Mark Duggan- Shooting was lawful

[Whitershadeofpale]

here

The gun was his. He was told to stop by armed police. He didn't. If police with guns told me to keep still, I wouldn't blink. He moved so police had to consider in a split second he was reaching for a gun. Justified IMO. He had prior. He was not some innocent man but a convicted criminal and gang member who was too stupid to stay still when told to. Plus he was 29 years old and father of six kids. Nice.

CSI has a lot to answer for, it is not my area of science but Even I know that a sock held In a pocket of jacket is not going to be a rich source of fingerprints and DNA.

Back - again my understanding of Jdm is that armed police told him to stop so he ran. Horrific bombs had just gone off and he's there acting dodgy with a back pack, running for a tube. Why would someone not stop when told to by armed police? I don't get it.

What if jdm had a backpack gill if bombs and police hadn't shot him ---- dammed if they do, dammed if they don't.

iaminvisible many of your arguments are based on what we know now. The verdict is about what the officer knew at the time.

Has any Met officer ever been convicted of killing anybody whether in custody or not?

Err- No. Not even when the coroner has decided it was an unlawful killing.

Backpack FULL of bombs - not gill!

If I was a member of the jury I think I'd be worried about my personal safety.

If the gun was his, explain why it had no DNA and none of his finger prints on it, or the sock Poppy!

Having 6 kids or being in a gang, or being unable to stand still does not mean you should be shot!

Actually poppy it was established later that none of that happened. The police told a story of a man with heavy jacket and wires hanging out running away from them but in the end it was shown that he just went to the station without a jacket and got on a train.

You are just remembering the early claims the police made when they realised they had killed someone who might have public sympathy

All of them Orange. They are all in the press today.

I've never watched CSI princess.

The gun was his. The man who supplied it was found guilty last year and was a witness in the inquest. It was his gun.

I still don't understand why someone would not stop when faced with armed police .....

If I was handling an illegal firearm and was possibly going to commit a crime with it, I would be making sure my DNA and fingerprints were not on it. It's not a surprise it was clean.

We don't actually know that Duggan didn't stop and Menezes didn't know the police were after him until it was too late. He had no reason to suppose they were since he was not in fact a criminal or doing anything wrong.

The police officer thought he had a gun in his hand and he had reasonable grounds to think that. Therefore he had reasonable grounds to think there was an imminent threat to his life. He had a second to make that decision and according to him he was scared that if he didnt shoot he'd be shot.

people should read the police and witness statements

What life is worth more ? Police officer or criminal with gun? Innocent bystanders or criminal with gun?

If you illegally have a gun then you might get shot.

I agree with orange pixie and think armed officers and juries have a hard enough job to do without a load of women who have not been privilege to all the facts and in most of you guys cases, with respect, probably not a total understanding of the judicial system passing judgement.

What surprised me with those 2 scumbags that murdered the soldier in London was just how much restraint the Police showed. The 2 guys came running at them deliberately with weapons raised and (to me) the Police were quite slow in firing.

I couldn't be a police officer dealing with all the shit they have to deal with - and that's from the home office, let alone the criminals!

I think I understand the judicial system that was applied to Menezes. Duggan sounds a waste of space so I care less about him, but I don't want to live in a country where the police gun down people and then lie about it blatantly because they know there's nothing you can do about it anyway.

But if armed police tell you to stop or something like that why would you not do what they say ....

How would he make sure the sock it was in was clean, Nick?

The policeman might have thought he had a gun, Viva, but the jury were sure by a majority of eight-to-two that he did not have a weapon in his hands when the police surrounded him. So how can it be a lawful killing?

Poppy67 who didn't stop?