Forums

We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.

Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.

Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.

To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home

There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 58 comments are related to the topic:
Surely the BBC aint gunna make Mark Duggan innocent

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 58
By:
ebulGery
When: 06 Dec 16 20:01
I saw Duggan as a bit of a wannabe, rather than a gangster

I agree s.kenbo, looking at his previous convictions he was hardly a Ronnie Kray,
but if one plays with guns one cannot complain if one gets burnt.

I do not believe Duggan was armed when challenged. Otherwise we are asked to believe that as he was shot he threw the gun
either voluntary or involuntarily a considerable distance over a wall, and nobody saw this gun flying though the air...
It is testing credibility to its ultimate limit. Also the program said Duggan's arm was hit by the shot, so it is a job to see him
throwing anything.

I believe Duggan left the gun in the cab or threw it over the wall as he exited the cab.

I have some sympathy with the officer facing Duggan. Duggan move for his mobile phone would have looked like a move for his gun,
so he fired. I have less sympathy with his statement, he did not see a gun. It has to be noted one of the bullets ended up in the radio
of another officer. But for that he may also have ended up killing one of his own men!

I also find it impossible to believe the police left the scene of crime without the most important piece of evidence, Duggan's gun.

I think the police were afraid to admit they had shot Duggan in error, in case it caused riots, so they lied to cover
their mistake. Ironically this triggered the riots!
The police come out of this very badly.
My advice always tell the truth.
By:
Des Pond
When: 06 Dec 16 22:14

Dec 6, 2016 -- 9:18AM, akabula wrote:


Especially when I remember what happened to the completely innocent Brazilian, Jean Charles de Menezes. If these are the kind of people charged with protecting the Public from armed threats, then I feel a lot less safe than I used toYou obviously don't know the full story of that event Des Pond.Was sad that an innocent person was killed but the blame cannot be laid at the feet of the police in the underground station.


You obviously don't know the full story of that event Des Pond.
Was sad that an innocent person was killed but the blame cannot be laid at the feet of the police in the underground station.


Go on then, enlighten me. What did Menezes do that made it fair enough for the Police to execute him? Don't say that he was running away and jumped over the barrier, because it has been proven categorically that he didn't. He died because the Police **** up big time. What makes you conclude that the police can't be blamed for his death. Of course they can. it was their fault!

By:
akabula
When: 06 Dec 16 22:23
I never said it wasn't the fault of the police.
I said it wasn't the fault of the police in the station.

A suspected terrorist was under surveillance and police were monitoring the flats he lived in.
They had intelligence that he was a suicide bomber.
Menezes was mistaken for him on leaving the flat and this was relayed to the various police on this case.
And because of that mistake his fate was sealed.
By:
Des Pond
When: 06 Dec 16 22:36
Fair enough. I thought you were suggesting that the police were not to blame.
By:
Capt__F
When: 06 Dec 16 22:51
lesson's will be learnt
By:
curious-cat
When: 06 Dec 16 23:56
2 different police officers claimed to have found the gun Mark Duggan was alleged to have been carrying.

Personally I think they were both lying but at least one of them was.
By:
curious-cat
When: 07 Dec 16 00:02
Why were the police lying about this ...... and why were there no fingerprints on the gun ?
By:
casemoney
When: 07 Dec 16 00:09
Or DnA  ,an Unarmed man was shot
By:
donny osmond
When: 07 Dec 16 00:10
the tv showed a reconstruction of him carrying gun in a box as picked up

i suppose he would have been careful to not get his fingerprints on it if he
was planning to use it, maybe throwing it over wall to collect later, probably
expecting to be searched and released

quite why two police claimed to have found gun is odd but maybe one found
it, left it there and before it was collected another officer spotted it and reported
it.....unlikely as the gun was clearly a major issue and you would think they
would have been jubilant to discover it
By:
saddo
When: 07 Dec 16 00:16
Obviously something bent going on there, but the stupidity of allowing statements from two coppers claiming the find is bewilderingly inept.
By:
Breedingmad
When: 07 Dec 16 00:17
Very suspicious all the same but you need absolutely irrefutable proof.
By:
Breedingmad
When: 07 Dec 16 00:18
Sorry about the big word SaddoLaugh
By:
bodil
When: 07 Dec 16 00:21
If you had him cloned x100 and spread them through the USA, >70 would have been shot by the cops in week 1. Lucky him growing up here. And dreadful luck being shot by one of the most craven police districts in the UK.
By:
khyber kim
When: 07 Dec 16 09:45
I think he was shot lawfully, the officer was right to shoot him in the circumstances but I think he left the gun in the taxi. The only other problem for Duggan was his mobile phone which would link him to the supplier of the gun.

On leaving the taxi he shaped to throw his phone away and it appeared he was going to produce the gun they knew he had somewhere.

The problem starts when the police can't find the gun until they spot it in the taxi then panic sets in even though the shooting is lawful.

There is a lot of activity at the scene until they decide the best course of action and it doesn't look great.They should have just declared what happened, he's no loss to anybody just another feckless estate criminal with no end of different women and kids.

I'm not sure about the wannabe tag either. When he went to live in Manchester with his relatives I'm pretty sure some of them are part of a notorious criminal family and they featured in a TV documentary.
By:
s.kenbo
When: 07 Dec 16 17:10
I seem to remember hearing that myself about him having a notorious criminal family in Manchester.

If he was prepared to use the gun then it's no real loss. If he was just going to hold the gun to try and impress some 'Bad Boys' and gain a bit of street cred, then it'd be a bit of a shame.
By:
donny osmond
When: 07 Dec 16 17:23
i thought it was alleged he was on a mission to avenge the death of a gang member

although thats not proven
By:
GoOnThen
When: 07 Dec 16 18:03
His mothers sister married Dessie Noonan.Google him!
By:
saddo
When: 07 Dec 16 18:11
Crime filth, well rid.
By:
Injera
When: 07 Dec 16 18:21
It was odd the gun was over the fence, 14ft away. If Plod planted it they would have put it on him or on the pavement.

I can only imagine what it's like to be an armed copper, with a family, going to work, knowing I'm tasked with dealing with a potentially armed man...
Page 2 of 2  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com