Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 28rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Avatar Image
I don’t think anybody is suggesting that people can be shot by the police without question, Eddie, and that’s certainly not what has happened here. As your article points out, there have been numerous enquiries and investigations culminating in a full jury inquest, led by a senior circuit judge. Nothing in your article is material not known to that...
16:38 Tue 27th Oct 2015
About the same amount as would be afforded to your family if they believed that you had been 'unlawfully' killed, in similar circumstances, I imagine.
Question Author
looks like FOCS are straight out in force! He was drug dealer, the plod that shot him did us all a favour.
Yup, he's dead and not making any applications to the courts.......his family are.

And stop referring to anyone with a more intelligent point of view as 'FOC'.
//..a more intelligent point of view..//

do you include in that judgement those who, on hearing of the death of pc david phillips, first thought wasn't "how awful", but "yeah but what about mark duggan"?
Why oh why is it not legal for a police officer to murder someone?

No wonder our society is in decline.
Mushroom - I am answering TGT and his insistence on referring to anyone disagreeing with him (those are the 'intelligent ones' I mention) as 'Friends Of Criminal Scum'.

I hold no brief for no-marks like Duggan and the world is not a poorer place for his passing....but it is Duggan's family who are appealling the decision, and I am not aware that they are all drug-dealing scumbags...are you?
Question Author
the case has been thoroughly gone through, his family don't like the answer so we must do it until they do eh gromit?
Who's paying the family's legal fees?
I was going to ask what the foc are FOCS but jack has kindly explained it, never heard that term before.
Question Author
"Who's paying the family's legal fees? " - I'll give you one guess zacs!
It's them you want to aim your vitriol at.
There has to be a point when this sort of thing stops.

Yes, have your inquiry but that should end it.
Question Author
what you and me zacs?
What a waste of time and money....
Read this!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Mark_Duggan
Plenty of controversial points,from both sides!!
bazwillrun - //What a waste of time and money.... //

That is where yourself and TTT, and jack and I part company - jack and I don't believe that seeking justice for anyone is a waste of money.

Fortunately, justice is not denied to you on the basis of what a member of your family may or may not have done - you get it because it is your entitlement.
^^ I sometimes almost abandon hope at some of the attitudes on here.
Posters such as TTT and bazwillrun seem to want a police state where you can be shot dead by the police, and no questions asked or even permitted.
TTT have you actually READ the link I posted ? It shocked me!
I don’t think anybody is suggesting that people can be shot by the police without question, Eddie, and that’s certainly not what has happened here. As your article points out, there have been numerous enquiries and investigations culminating in a full jury inquest, led by a senior circuit judge. Nothing in your article is material not known to that inquest and, as far as I can see, no fresh evidence has come to light.

I think that those who are saying that “enough is enough” have a valid point. The question worth addressing is, had that jury returned a verdict of unlawful killing, would an appeal against that decision have been granted? I think it highly unlikely which leads people to believe that the enquiries will only cease when the “right” verdict has been reached.

I am the first to defend the exhaustion of the proper legal process and if the family are entitled to an appeal then so be it. But I have a faint suspicion that if the appeal does not go in their favour it will not be the last we hear from them. Their demand for “justice” is not that at all. Justice will always leave one of the parties disappointed. Their demand is for the people who killed Duggan – who were doing a difficult and dangerous job and who did not have six months to mull the matter over in agreeable surroundings - to be punished, whether the killing was held to be lawful or not. Nothing else will do for them.
Question Author
what the judge said.
^Ditto.

1 to 20 of 28rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

How Much More "due Process" Must We Afford This Pond Life?

Answer Question >>

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.