Gordon R Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 The police use force all the time. One word for that - rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therealchucknorris Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 I have not mentioned murder,i am merely pointing out that from what has been said at the inquest it smells like a month old kipper,and i have then pointed out the parameters for using lethal force, We could all accept the police officers words if they rang true, but by their statements alone they raise a lot of questions,if we do not ask these questions then the police will continue as they are... ...Accepting their word blindly is fool hardy. I didn't say you had mentioned murder. As I mentioned in my post I don't accept all the pieces presented as evidence but I do happen to believe the officer in question when he said he thought he saw what he did - and crucially that is also how the jury saw it. The rest of the accounts don't corroborate this but then they don't seem to agree with each other. I will do my own further digging to form my opinion on this side of the story. Accepting anything blindly is fool hardy whether it's from the police, my aunt or Desmond Tutu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Sorry mungler but I haven't seen the film and have completely missed your point. I said how many people off here have been questioned over a murder with an illegal firearm. Mark duggan has, I on the other hand have not. Harry: That’s just fine, But how does murder fit in? When the police start becoming their own executioners where’s it going to end, Briggs? Pretty soon you start executing people for jaywalking. And executing people for traffic violations. Then you end up executing your neighbor because the dog ****** on your lawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albertan_J Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 It's obvious they have lost the trust of a large part of the community regardless of the outcome they shot an unarmed man and that doesn't sit well with me at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 I have heard that before, I am not quite sure what it means. The police use force all the time. They are there to serve,sounds outdated but that is it in a nutshell. It is the metropolitan police service. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Police_Service Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westley Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 If we are all for the police just dropping any naughty boy they feel like, then be careful what you wish for. What do you reckon then.... Legal Aid or what ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 (edited) Like I said, the jury decided after hearing all sides in far more detail that we will ever know. Well, if that's the start and end of it there's no need for any questions or a thread on the subject Mind you juries never get it wrong or have false evidence presented to them. Mind you maybe Flynny was the foreman True enough, but I suspect they got to hear a bit more evidence than we have here! I'm surprised this thread is still going, it has certainly gone round in circles for a while! Edited January 9, 2014 by Dekers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun4860 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 I'm surprised nobody has asked why they didn't tazer him? It would have dropped him on the spot if the blurb on them is to be believed I'm surprised this thread is still going, it has certainly gone round in circles for a while! It's on the verge as it is now just starting to repeat itself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 I'm surprised nobody has asked why they didn't tazer him? It would have dropped him on the spot if the blurb on them is to be believed If he had been holding a handgun a tazer could cause an involuntary muscle contraction and he could pull the trigger involuntary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun4860 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 If he had been holding a handgun a tazer could cause an involuntary muscle contraction and he could pull the trigger involuntary Not wanting to further muddy the water but he wasn't holding or pointing a gun at anybody Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 They are there to serve,sounds outdated but that is it in a nutshell. It is the metropolitan police service. I understand what you are saying, but in reality you haven't much choice if you don't consent then you get arrested by force if necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Like I said, the jury decided after hearing all sides in far more detail that we will ever know. fact is all the jury know is what they have been told, if they are told fibs they will make a decision based on fibs, the only people who know the real truth are plod, and of course we have no record of them telling fibs to cover up cock ups have we!! KW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 I'm surprised nobody has asked why they didn't tazer him? I did in the context of taking in the two at Woolwich and in dealing with Raoul Moat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Not wanting to further muddy the water but he wasn't holding or pointing a gun at anybody Shaun - agreed, but if had been Tazered, he might have made an involuntary phone call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therealchucknorris Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 It's obvious they have lost the trust of a large part of the community regardless of the outcome they shot an unarmed man and that doesn't sit well with me at all. It's obvious that the press are focusing on the case and looking to sell papers off the back of it. I can't recall seeing any actual surveys of different communities produced that would evidence this just yet though. It doesn't sit well with me that we have gangsters running around in taxis with illegal handguns. The coppers weren't cruising the streets in an unmarked car and decided to pull it over for jumping a red light, there was some additional context around this situation that doesn't paint things as black and white as your post suggests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Shaun - agreed, but if had been Tazered, he might have made an involuntary phone call. Sharp very sharp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun4860 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 I did in the context of taking in the two at Woolwich and in dealing with Raoul Moat. So you did, I apologise :Shaun) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Pretty soon you start executing people for jaywalking. And executing people for traffic violations. Then you end up executing your neighbor because the dog ****** on your lawn. you do if your a pw member just about any crimes punishable by death here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Nice to see the commissioner Sir Bernard supporting his officers in a video online with the BBC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Nice to see the commissioner Sir Bernard supporting his officers in a video online with the BBC. lets hope he is also as proactive with this http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-scotland-yards-rotten-core-police-failed-to-address-endemic-corruption-9050224.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 lets hope he is also as proactive with this http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-scotland-yards-rotten-core-police-failed-to-address-endemic-corruption-9050224.html Very interesting article that KW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 If memory serves correctly, did he not live in the same block of flats where a suspected terrorist lived, who was under surveillance. You can argue the toss about it all day long, if not here illegally he was on an expired visa which is why he ran when confronted by police. Put yourself in the coppers place, with terrorist atrocities very recently committed, would you just leave it to chance the he wasn't carrying a bomb in that rucksack? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flynny Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Well, if that's the start and end of it there's no need for any questions or a thread on the subject Mind you juries never get it wrong or have false evidence presented to them. Mind you maybe Flynny was the foreman Let me at em ,let me at em, Nice one mungler, Atb Flynny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bi9johnny Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 There is a very long line of others that lead the same lifestyle both in and out of prison who should all go the same way and reduce the burden on the taxpayer. I am fed up of giving these crooks and others a cushy life when incarcerated , there's plenty of them that have gone before which should of had a last injection. This country has become a crime mockery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old rooster Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 I did in the context of taking in the two at Woolwich and in dealing with Raoul Moat. I did in the context of taking in the two at Woolwich and in dealing with Raoul Moat. Very sad outcome to the tazering of Moat, the guy who hurriedly supplied the new, tazer they used, which had not been approved, committed suicide not long after, having been prosecuted for supplying the weapon. He was only trying to help in the incapacitating of a very dangerous killer. The police officer who was blinded by Moat has since committed suicide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts