The Tottenham Riot

Post by **spot** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 7:08 pm

You have confidence in the integrity of these paid killers. I don't.

Let's see what pans out, shall we.

Post by **spot** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 7:12 pm

Bruv;1376358 wrote: A lot of assumptions.

I read that the box had finger prints but not the gun, the box being in the vehicle while the gun was yards away, over a fence.

If we're working from press reports, the earlier Independent link saysPolice said yesterday that they had charged a 29-year-old man with an assault at a hair salon and of possessing and transferring the gun that was reportedly found a month later hidden inside a box near the body of Mark Duggan when it was recovered.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:25 pm

spot;1376366 wrote: You have confidence in the integrity of these paid killers. I don't.

Let's see what pans out, shall we.

As posted elsewhere .........please someone put me out of my misery.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:34 pm

Bruv;1376471 wrote: As posted elsewhere .........please someone put me out of my misery.

And me...

Post by **spot** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:29 am

The first academic study of the reasons for the riot has been prepared. David Cameron, not surprisingly, was lying when he said the riot was "devoid of political meaning" - being a manipulative opportunist short-term politician that's no surprise at all.

Here's the BBC's news report: BBC News - England riots study: Anti-police anger 'was factor'

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:16 am

Very easy to come up with a politically motivated reason, after the event.

Of course these people came up with seriously clever reasons for knicking trainers and wide screen TV's.

If they felt that strongly, why not protest without the firing of non political buildings ?

Post by **spot** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:22 am

I think anyone saying there was no link between the Duggan ambush and the riots is being unreasonable. The reason for producing the report was to provide evidence to back up intuitive logic and to refute the self-serving abdication of responsibility by the Prime Minister.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:28 am

Nobody can say the events were 'unconnected' The link is obvious.

The people who say it was politically motivated protest are giving retrospective excuses, not proper reasons.

Post by **spot** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:35 am

Perhaps you could explain how both sentences are simultaneously true. They appear to contradict each other.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:10 am

Bruv;1377690 wrote: Nobody can say the events were 'unconnected' The link is obvious.

The people who say it was politically motivated protest are giving retrospective excuses, not proper reasons.

spot;1377691 wrote: Perhaps you could explain how both sentences are simultaneously true. They appear to contradict each other.

The shooting of Duggan was the immediate cause of the unrest in London.

The resulting riots all around the country, although caused by the original incident were the result of opportunist thieves who later used the shooting as an excuse , rather than a reason.

I have no doubt there was a good enough reason for black youths to feel aggrieved for their treatment at the hands of the police, however the police were not the focus of their 'protest' only incidental during their criminal activities.

I don't think any Police stations were damaged, while many retail outlets were burnt to the ground.

Saying stealing a wide screen TV was a protest against poor policing methods, must be an excuse, rather than the real reason.

Post by **spot** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 9:46 am

The responses to the interviewers was more that the thefts were incidental. Whether the responses were true or not is another matter, but it's what the interviewees predominantly reported.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:19 am

spot;1377698 wrote: The responses to the interviewers was more that the thefts were incidental. Whether the responses were true or not is another matter, but it's what the interviewees predominantly reported.

We are now to take the responses of people caught up in the moment of shop fronts being smashed who felt the need to help themselves of the goods, who then say "it was the rotten policing wat done it guv "?

If they were really out to protest poor treatment from police, why not target police stations, police vehicles rather than sports wear and electrical shops.

Suspect many of them acquired sick mothers, pregnant girlfriends and potential jobs magically before appearing in court too........or am I just an old cynic ?

Post by **spot** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:42 am

I think you're ignoring the national sense of utter outrage felt by the dispossessed at yet another callous and deliberate assassination designed in Leman Street.

When the police decide to manipulate a target into the maximum possible charges they can bring rather than arresting someone before they get that degree of criminal behaviour then the police are at fault. When they have an ambush strategy which practically guarantees the death of their target then the police are at fault.

Mass protests are inevitable when they go to those lengths or the police would do it even more routinely and with even more impunity than they do already.

theia · Post by **theia** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:49 am

spot;1377698 wrote: The responses to the interviewers was more that the thefts were incidental. Whether the responses were true or not is another matter, but it's what the interviewees predominantly reported.

