Riots - Page 97

**Damien** · 08-01-2014, 15:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

So what can the family do now?

Judicial Review maybe?

---------- Post added at 16:50 ---------- Previous post was at 16:45 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

If you live by the sword, you will die by the sword. Ancient wisdom that still has resonance today. Duggan may not have been in possession of a gun at the fatal moment, but he put himself at risk of exactly this end by way he conducted his life.

I hope the liberal hand-wringers and professional agitators will drop it now this verdict is in - a verdict by a jury, let us not forget, not a coroner deciding alone.

But I doubt it.

Although the main reason it won't drop is because this is the worst possible verdict for drawing a line under the case. They found he didn't aim a gun or have it on him at the time police confronted him but did agree he had a gun and the police believed him to still be in possession of that gun. Everyone is going to believe they're right here. The 'hand-wringers' will point to his lack of possession of the weapon at the time of the shooting whilst others will point to the police believing he had a gun on him at the time and the fact he had a gun in the first place.

08-01-2014, 15:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

So what can the family do now?

accept that their son was a scroat and give the rest of us a break

Gary L · 08-01-2014, 15:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

Riots part 2 tonight....

Just needs a few, and the rest will have to follow.

I was gonna go out later to get some sugar too.

thenry · 08-01-2014, 15:56

'F the Police' and destroy the High Court. yup this is definitely going to go away.

---------- Post added at 16:56 ---------- Previous post was at 16:55 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

If you live by the sword, you will die by the sword. Ancient wisdom that still has resonance today.

**Chris** · 08-01-2014, 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

Judicial Review maybe?

---------- Post added at 16:50 ---------- Previous post was at 16:45 ----------

Although the main reason it won't drop is because this is the worst possible verdict for drawing a line under the case. They found he didn't aim a gun or have it on him at the time police confronted him but did agree he had a gun and the police believed him to still be in possession of that gun. Everyone is going to believe they're right here. The 'hand-wringers' will point to his lack of possession of the weapon at the time of the shooting whilst others will point to the police believing he had a gun on him at the time and the fact he had a gun in the first place.

Oh I know they won't drop it. But I can hope. The main thing to bear in mind here is that the jury's job was to weigh up precisely these arguments and this is the conclusion they have come to. A properly directed jury, fairly exposed to relevant evidence, cannot be wrong. That's just how it is. If anyone wants a judicial review they are going to have to show some evidence that the process was not fair. They cannot secure a review by simply asserting that the jury was wrong.

Russ · 08-01-2014, 16:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenry

'F the Police'

I thought that's what I could hear on the BBC news report

**Chris** · 08-01-2014, 16:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

Just needs a few, and the rest will have to follow.

I was gonna go out later to get some sugar too.

You still can. Were you planning to pay for it?

thenry · 08-01-2014, 16:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

Riots part 2 tonight....

ah yes.. more of this please http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14458424

**Damien** · 08-01-2014, 16:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

accept that their son was a scroat and give the rest of us a break

The verdict was presumably based on the fact the Jury decided that the officer honestly believed Duggan was armed and was going to shoot when they shot him. The decision was not based on Duggan being a 'scroat' or being an alleged criminal as the latter is not a reason to shoot someone.

08-01-2014, 16:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

The verdict was presumably based on the fact the Jury decided that the officer honestly believed Duggan was armed and was going to shoot when they shot him. The decision was not based on Duggan being a 'scroat' or being an alleged criminal as the latter is not a reason to shoot someone.

my reply was in answer to the question of "what can the family do now" not how did the jury arrive at their decision ,i stand by my answer

**Hugh** · 08-01-2014, 16:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

Riots part 2 tonight....

Depends if it's raining or not.....

Russ · 08-01-2014, 16:17

True - chavs and plastic gangstas don't like the rain.

**Maggy** · 09-01-2014, 14:57

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25363828

This is what some people just don't want to hear and frankly I fail to see how the verdict could have gone any other way.

Derek · 25-03-2015, 08:04

Just in case anyone missed this.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-32041119

Quote:

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) found the operation targeting Mr Duggan was "appropriate".
Its three-and-a-half-year investigation cleared the Metropolitan Police of any wrongdoing.

3 1/2 years for an investigation and no recommendation at the end for the IPCC not to give misleading info to the media after an incident.

**Chris** · 25-03-2015, 08:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

The way the comments are going, its looking that way.

I am all for the police doing there job by any means possible, water cannon the lot, if it brings peace to the area.

Look what I found buried in the depths of this thread, from 2011.

Funny how Arthur changed his mind about water cannon as soon as the evil Tory Boris did as Arthur asked and bought some.