he opened fire.
He told the jury: 'I'm hoping he's going to drop it.
'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.
'I've brought my weapon up and I've discharged one round and I'm aiming for the central body mass because I'm looking to shoot to stop.'
He said the first bullet hit Mr Duggan in the chest and caused him to flinch but the gun, wrapped in a sock, was then pointing towards the marksman.
The officer fired a second shot, hitting Mr Duggan in the right bicep.

The only way that could make sense is if Duggan was holding something the shooter thought was a gun - but wasn't. And made the rather big mistake of pointing whatever it was at armed police - after already being shot once. It makes no sense to me. If Duggan HAD been holding a gun and had been shot in possession, then it would at least be understandable -if unwise - if he had raised his own weapon to try to fire back, but if we accept he was not holding a gun then how to explain the police account? It's not like "Ihe had something which I thought could be a gun", or "looked like a gun"; the account is unequivocal.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Thu Jan 09, 2014 12:02 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

What I can't reconcile is the account of the shooter with the finding that Duggan was not holding a gun:
The only way that could make sense is if Duggan was holding something the shooter thought was a gun - but wasn't. And made the rather big mistake of pointing whatever it was at armed police - after already being shot once. It makes no sense to me. If Duggan HAD been holding a gun and had been shot in possession, then it would at least be understandable -if unwise - if he had raised his own weapon to try to fire back, but if we accept he was not holding a gun then how to explain the police account? It's not like "Ihe had something which I thought could be a gun", or "looked like a gun"; the account is unequivocal.

Sorry to ask you to do my donkey work FA, but seeing as you are on the case so to speak, can you furnish me with the account of how the gun was thrown into the field.
I am not questioning that Duggan threw it or suggesting that it was planted.
It's just that for Duggan to throw it there he had to have opened the door or wound the window down at some stage.
Now I can tell, as a driver, if this has occurred.
What did the taxi driver say?

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Thu Jan 09, 2014 12:05 pm  

If he wasnt a member of that gang. If he wasnt carrying a gun.

The taxi he was in wouldnt have been stopped would it?

Only himself to blame.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Thu Jan 09, 2014 12:20 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

The story is a perfect illustration of one huge difference between UK and US, though. The incident wouldn't have merited half a column inch over there. I agree largely with Him, but we should all be grateful that life, and the right to it, is held in so much greater regard over here.

I was just about to post the same thing. To be fair to the US police they have to deal with nutters with guns far far more frequently than we do so you can understand that they're more likely to "shoot first" so to speak. I remember seeing on one those police camera action type tv shows a police officer just pulls over a bloke just to give him a speeding ticket and as soon as he gets alongside the side window the bloke pulls out a gun and shoots the police officer.

But they are still too reckless and gung-ho over there.

SmokeyTA wrote:

Him wrote:

I thought he was in the back seat of a car wasn't he? And the police were in another car that pulled up alongside. Which would make it very difficult to shoot him in the leg.

You see that’s my issue with it, I agree with what you said regarding the gun being over the hedge. But my worry is how the police, knowing how difficult incapacitating him in that vehicle would be, and knowing all they knew about the threat he caused, ever expected that situation to end any differently to what it did. What was the outcome they hoped for by pulling up alongside in the car?

I agree to a point. I'm only going off memory here so apologies if I'm wrong but didn't the police think he was on his way to commit a murder? So would have to stop the car he was in rather than wait til he got to his destination. I might be wrong on that though.
But if they've decided they need to stop the car I'm not sure what the best way is to be honest, if you just sit behind and put blue lights on you're relying on him pulling over and not driving off and then you've got a pursuit on your hands.

As I said, my biggest issue is with the gun. Either how did it get out of the car and over a hedge? Or as FA points out, if it was thrown that doesn't tally with the officer's statement. Unfortunately I'm very sceptical of the police in this kind of situation as I think their first reaction is just to close ranks.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Thu Jan 09, 2014 12:21 pm  

It's one of the topics on the Jeremy Vine Show right now.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Thu Jan 09, 2014 12:26 pm  

guess who wrote:

If he wasnt a member of that gang. If he wasnt carrying a gun.

The taxi he was in wouldnt have been stopped would it?

Only himself to blame.

That seems a pretty poor justification for summary execution doesn’t it?

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Thu Jan 09, 2014 12:40 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

That seems a pretty poor justification for summary execution doesn’t it?

A court of law has proved that didnt happen. So your point is?