egafd.com

"It also suits the family to paint him as an angel to gather support for their cause."

Of course that could well be the case.

What I find very interesting is that people in this forum are so quick to believe the stories coming out from the police rather than the family.

The very same police who have been found wanting on the Plebgate case with regard to a Tory Minister, Andrew Mitchell and tried to cover up the death of Ian Tomlinson. If the police can try and "fit up" someone as powerful as a Tory minister, then they can manufacture misleading information against anyone. The police already had a go at putting out misleading information by accusing Duggan of opening fire before they had even contacted the family to say that their son had been shot dead by the police.

"Also, while I do believe Saville is guilty, your argument that the number of complaints means he is guilty is not without flaws"

I said it "looks like Savile is not innocent" based on the huge number of complaints against him from the public but that is very different from me being judge, jury and executioner, unlike so many on this thread, based on what the police state in order to defend shooting an unarmed man.

It is reasonable that those who ask justice do justice

As far as I am aware, it has not been disproved that he had been handling a gun not long before he was shot.

Why would the fingerprint of this fine upstanding citizen be found on a gun?

Again as far as I am aware, neither Ian Tomlinson nor Andrew Mitchell had been seen sporting a firearm before they were killed and framed respectively.

"What proof exactly have you got for anything contained in the following? The answer to save you embarrassment is none whatsoever."

To save me embarrassment? You clearly have a high opinion of your opinions - well, I guess somehow has to !happy!

All the things I've said have been said by Police and specifically by members of Operation Trident. Also Kevin Hutchinson-Foster was CONVICTED of supplying the gun that Duggan had on the night he was shot dead by Police.

As I said above:

"It has been claimed by the Operation Trident officer that Duggan once shot somebody in a nightclub and another time had fired a gun in a nightclub car park. He was also once arrested on suspicion of murder and was also, on two occasions, nicked for travelling in vehicles where guns and ammunition were found ... 29 year old Duggan was a member of the Tottenham based Man Dem gang who are associated with drug dealing and violence."

I suppose if we are in the business of viewing someone as basically a choir boy unless they're clearly convicted of something then he might not have actually done any of the things I've outlined above. But do you think they kept suspecting the wrong man for all those things? I've never been wrongly accused of even one of those things, nor has my mother or elderly neighbour, let alone thought of as having done ALL of those things.

Duggan was clearly no choir boy. If the authorities did what you seem to want them to do then they'd never nick anyone or pursue anyone and the streets of our cities would be much more dangerous than they already are. The things I wrote I got from several newspapers that I read on Thursday and they were also reported on the TV news.

Kevin Hutchinson-Foster was asked the following via video link from jail (I've copied and pasted this from a BBC News report):

STARTS
Hugo Keith QC, representing the Metropolitan Police, told Hutchinson-Foster: "Your actions led to unparalleled disorder and remarkable, extraordinary events in London."

Hutchinson-Foster replied: "That was down to the negligence of the police, not down to me," as members of Mr Duggan's family cheered.

Ian Stern QC, representing the firearms officers, asked Hutchinson-Foster: "Why did Mark Duggan want a gun?"

Hutchinson-Foster replied: "Is that a trick question? How would I know?"
ENDS




I suppose there is a possibility that Duggan was a gun collector, purely for the aesthetic value of owning one - similar to how some people collect artefacts from the American Civil War and similar - and perhaps wanted to decommission the weapon and keep it as an ornament on his mantel-piece.

Gun collector my a$$. Irrelevant anyways as owning a gun is illegal.

Interesting reading here:

I was being sarcastic.

I know you were. That was me agreeing with you

What's the betting that when all the facts are revealed, when all the shouting is done Mark Duggan will be revealed to be the lowlife scumbag that we (well apart from a certain someone) assume and believe him to be?

Also, rather sickening to listen to Nadine Dorries on Question Time referring to him as "Mark" as if she was one of his friends.

On a separate but Question Time-related note I wish the panel would stop referring to the questioners in the audience by their first name. It started with Nick Clegg on the PM debate in 2010 and has continued ever since. It doesn't make us warm to you ? in fact, it makes me think you are even less sincere than I give you credit for.

I agree, but the Mark Duggan thing will still be a big issue in the media for some days yet, we've got the 'vigil' in Tottenham to come on Saturday - where lots of 'community leaders' and 'friends of Mark Duggan' will no doubt be standing on platforms with a large PA system either side of them ranting about the Police and about society.

I remember Trevor Phillips, who was head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, saying that there are some people in the black community who make a good living out of constantly telling white people how bad they are (Phillips is black himself). I've always had a lot of respect for Trevor Phillips, I've found him to have fair, balanced, views - and I think it's a shame he never stood to become the MP for Tottenham after Bernie Grant died, something he considered doing. You don't hear much about him these days.

An outfit similar to the American 'Black Panthers' showed up outside the Stephen Lawrence enquiry a few years ago when it was being held in that building in south London. They all wore identical matching suits, sunglasses, and stood there - presumably so they would be filmed and photographed and it would get their organisation lots of publicity. A spokeswoman for the Jewish Board of Deputies was absolutely scathing about them on TV later that day I remember, she said they were like "the Hitler youth." I wouldn't go that far, I don't know much about them, but that is what she said.

I mention all this to point out that a lot of self-serving, publicity-seeking people seem to always come out of the woodwork at times like this. This was, and still is, a very American thing. You always get the Rev Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton popping up when something high-profile to do wih race occurs over there. You almost get the impression that they can't wait for the next thing to happen because it will mean they'll be back in business. Similarly here these days: the 'pastor' from Tottenham has been talking into every camera available and has been very prolific in the last day and a half. He will most likely be on a platform on Saturday in Tottenham going on about the angelic Mark Duggan and about how the Police are all bastards. He will no doubt be disappointed and wonder what he'll do next when the story dies away next week.

Next. I didn't see Question Time but I know what you mean - the 'first name thing'. I think some people on the panel do it with audience members because then the person asking the question might not attack them so harshly once the exchange gets underway. The panellist will say to David Dimbleby "I want too take up Jane's point" (Jane being the questioner in the crowd) or "I agree more or less with what Jane has said". Quite why they refer to the SUBJECT in the discussion by the first name ("Mark" for Mark Duggan), when he is clearly a bad person, is beyond me.