Advanced search

Home secreturns off hols for riot duty

(14 Posts)
chasingthedevils Mon 08-Aug-11 17:05:36

The Home Secretary is returning from hols to help man/woman the police lines in North London

CogitoErgoSometimes Mon 08-Aug-11 17:22:26

To be in closer contact with the police operation, you mean. smile

newwave Mon 08-Aug-11 21:38:00

I note she rightly condemmed the rioters yet made no mention of the Police killing, no doubt if a Police officer had been killed in the riots her gob would never have stopped talking about it.

Another "Tomlinson" and another attempt at a cover up, no doubt.

CogitoErgoSometimes Mon 08-Aug-11 22:12:42

The fatal shooting is the subject of an investigation. The looting is not necessarily connected to it. I think the Home Sec is right to condemn the violence and not comment on the investigation.

newwave Mon 08-Aug-11 22:28:28

"the investigation" ha ha ha dont you mean whitewash or maybe cover up.

CogitoErgoSometimes Mon 08-Aug-11 22:34:45

No I don't mean whitewash or cover-up.

newwave Mon 08-Aug-11 22:49:11

Maybe you dont but that will be the outcome

CogitoErgoSometimes Mon 08-Aug-11 22:54:37

If the investigation shows that the armed unit was right to fire, you'll call it a whitewash. If it shows they made a mistake, you'll say 'I told you so, the police are a bunch of killers'.... you'll be happy either way, won't you?

newwave Mon 08-Aug-11 23:09:14

I would be happy if the first reaction as in the Tomlison case was not to lie through their teeth, if it wasnt for the videos they would have "got away with it".

The officers who knew what really happened closed ranks and kept quiet yet not one of them has been sacked.

The "investigations" seem to take forever. The moron who lobbed a fire extinguisher is now rightly in the nick yet the copper who "killed" Tomlinson is still walking the streets.

The law needs to be applied to all evenly.

CogitoErgoSometimes Mon 08-Aug-11 23:16:46

No-one has lied in this case. There have been plenty of rumours and counter-rumours but there has been no official line, no quick confirmations or denials to appease anyone, I suspect deliberately to avoid future charges of deception. There is a due process to go through, same as there was for the moron that lobbed the fire extinguisher. Same as I hope will happen for the morons that injured over two dozen police, two seriously, on Saturday night in Tottenham.

newwave Mon 08-Aug-11 23:26:19

The process for Police "wrong doing" takes forever with as much prevarication as possible unlike for the public as for the IPC that is a joke and an oxymoron.

With regard to the injured coppers not nice I agree but no copper was killed unlike Menzies, Tomlinson or Blair Peach who were killed by the Police and with it seems impunity.

The Police need to learn they are the publics servants and not the publics masters and quickly.

beachyhead Mon 08-Aug-11 23:29:50

There was a non-police weapon found at the scene, which I would assume belonged to the victim or his driver

newwave Mon 08-Aug-11 23:44:24

bh, you may indeed be correct but on the news it was reported that only two shots were fired and both came from Police issue weapons whilst the Police at first claimed they were shot at which now seems doubtful.

niceguy2 Tue 09-Aug-11 09:33:40

It's all speculation at the moment but unless we are to believe the police planted the gun, logic dictates it belonged to Duggan.

If it belongs to Duggan then the police obviously deployed their armed response correctly. In other words they deployed on knowing there was a chance he had a gun.

Firstly doesn't Duggan have to assume that if he wanders around the city tooled up that one of the consequences of this is he may be shot by the police?

Right now no-one but the officers there knows what happened. Now if the above are true then the police fired for three reasons:

1) An officer thought in all honesty that Duggan was about to fire on them. Bear in mind the officer may be highly trained but he has only a split second to make that judgement from a distance and may have had to guess based on where Duggan was waving the gun. In that context I don't care if Duggan fired first. If he was pointing a gun at anyone then he deserved to be shot. We don't want police only to be allowed to shoot AFTER the criminal has shot first. That's frankly stupid.

2) The officer fired by mistake. In which case it's an honest mistake. Shit happens and again it's a risk the criminals take when arming themselves.

3) The officer(s) fired in an act of premeditated murder. This sounds rather unlikely to me. I can accept a total fuck up or that someone thought that Duggan was about to shoot. But premeditated shooting? That'd be a real stretch.

It's perfectly plausible that the police genuinely thought that Duggan fired first. For example if he was waving his gun around, one officer thinks "OMG he's going to fire...." and shoots. All the other officers hear is a shot. They could think "He's fired" and shoot too. I think they call it the fog of war. It doesn't necessarily mean that anyone's intentionally lied and is exactly why the IPCC investigation takes time.

Lastly, I'd have more sympathy for the rioters if I thought they were genuine protestors. From what I've seen though it's just a convenient excuse to loot some shops and cause trouble.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: