• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

He had a gun with him which he thew from the car. So technically not unarmed although he didnt have it in his hand when they shot him so sounds like a trigger happy policeman to me.

Then again if you don't go around with guns you are unlikely to be shot by the police so I dont have a lot of sympathy for him.
This, trigger happy cops doesn't bode well but the fuzz do use guns so rarely that we don't really need to be alarmed. And how his family are trying to paint him as a peace loving man is baffling.
 
This shooting certainly puts my recent fine for being sick in a taxi into perspective although I still feel sixty quid was a bit harsh and my suede cowboy boots came out of it a lot worse than the back of the taxi.
 
nor did him running away when told to stop by an armed policeman.

That statement is so wrong I don't even know where to start.

1. The officers were in plain clothes

2. The officers didn't identify themselves

3. If some blokes were following you, you'd probably freak out and try to run/get away...

4. but JCDM wasn't running, he stood up and walked towards the officer on the tube who pinned him to the seat, then dragged him out of the carriage before putting 7 bullets in his head.

Hardly a man 'running away when told to stop by an armed policeman'
 
Utter crap. Notice you use the word "execute" just like his supporters are - how very touching.
American style? don't know what that is supposed to mean, extra cheese perhaps?
Democracy 0 ? what do you suppose he had collected the gun earlier in the day for ?

There is, of course, no proof that Mark Duggan was actually in possesion of a gun at the time he was killed.

While it's clear he was no angel-even his family accept that-the fact is he didn't have a serious criminal record ( eg no previous for assault or possesion of a firearm).

Nothing major in fact, except for a conviction against him for marijuana possesion.
 
Last edited:
Be interested to see one of these bleeding hearts (or one of their family) became somehow a victim of one of Duggans gang and see if their outlook would change on this subject.
 
There is, of course, no proof that Mark Duggan was actually in possesion of a gun at the time he was killed.

While it's clear he was no angel-even his family accept that-the fact is he didn't have a serious criminal record ( eg no previous for assault or possesion of a firearm).

Nothing major in fact, except for a conviction against him for marijuana possesion.

May I ask where you acquired knowledge of the man's police record? Not even your beloved Guardian have access to such things - now that is a fact!
 
sorry and I don't wish to sound rude but you can't be definite on something you have no knowledge of.

Det Ch Insp Mick Foote, from the Met's gang crime unit Trident, said Mark Duggan was a "confrontational and violent" member of Tottenham Man Dem, a gang associated with drug dealing and violence, the latter usually targeted at other gangs in London.

But Det Ch Insp Foote said he was "very lightly convicted". Minor offences like cannabis possession and the sale of stolen goods were all he had on his record.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25363828
 
what about the coroner's belief that there is strong evidence that he collected the gun, isn't that involvement in serious crime ?

LOL you can't convict a dead body of a crime.:hilarious: He might have been 'guilty' of collecting a gun, but that wouldn't have been on his record as a conviction


please quote previous posts properly.
 
LOL you can't convict a dead body of a crime.:hilarious: He might have been 'guilty' of collecting a gun, but that wouldn't have been on his record as a conviction


please quote previous posts properly.

don't quite understand your point. do you know what the job of a coroner is?
Like I say - you don't know what his police record states because you will never have access to it.

don't know what's happening to the quoting thing - stop being so patronising
 
don't quite understand your point. do you know what the job of a coroner is?
Like I say - you don't know what his police record states because you will never have access to it.

don't know what's happening to the quoting thing - stop being so patronising

Yes I know what the job of a coroner is.

His historic police record (before the fatal incident) was revealed by a senior police officer. I'm pretty happy to take that as fact. He was obviously a bad person who was rightly being closely watched and the attempt to arrest him and seize the gun was perfectly fine. However, it still does not excuse the shooting of an unarmed person, no matter what was on his record or what he'd done 5 mins ago.
 
Back
Top