But if we don't know whether or not the responses were true, then we know no more than we did before the study.

Post by **spot** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:54 am

I can't imagine all the interviewees got together beforehand and agreed a story. It seems more credible that that's what they think's true.

theia · Post by **theia** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:00 am

spot;1377706 wrote: I can't imagine all the interviewees got together beforehand and agreed a story. It seems more credible that that's what they think's true.

I can't imagine it either, though I can imagine that interviewees had access to the media.

Post by **spot** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:11 am

Had anyone announced what the report would end up saying, before the interviewees were questioned? I don't recall such a discussion. I think we can at least say the interviewees have put their finger on a major source of their collective frustration.

theia · Post by **theia** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 12:20 pm

spot;1377708 wrote: Had anyone announced what the report would end up saying, before the interviewees were questioned? I don't recall such a discussion. I think we can at least say the interviewees have put their finger on a major source of their collective frustration.

I don't recall such a discussion either...however, there was a lot of speculation, commentary and opinion in the media.

Maybe the study has revealed some of the motivation behind the riots but, for my part, I'm too cynical about studies/research to give this one too much credence.

Post by **spot** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 12:25 pm

theia;1377716 wrote: Maybe the study has revealed some of the motivation behind the riots but, for my part, I'm too cynical about studies/research to give this one too much credence.The report sounds more honest than David Cameron's claim that the riot was "devoid of political meaning". Perhaps cynicism is a good thing.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:16 pm

spot;1377702 wrote: I think you're ignoring the national sense of utter outrage felt by the dispossessed at yet another callous and deliberate assassination designed in Leman Street.
You what ?????

Are you not guilty of at the very least poetic licence with you own obsession about the police ?

The police cocked up yet again, no doubt, but 'deliberate assassination ?'

The only thing that might have been designed or badly handled in Leman street was the reaction to the shooting or the non reaction.

When the police decide to manipulate a target into the maximum possible charges they can bring rather than arresting someone before they get that degree of criminal behaviour then the police are at fault. When they have an ambush strategy which practically guarantees the death of their target then the police are at fault.
So you seriously believe the police engineered a situation where they would attempt to arrest a man knowing him to be armed and ready to shoot back ?

You believe the powers that be sent their work mates into a situation knowing the target would return fire ?

I think the police are guilty of being inept, of being human, and of having to do a difficult job in a PC world, where they are the only players that are restricted by rules of engagement. In your world the police have total control and total intelligence of any situation they enter, whereas in fact they are just flesh and blood guys who go out on a limb every time they arrive at work.

Mass protests are inevitable when they go to those lengths or the police would do it even more routinely and with even more impunity than they do already.
Mass protests aimed at JD Sports and Currys are the unacceptable face of mass protest, but why not Leman street ?

Now that would be inevitable in your rose coloured world, a few police stations laid to siege, not Carpet world set ablaze.

There several things happening here, some are related, some are not, although the excuses given might give the impression one led to the other.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:27 pm

spot;1377708 wrote: Had anyone announced what the report would end up saying, before the interviewees were questioned? I don't recall such a discussion. I think we can at least say the interviewees have put their finger on a major source of their collective frustration.
You are very naive Spot.

When interviewed, would you expect these people to say something along the lines of "What shooting?.......I just needed new trainers"

This is all part of the police frustration, they can arrest people after putting their own personal safety on the line, only to find come Monday at the court the toe rag that called his parentage into question whilst kicking him in the nuts, arrives with a social worker and a story that goes along the line that if he should be sent down, his aged crippled mother and pregnant girlfriend and his new career would suffer.......so he gets the benefit of the doubt against the biased nasty policeman's word.

Post by **spot** » Tue Dec 06, 2011 1:16 am

Bruv;1377738 wrote: So you seriously believe the police engineered a situation where they would attempt to arrest a man knowing him to be armed and ready to shoot back ?
Yes, undoubtedly, except for the "and ready to shoot back". Because his being armed would increase the severity of charges against Mr Duggan - indeed in Mr Duggan's case they're the only charges available, he's not even on his way to a robbery.

The problem with this design is that it also maximizes the likelihood of Mr Duggan (or whoever they've waited until the anticipated crime kicks off before intervening) ending up dead because the authorized "marksman" has standing orders never to allow the ambush victim to fire, which translates to kill him before he can react.

Your "knowing the target would return fire" is wide of the mark. What they know is they've got the drop on their target and he stands no chance of returning fire or activating a detonator because he'll be dead first: in the case of Jean Charles de Menezes with seven rounds through his skull.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Dec 06, 2011 4:47 am

So........the police actively contrive to shoot dead a young man.

Next question, the one that needs a proper reply from you.

WHY ??

Post by **spot** » Tue Dec 06, 2011 5:41 am

Bruv;1377809 wrote: So........the police actively contrive to shoot dead a young man.

Next question, the one that needs a proper reply from you.

WHY ??

Because if Leman Street didn't have this as its policy its staff wouldn't be important to the Met. They're the high-profile experts at killing in ambush. It's what they do. For some reason, ever since The Sweeney there's been this perceived need for a bunch of trained kill-on-command police to call on whenever someone in London might - and I emphasize might - be going around tooled up.

I'm not saying Leman Street set up Mark Duggan, some other outfit in the Met may well have done that bit of the job but the endgame involves Leman Street every time. As for why someone set him up there's promotion for nailing hardened criminals, all you need do is invent one out of a patsy and you take another step along the career path.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Dec 06, 2011 5:55 am

You are a worry to me Mr Spot.

Do you seriously think the police have to invent criminals to sort out ?

Do you seriously think Leman st has to justify it's existence by shooting an innocent bystander just because they can ?

And just as aside, how many successful non fatal operations does Leman st carry out on a regular basis ?

Post by **spot** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:59 pm

Yes, yes and if you find an answer to the last question, do please post it. As far as I'm aware it's not published, possibly out of a reasonable sense of embarrassment.

BBC News - Duggan family's 'breakdown in confidence' in IPCC keeps the story moving along.Anger over the shooting sparked riots in Tottenham on 6 August, with the unrest spreading across London and to other parts of England.

Mr Mansfield, who is also representing Mr Duggan's fiancée Semone Wilson, questioned Colin Sparrow, the lead investigator for the IPCC, during the hearing at North London Coroner's Court in High Barnet. He said: "My first question is, you appreciate the anxiety that the family have about the investigation? And you are aware at least, one of the reasons is the misinformation that was broadcast at the beginning, close to the time Mark Duggan met his death. Misinformation suggesting some form of shoot-out, and you accept that was a serious mistake?"

Mr Sparrow replied: "It wasn't accurate", before adding: "It was a mistake."

Mr Mansfield continued: "The problem for the family is a complete breakdown in confidence for this investigation. While normally this question might not have to be asked because confidence is automatic, on this occasion, from the beginning, there has been misinformation, a lack of information, and conflicting information."

When questioned, Mr Sparrow agreed there were no fingerprints, DNA or blood relating to Mr Duggan on the non-police firearm found at the scene. The court was told that a gun initially linked to Mr Duggan was actually found 14ft (4m) away from the crime scene in Ferry Lane, and on the other side of a fence. Mr Mansfield said witnesses had said they had seen a police officer throw the weapon there. He asked Mr Sparrow: "How on earth did the gun get over a fence 14ft away? Was it thrown there by a police officer?"

Mr Sparrow replied: "That's a suggestion, yes."

Confidence in the IPCC is normally automatic is it, Mr Mansfield? I fear you allowed yourself a little joke there.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:47 pm

And just as aside, how many successful non fatal operations does Leman st carry out on a regular basis ?

spot;1378359 wrote: Yes, yes and if you find an answer to the last question, do please post it. As far as I'm aware it's not published, possibly out of a reasonable sense of embarrassment.

An extremely poor response.

You are the analyst, how can you analyse a series of poor results in isolation, unless you are a smart ars*e pushing an agenda ?

I would suggest that there are several armed interventions of varying degrees each and every day on the streets of London with no problem.

And that is not belittling the bad result in this particular incident.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:07 pm

Spot... get In the real world.

Mark Duggan was part of a gang with links to Jamaica's ruthless 'Yardies'

Carried a gun 'for protection' after cousin was stabbed in heart with bottle

Dad-of-four was a 'crack cocaine dealer' who ruled with violence and fear

Gang linked to murder of PC Keith Blakelock in 1985 Broadwater Farm riots

Read more: Mark Duggan: Violence, drugs, a fatal stabbing and a most unlikely martyr | Mail Online

There's an old saying........ You pays your money and makes your choice.

My own theory Is that the shooting of Duggan was an accident... I do not believe the police set out to execute him or anyone else.

If you choose the lifestyle of Duggan, then you are at risk.

Post by **spot** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:01 am

We'll bring the thread back after the enquiry, oscar, and compare the propaganda in the Mail article to the findings. I certainly think they make things up and pass on biased lies a lot more than I do.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 12:21 pm

spot;1378400 wrote: We'll bring the thread back after the enquiry, oscar, and compare the propaganda in the Mail article to the findings. I certainly think they make things up and pass on biased lies a lot more than I do.

My God, your Narcissism Is astounding. How on earth can you decide weather the article In the Mail is lies or propaganda? What makes you so Informed or so Important, that you would know that?

The truth Is, you don't know do you? You are doing what you do every time you are faced with evidence that opposes your own beliefs.... dismiss It as Propaganda.... It's tiresome and boring now.

Duggan was a toerag who carried a gun. he was also a piece of scum who dealt In drugs. If the police knew he was likely to be armed then they are legally within their rights to arm themselves against him.

Don't even try to make him out to be some loving father, family man who only popped out for a pint of milk. There's enough on the net If you look about exactly what he did to earn his keep.

You are just using this to push your own agenda and hatred towards our police yet again.

What is sickening In this story Is that some low life who would no doubt sell crack cocaine to your children given half a chance, has any kind of sympathy. I am not saying he deserved to die, I am not saying that the police should have shot him but If you live the life Duggan did, you are open to those kind of risks.

Post by **spot** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 12:32 pm

That's a disgusting post.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:44 pm

spot;1378439 wrote: That's a disgusting post. No It's not Spot.... It's the real world and what anybody with an ounce of sense knows It.

You are just looking for any means to attack our police even making a martyr out of a gun carrying drug dealer to hammer home your point.... Yeah.. we get It... you hate the police and think policing should be carried out by private companies who would make a profit out of violent crime and victims........ Now that IS disgusting.

Post by **spot** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:28 pm

I can either adopt the facts portrayed by you by way of the tabloids, or I can adopt those in The Guardian. The Guardian account accords with prior shootings far better than yours. There's a pattern to what happens in these ambushes, and blackening the name of the dead man is one common factor. I know of no Leman Street shooting that didn't start with a stack of police lies which were eventually shown to be untrue. You'll remember what the tabloids said of Jean Charles de Menezes, for example, while parroting their police spokesmen without attribution.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:34 pm

spot;1378466 wrote: I know of no Leman Street shooting that didn't start with a stack of police lies which were eventually shown to be untrue.

You are talking of the fatal shootings presumably, due to there being no recorded armed police actions that end successfully ?

theia · Post by **theia** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:42 pm

Mark Duggan: profile of Tottenham police shooting victim | UK news | The Guardian

Seems like a balanced profile

Post by **spot** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:53 pm

Bruv;1378467 wrote: You are talking of the fatal shootings presumably, due to there being no recorded armed police actions that end successfully ?

No, just Leman Street shootings. As I say, if you know of an ambush by a team from Leman Street that didn't end in a shooting then let's look at it.

I note that the police are now claiming they have video evidence of Mr Duggan taking the gun into his possession that afternoon, which sounds to me as though he was staked out by officers waiting for him to sufficiently incriminate himself and that he could easily have been arrested while unarmed. I note they also agree with the family that Mr Duggan was of good character, if that's the proper term for someone with no criminal convictions.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:16 pm

spot;1378466 wrote: I can either adopt the facts portrayed by you by way of the tabloids, or I can adopt those in The Guardian. The Guardian account accords with prior shootings far better than yours. There's a pattern to what happens in these ambushes, and blackening the name of the dead man is one common factor. I know of no Leman Street shooting that didn't start with a stack of police lies which were eventually shown to be untrue. You'll remember what the tabloids said of Jean Charles de Menezes, for example, while parroting their police spokesmen without attribution.

The Guardian Is a tabloid same as the rest.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:28 pm

Are you being evasive or obtuse ?

My point being only failed, or fatal actions are reported or newsworthy.

When reporting a single motorway crash causing fatalities, they never tell you how many miles are driven with no fatalities ?

I don't know but could believe there would be several armed actions daily in a city as large as London every day.

This incident was a poorly carried out and tragic. The character of the man will be recounted differently by people that knew him, to some he was a family man, to others he may have come across as a bit of a lad, there is no reason he couldn't be multiples of all the descriptions given.

You seem to believe the police set out to assassinate this guy........just because they can.

I believe they went terribly wrong and then they naturally, humanly, in the ensuing confusion gave out bad information that then got dissected forensically against any subsequent information until it looks like a conspiracy or cover up.

Post by **spot** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:30 pm

That would be a fair point of view did it not happen so repetitively, so routinely.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:36 pm

spot;1378487 wrote: That would be a fair point of view did it not happen so repetitively, so routinely.

You would have to weigh it against the amount of good operations carried out to say such a thing, and that is the missing data..........

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 19, 2012 7:20 am

An update on the various defendants accused of involvement in deliberately car-killing local residents in one of Birmingham's Asian shopping strips - all absolved of guilt by the jury.The incident ignited racial tensions in Birmingham, and Tariq Jahan, father of one of the victims, made a televised appeal for peace that is credited with helping to end the riots. Judge Julian Flaux appealed for calm Thursday. He said "the jury have decided that this was a terrible accident" and their verdict should be respected.

British jury clears 8 men of murdering 3 others in hit-and-run during English riots

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Tue Sep 17, 2013 4:34 am

We have an opportunity to discuss the upcoming inquest into the death of Mark Duggan. Rather than having yet another thread-wreck may I suggest that anyone wanting to rubbish my points of view, or to quote from the Daily Mail, posts in one of the other existing Mark Duggan threads that they've already started? That way the site can, for once, actually have a discussion rather than be obliged to watch an online bully bullying.

BBC News - Mark Duggan inquest: Key questions set out for jury

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:09 am

The preparatory work is still in progress.

Mr Foote told the inquest into Mr Duggan's death that in January 2011 the Metropolitan Police received intelligence that Mr Duggan had shot "someone in a nightclub" and in February 2011 that he had "fired shots in club car park".

BBC News - Mark Duggan 'among Europe's most violent criminals', inquest told

I wonder whether the police have shown paperwork to the hearing which confirms that these claims were followed up at the time, and that the reports were taken seriously in January 2011 and February 2011 and aren't simply backdated inventions. Because they're not worth a can of beans otherwise. There's been a slew of name-blackening since the day Mr Duggan was killed, more of the same is scarcely evidence.

The slew of name-blackening from the moment a person dies at the hands of a Leman Street team is so routine that one could credibly investigate whether it's institutionalized lying, if one were actually interested in putting an end to institutionalized lying by elements of the Metropolitan Police. I doubt very much whether anyone of influence within the Metropolitan Police has any such interest.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:34 pm

Mark Duggan was one of the most violent gangsters in Britain and was linked to ten shootings and two murders, an inquest heard today.

The 29-year-old, whose death at the hands of a police marksman sparked the 2011 summer riots, opened fire in a nightclub in Christmas 2010, it was said.

He was also a senior member of the notorious Tottenham ManDem gang and was implicated in several other firearms offences leading up to his death, it was alleged.

A police report shown to the jury at Duggan’s inquest said the alleged gangster and his associates ‘posed a high risk to the public and police alike’.

Read more: Mark Duggan 'was one of Britain's most violent gangsters': Inquest hears he was linked to ten shootings | Mail Online

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook