Tuesday, 26 February 2013

Mark Duggan - Murdered by the Met?

Kevin Hutchinson-Foster
 
Kevin Hutchinson-Foster has been sentenced today to 11 years in jail for drugs and firearms offences. He was convicted of supplying the gun to Mark Duggan, which he was in possession of, when shot dead by police.

When I first wrote about this story the riots that followed Duggans death were just starting. Some sections of the 'community' in Tottenham and London decided that the police shouldn't go around executing an innocent, unarmed, law abiding, family man. Other parts of the country saw this as an opportunity to take part in the retail riots, thinking that our ineffective justice system would allow them to get away with it.

Hutchinson-Fosters trial has brought out almost all the evidence that will be heard at Duggan's inquest. The jury decided that one gun toting drug dealer gave a gun to another gun toting drug dealer. We can only speculate what Duggan intended to do with the gun. The Trident officers investigating Duggan clearly believed he intended to cause harm to, or murder, the man he believed to be responsible for the death of his cousin. Quite rightly, knowing that he had taken possession of the gun, they ordered the firearms team in to arrest him. The police officer that shot Duggan stated that he had the gun in his hand and raised it towards the officer who then shot him.

Duggan, The Family Man, With Two of His Friends Who are Serving Life for Shooting People

Unfortunately there are still a few misguided souls around who still believe that Duggan was this completely innocent family man who was executed by the police in retaliation for the murder of Keith Blakelock.



 

43 comments:

  1. A poor effort even by your standards dude. Retail riots? is that why we hit 6 police stations in Nottingham? Not too many Nikes only donuts;) You may say that Duggan was armed but who outside of your coterie of brain dead racists believes it? Finally any thoughts on Jon Venables photo being shown? Plod protect nonces - oh well birds of a feather Ferenda;))

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Stuart Denney QC, barrister for Mr Hutchinson-Foster, asked the pathologist to imagine a scene in which Mr Duggan had got out of a minicab and was heading towards a wall beside the road while a police officer had got out of a car behind the taxi and was standing on the pavement.

    The jury has already heard evidence from a police officer known as V53 who described a similar situation leading up to the shooting.

    Mr Denney suggested that if the police officer then fired the shot that struck Mr Duggan in the chest, the track of the bullet would have to pass from the left to the right.

    He asked the pathologist: "But in fact the chest wound is right to left?"
    "Yes, that's right," answered Dr Poole."
    ...................................

    And then again -

    ".. as to whether this could have been possible if police were actually standing in relation to Mark Duggan and Mark Duggan was taking the position described by police and Dr Simon Poole said that no this was not consistent with the scenario as described ..

    .. the court .. heard from .. V53 that Mark Duggan exited the mini-cab on Ferry Road and that as he made his way from the mini-cab towards a wall police shot him as he as he pulled a gun from the inside of his jacket and that he was holding that gun and pointing it at police crucially when he was shot.

    The defence put it today to the pathologist that Mark Duggan could not have been in the position that the police say he was in when they shot him dead and the pathologist did agree that the defence appeared correct in that assertion.

    Also .. the pathologist said that one of the shots fired appeared to have entered the body higher than it exited suggesting that either Mark Duggan was bent over or he was standing upright and holding his hand above his head when he was shot.”


    ReplyDelete
  3. Lex,
    Im surprised this hasn't made more of a splash in the news.

    And why havent the community leaders come out to apologise for their previous support of the saintly Mark Duggan?

    And are the family still insistent that at no time did he have a gun?

    And have they come up with a feasible motive for the arms officer 'executing' the innocent, law abiding, gainfully employed, sexually faithful, non-drug taking, non drug- dealing, non-gangster father?

    And why on Earth does this legal process take so long? why is the inquest not till Sept?

    We will all be dead by the time its over and done with!

    ReplyDelete
  4. And why are some thirty or so officers refusing to answer to the IPCC?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rehill - the law has decreed that you cannot publish photographs of Venables. If you choose to disobey the law then you deserve whatever comes to you.

    Anonymous 2240 - we had all this trajectory theory nonsense in the Harry Stanley case, where it was proven that the police officers had done nothing wrong. There is no proof that the officers account regarding the Duggan shooting is untrue. You will hear more about this at the inquest.

