ChatterBank2 mins ago
Jury Concludes Mark Duggan Lawfully Killed
76 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ChillDoubt. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
That was not the instruction by the coroner, Gromit. He asked a series of questions. "Did the man have a gun in his hand at the time he was shot?" was the tenor of one, and "Did the officer genuinely believe that the man had a gun in his hand?" that of another. The answers were "No" to the first and "Yes" to the second. Those alone explain the verdict. That is the law on the matter.It is not what is fact but what the person who fired believed to be fact that matters.The jury also found that the man had had a gun in his hand, but had thrown it some twenty feet in the moments before he was shot.
Fred, I realise I am going on newspapwr reports which may be unreliable, but that is not how it was reported when the jury went out to deliberate in December.
// "You have to be sure that the act was unlawful, that is that it was not done in lawful self-defence, or the defence of another, or to prevent crime," he told them.
"If you are sure that he did not have a gun in his hand, then tick the box 'unlawful killing'," he said.
He then reminded the panel they could use the "balance of probabilities" standard for the other eventualities.
"If you conclude that it was more likely than not that he did have a gun in his hand then tick the box accordingly, and go on to consider lawful killing or an open conclusion." //
http://
They seem to have accepttd that he did not have a gun, but he was lawfully killed. Perhaps we needed yo be in Court to know what exactly how they arrived at their verdict, but it still looks to me they did not follow the Judge's instruction.
// "You have to be sure that the act was unlawful, that is that it was not done in lawful self-defence, or the defence of another, or to prevent crime," he told them.
"If you are sure that he did not have a gun in his hand, then tick the box 'unlawful killing'," he said.
He then reminded the panel they could use the "balance of probabilities" standard for the other eventualities.
"If you conclude that it was more likely than not that he did have a gun in his hand then tick the box accordingly, and go on to consider lawful killing or an open conclusion." //
http://
They seem to have accepttd that he did not have a gun, but he was lawfully killed. Perhaps we needed yo be in Court to know what exactly how they arrived at their verdict, but it still looks to me they did not follow the Judge's instruction.
-- answer removed --
They seem to have accepttd that he did not have a gun, but he was lawfully killed. Perhaps we needed yo be in Court to know what exactly how they arrived at their verdict, but it still looks to me they did not follow the Judge's instruction.
---------------------
Or maybe 10 Londoner's are fed up of gun-toting drug dealers moving around the capital with percieved impunity and decided that one less is probably good for their general wellbeing?
---------------------
Or maybe 10 Londoner's are fed up of gun-toting drug dealers moving around the capital with percieved impunity and decided that one less is probably good for their general wellbeing?
the questions and answers are here
http://
http://
I think I understand why the jury arrived at their decision, but questions still remain over all of this. If he exited with a gun in hand, then tossed it 20 feet away over the railings, how come the armed police did not see that action? If he had tossed it before exiting the taxi, then he must have exited the cab without a gun in hand at all, which then means that the armed response officer must have mistaken something like a mobile phone for a gun, I guess.
And it still seems weird to me when you recall the original press releases from the Police and the IPCC over the whole Duggan affair, when they talked of a gun battle, shots being fired, a police officer narrowly escaping being wounded when a bullet hit his radio - where did all that come from?
And it still seems weird to me when you recall the original press releases from the Police and the IPCC over the whole Duggan affair, when they talked of a gun battle, shots being fired, a police officer narrowly escaping being wounded when a bullet hit his radio - where did all that come from?
@Naomi Maybe - but as best I can tell from all of the reports, not a single officer, not even the marksman involved in the shooting, recalls seeing the gun being thrown through the air at any time.
I do not want to second guess the jury, who have had ample time and access to the evidence and heard all the testimony, but there are several areas of the account that remain -at best- confused and contradictory.
I do not want to second guess the jury, who have had ample time and access to the evidence and heard all the testimony, but there are several areas of the account that remain -at best- confused and contradictory.
//not a single officer, not even the marksman involved in the shooting, recalls seeing the gun being thrown through the air at any time. //
I can only think it all happened so quickly. Confronted with an armed man, it's not inconceivable that the split second scenario didn't happen and no one realised he'd thrown the gun.
I can only think it all happened so quickly. Confronted with an armed man, it's not inconceivable that the split second scenario didn't happen and no one realised he'd thrown the gun.
At the trial of the man charged with supplying Duggan with the gun
// The trial included testimony from seven police officers who were allowed to remain anonymous and use pseudonyms. The Police alleged that Duggan had pulled the gun from his waistband and pointed it at police before they shot him. //
That version of events differs widely from the verson at this inquest. They can't both be correct. The man convicted at he earlier trial could appeal on the basis that the police version is different from the one old at the enquiry.
// The trial included testimony from seven police officers who were allowed to remain anonymous and use pseudonyms. The Police alleged that Duggan had pulled the gun from his waistband and pointed it at police before they shot him. //
That version of events differs widely from the verson at this inquest. They can't both be correct. The man convicted at he earlier trial could appeal on the basis that the police version is different from the one old at the enquiry.
http://
The Black Power salute about says it all.
Why do some sections of the community seem to get preferential treatment than others?
If this had been a member from some other communities who had had what they perceived as an incorrect ruling, do you think we would see a senior member of the Police Service trying to ask for calm?
It is also reported that they will even arrange a meeting with members of the community.
/// Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe will meet political representatives from London and local community leaders from Tottenham today to discuss how the police can build better relationships. He said he is 'open to ideas and advice'. ///
The Duggan family have not ruled out a call for a judicial review.
/// The family are expected to seek a judicial review in the hope that the verdict may be overturned so a fresh inquest can be heard. ///
Yes we can all see this happening especially after such threats as this,
/// Pat Davis, 57, a mother-of-two, told the Independent she feared a reaction. ///
/// 'It all depends now on how the Duggan family react. If they react, the community is going to react,' she said. ///
Anyone care to bet that such a review will be granted and the decision of a jury overturned by some Judges so as not to cause further troubles?
The Black Power salute about says it all.
Why do some sections of the community seem to get preferential treatment than others?
If this had been a member from some other communities who had had what they perceived as an incorrect ruling, do you think we would see a senior member of the Police Service trying to ask for calm?
It is also reported that they will even arrange a meeting with members of the community.
/// Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe will meet political representatives from London and local community leaders from Tottenham today to discuss how the police can build better relationships. He said he is 'open to ideas and advice'. ///
The Duggan family have not ruled out a call for a judicial review.
/// The family are expected to seek a judicial review in the hope that the verdict may be overturned so a fresh inquest can be heard. ///
Yes we can all see this happening especially after such threats as this,
/// Pat Davis, 57, a mother-of-two, told the Independent she feared a reaction. ///
/// 'It all depends now on how the Duggan family react. If they react, the community is going to react,' she said. ///
Anyone care to bet that such a review will be granted and the decision of a jury overturned by some Judges so as not to cause further troubles?
And it still seems weird to me when you recall the original press releases from the Police and the IPCC over the whole Duggan affair, when they talked of a gun battle, shots being fired, a police officer narrowly escaping being wounded when a bullet hit his radio - where did all that come from?
---------------
LG, just to answer that particular query I seem to recall some 7-10 days after the shooting, ballistics evidence from initial reports showed the bullet lodged in the Officer's radio did in fact come from another Officer at the scene i.e. that Duggan was in the middle of a Police crossfire, one to his front and one to his rear.
I will have a dig around on that one.
---------------
LG, just to answer that particular query I seem to recall some 7-10 days after the shooting, ballistics evidence from initial reports showed the bullet lodged in the Officer's radio did in fact come from another Officer at the scene i.e. that Duggan was in the middle of a Police crossfire, one to his front and one to his rear.
I will have a dig around on that one.
http://
Releasing the initial findings of ballistics tests, the police watchdog said a CO19 firearms officer fired two bullets, and that a bullet that lodged in a police radio was "consistent with being fired from a police gun".
One theory, not confirmed by the IPCC, is that the bullet became lodged in the radio from a ricochet or after passing through Duggan.
Releasing the initial findings of ballistics tests, the police watchdog said a CO19 firearms officer fired two bullets, and that a bullet that lodged in a police radio was "consistent with being fired from a police gun".
One theory, not confirmed by the IPCC, is that the bullet became lodged in the radio from a ricochet or after passing through Duggan.
@Chill Thanks for the additional information. I remember the initial reporting, which suggested a shootout at the scene between Duggan and the police, but I did not remember any subsequent reporting to the effect that the bullet in question came from a police gun.
As I said originally, I was not trying to second guess the jury, just was puzzled at the seeming disparity in jury decisions, but I can understand how they arrived at their decisions, following discussions here and reading the more detailed reports of the jury decisions.
As I said originally, I was not trying to second guess the jury, just was puzzled at the seeming disparity in jury decisions, but I can understand how they arrived at their decisions, following discussions here and reading the more detailed reports of the jury decisions.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.