    Jess - I agree those shouting executio; those that rioted; those shouting racist police; you will never hear an apology from them. The so called community leaders such as David Lamentable MP; you will hear no apology from them either; no condemnation of the rioters and criminals. Such an apology, or dare I say, support for the police or law and order will apparently remove all your credibility or election chances in some communities.

    Anonymous 2247 - police officers distrust the IPCC. What faith would you have in an organisation that measures success, not by uncovering the truth, but by the numbers of police officers prosecuted or sacked. Having said that, all police officers in this case have provided written accounts to the IPCC. If there is any evidence to suspect that any police officer has lied in a statement or committed any crime then they can be arrested and questioned like anyone else. This suggestion that police officers are refusing to give accounts or answer questions is untrue.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If V53's quasi-legal "honest held belief" was indeed both honest and truly believable then he would have no need to say it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ferenda whose law? The one for the rich or poor? Fuck your law and your racism. The world knows what UK police are lie and your fear over G8 is well grounded - New Scotland Yard delenda est.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Adding extra chill to the day is your suggestion that only a few misguided souls are sufficiently foolish to entertain a sceptical view, in the matter of collusive statements constructed by police marksmen.

    As to the integrity of many serving police, one need only cursorily examine your police neighbour. 'Shijuro' is a police blog making a habit of publishing comments purporting to be from my server. For as long as his type handle evidence and prepare statements, my scepticism will prevail. Such false accounting has a negative impact and undermine any good done by superior colleagues. I trust you are familiar with Aesop's The Boy Who Cried Wolf.

    And smearing the dead is another regular police tactic winning zero respect from the public. Nobody is a 'completely innocent family man', lex. Distinguishing us from saints are moral weaknesses which, to various degrees, you and I share with Mr Duggan but you are entitled to state 'he was no saint'.

    I suggest it is a majority of reasonable citizens who now place no more faith in a lying, corrupt Establishment than they can prudently entrust to any public servant.

    If any war rages in our cities between police and armed, murderous gangsters, it has been very seriously compromised by proven police dishonesty and serial manipulation.

    Law enforcement can never resolve a conflict with organised crime by adopting misguided actions which conceivably include executions for 'the greater good'. It is the interminable course plotted by some Flying Dutchman.




    ReplyDelete
  9. melv, it has been standard practice, and encouraged by the law, for police involved in incidents to collaborate when making notes. In practice, it ensures that the best recollections are put forward in evidence. I have done this hundreds of times and the account given has always been honest and truthful.
    I understand that the practice is open to allegations of collusion but don't criticise the police, the vast majority of whom are totally honest, criticise the system and get it changed.

    I don't read Shijuro. I find it hard to believe he is adding comments to his posts purporting to be from you. You plague police blogs with pompous criticism but rarely have anything constructive to add.

    The focus of this post wasn't smearing the dead. The focus was pointing out, and rubbing the noses in the muck of this mans life, to all those souls who shouted murder, racist police, Etc. All those who took the opportunity to take part in the Retail Riots. They have mostly gone very quiet. The media has glossed over it. These people need to be reminded who Mark Duggan really was and that their allegations and behaviour were completely unjustified.

    Your suggestion that Duggan may still have been executed just makes me feel sorry for you.

    I share your concerns regards the Establishment. It appears that people are waking up to the fact that even the Liberals don't know what an honest politician is. Covering up poor behaviour is apparently justified in order to ensure that the bigger picture of clinging on to power, lining your pockets, forcing your failing policies on the population and rabidly dismissing anyone who holds a different view. How tolerant and inclusive.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Lex,
    I'm not sure I'd bother to continue to engage with Melv.
    His repeated assertions about events that he clearly knows nothing about and can obviously not be bothered to do any basic research on, undermine any points he might be trying, quite reasonably, to make.


    Tang0

    ReplyDelete
  11. Good evening, lex.

    "You plague police blogs with pompous criticism...."

    Ouch! :)

    ReplyDelete
  12. A great post Lex. You can tell it's great by the bile posted by Melvin and Rehill. Anything that gets those two idiots ranting gets my vote.I'm sure both of them would have been delighted had one of their daughters bought Duggan home as their new squeeze.
    Jaded.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Jade at least our daughters (Melvin et moi) are not on the game like yours! Low blow! As for Shitgiro he does indeed play fast and loose with comments, total ****, at least Ferenda allows criticism (as I do) my point stands plod = corrupt ***ks!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Rehill - you lie. You do not allow comments from any normal person who disagrees with your deranged views.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Classic comment Rehill. Put it with;
    "I bet you were bullied at school"
    "Take these handcuffs off and I will do you"
    "Who's shagging your wife when you are on nights?"
    Etc etc bullshit bingo from scum like you.Heard it all before and you think you are soooo original.
    Anyway read Rehills blog,it's hilarious. By printing topless pictures of Kate Middleton he is sticking it to "the man" and inciting revolution.

    Anyway back to the topic. The elephant in the room is what Duggan was going to do with that gun-going to shoot a rival perhaps?
    Jaded

    ReplyDelete
  16. Jaded's dozen or so jobs before acceptance by police are certain to be exclusive of diplomatic service.

    Evidence of dishonesty, a light education and early years as a victim of bullying, gush from the keyboard of a sneaky and seriously irritating character.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Official figures revealed at the beginning of last year that more than 900 serving police officers and community support officers have a criminal record.

    Most are for traffic offences but there are also convictions for burglary, drug supplying, causing death by careless driving, robbery and domestic violence.

    Senior officers include two detective chief inspectors and a chief inspector, all from the Metropolitan Police.

    Mark Duggan had no criminal record.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Of course Duggan is not the issue, the decent folks know he was murdered and the scum in blue did it, now to the issue of police blogs - Ferenda is poor but a King compared to Sgt Kevin Edney (Insp Gadget) who bans critics (most notably my pal Michael a human rights activist) and Shitgiro who as one anycne can see is just another far right goon in uniform. God I miss Shanky! Oh finally one hopes that your odious colleagues apply to G8 we will make it a Hot LZ luv from CIRA, RIRA and ONH!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous 1023 - there are a number of police officers with criminal convictions. As you say most are for traffic offences. Almost all those left that have convictions for burglary Etc which they got when they were kids. The police decided about 20 years ago that someone who broke into a shed or broke a window when they were 14 shouldn't be debarred from becoming a police officer at say 23 when they had held down a job and shown they were responsible. Some people may disagree with that.

    Duggan may not have had a criminal record. If he were alive now he would have one for possession of a loaded firearm.

    Perhaps you can explain how Duggan supported his family in the style he did with no job?

    Perhaps you can explain why he wore a ganster member T shirt on his Facebook page?

    Perhaps you can explain why he had a funeral a la Kray Bros. and why some of the tributes left referred him as a 'soldier' or 'general' and to the Star Gang and their associates Gang N17 Farm?

    Perhaps you can explain why he was under surveillance by Op Trident? And before anyone says it, there are more than enough criminals out there to target; the police don't need to target innocent people.

    Perhaps you can explain why one of his best friends said 'he was into things?' Or why his girlfriend said that if he had a gun he wouldn't have used it.

    Finally, a reminder that the police have never made a statement that Duggan fired his weapon first. That comment came from the IPCC very shortly after the incident and should never have been made.

    ReplyDelete
  20. tut tut

    for me the fact that duggan procured a firearm is not evidence of anything.

    more than likely he wished to simply trim his toe nails with it...

    ReplyDelete
  21. Melvin you are beyond parody.Repeating the bullying line!

    Even most comments on the Guardian are generally quite supportive to the police for a change.

    Jaded.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Well, I do have a little sympathy for the position of the Met and the indignities now facing this once respected power. A despised, alienated and dishevelled Force, reduced to sniping and crawling on its belly.

    So reminiscent of the Wehrmacht's infamous arrival at Stalingrad, lex.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Perhaps you could explain the concept of innocent until proven guilty.

    Perhaps you could try and sort in your mind the difference between a professed "honest held belief" and actual evidential forensic fact.

    Perhaps you could try and sort out the difference between lawful and unlawful killing.
    Given the way things are being spun at all levels it doesn't look likely the inquest jury will be given that option.

    ReplyDelete
  24. anon

    perhaps you could attempt to understand that the recent prosecution PROVES the guilt of Duggan's gun ownership.

    perhaps you could attempt to understand that some things in life cannot be objective. Do you understand what 'judgement call" means.

    perhaps you yourself need to look up lawful/unlawful killing?

    ironically the police saved a life that day... the life of another gangster that our Man Dem friend was likely targeting.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Loved the Stalingrad analogy MTG but it is wasted here, Ferenda & Jade move their lips when reading and grew up on "Commando" comics where they supported the SS!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Good evening, Ciaran.

    WC Jaded will confuse Stalingrad with a vodka brand....and I suppose it is remiss of me to totally ignore unimportant details.

    ReplyDelete
  27. MTG Jade aspires to cheap vodka mostly she drowns her self loathing in Buckfast!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Grass still growing Melvin? With all the extra time on your hands now you haven't got a lawnmower perhaps you would care to explain how you are such an expert on policing. I've asked before and not got an answer so I don't expect one here.
    Try not to use the word radiator in the reply.
    Jaded.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Broxted - I suspect Lex actually based himself on Union Jack Jackson, in a completely different comic.
    I am confused as to why you now believe Jaded read Commando. Jaded may well be such on days off but surely from your previous assertions Jaded would have read Jackie.
    Keep drinking the Tennants and try and think of something amusing or clever to say.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Learned C*****l Why do plod walk around in threes? One can read, one can write and one keeps an eye on the two dangerous intellectual subversives;)

    ReplyDelete
  31. I wouldn't say that plod are thick but one found a dead horse in FitzWilliam Street, could not spell it so dragged it into Chapel Street.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Persistence and innovation will ultimately rescue the slow, Ciaran. As a case in point, I politely refer to our host as 'lex' but the gesture remains aloft.

    Tantalisingly close with his 'melv' response, it must be sweetened before we know the assarius has dropped.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Assarius? Is that like a dinosaur? I hear that Jade coloured in a Viking today at work and the Desk Sgt gave her a Gold Star and 10 mins extra playing with the hamster!

    ReplyDelete
  34. Learned Council01 March, 2013 19:46

    Broxted - is that the best you can do. Pathetic. And for goodness sake Google Assarius you moron.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Broxted?Rehill? Etc-don't give up your day job,whatever that is.How are you funding the revolution? I assume it's by benefit fraud.
    De-facto Jaded.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Rehill - you epitomise the views of the modern left. You are so sure that you are right that anyone who disagrees with your point of view is sub human or a nazi.
    The irony is that it is these views that will lead to state oppression, torture, re-education camps and even state sponsored murder.
    You think you are fighting all these things when all you are doing is advocating that we continue on that slippery slope.

    ReplyDelete
  37. 'Is that like a dinosaur?'

    Talented observation, Ciaran. :)

    ReplyDelete
  38. Jade - it is Presume for first person singular, we have covered this in earlier lessons
    Ferenda - many would rather my nad the far left's vision than your "Ministry Of Love"
    Dr MTG - I play it for laughs here mostly as the combined IQ of the average nick is about room temperature!

    ReplyDelete
  39. But Lex I really wanted to buy that Montana Real Estate!

    ReplyDelete
  40. Despite all the leftie bollocks, its still hardly what you'd call a loss to society.

    ReplyDelete
  41. If the police are so innecte can you explain why their testimony in court didn't match. And how the gun ended up 12 ft away from him after he'd been killed?

    ReplyDelete
  42. I don't know what parts of their testimony didn't match. Perhaps each officer told their story exactly as they saw it. We all see things slightly differently for a number of reasons. If the police evidence was all exactly the same, the conspiracy theorists would say that they had colluded and were lying.
    I believe the gun was found 12 feet away as it was thrown there to make sure it was out of the way and not available to be used, but I wasn't there and so I am not certain of this.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Someone pulling a gun and then throwing it away is a big thing to forget/miss.

    Police don't just throw guns away where anyone can pick them up they move them away from the guy who was holding it but not that much.

    Only 2 of the police claim to have seen the gun, one said it was pointed at them, the other that it was in his hand, another policeman says he didn't see one at all, neither did any of the passers by. Eyewitness testimony is not so unreliable you forget someone waving a gun around.

    ReplyDelete