Mark Duggan.

[lhancock90]

Wondering what everyone's opinions/feelings are on the case and it's outcome.

Do you feel it was a justified shooting? Do you think the right decision has been reached? Do you feel he was an innocent non violent man?

Edit: I do think it was justified aswell.
They knew he was going to buy a gun, the fact he threw one away doesn't mean he didn't have another.
He has a track record of violent friends and was arrested several times.
I understand a family want to see the best in their child but I think his mother does need to accept that Mark Duggan has a violent man who many were afraid of.
A non violent man is not out to purchase an illegal firearm after all.
I really do feel that ultimately it was his own life choices that led to his death far more than the police.

 

[sue_88]

I feel it was justified.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

 

[pinkpolkadot]

Wondering what everyone's opinions/feelings are on the case and it's outcome.

Do you feel it was a justified shooting? Do you think the right decision has been reached? Do you feel he was an innocent non violent man?

Edit: I do think it was justified aswell.
They knew he was going to buy a gun, the fact he threw one away doesn't mean he didn't have another.
He has a track record of violent friends and was arrested several times.
I understand a family want to see the best in their child but I think his mother does need to accept that Mark Duggan has a violent man who many were afraid of.
A non violent man is not out to purchase an illegal firearm after all.
I really do feel that ultimately it was his own life choices that led to his death far more than the police.

Regardless of how Duggan conducted himself the rest of the time, it is only the immediate threat the officer faced that should be taken into account when considering this IMO. If the officer really did believe his life was in danger at that moment then yes he was justified in defending himself.

After reading the inquest notes it seems the jury mostly agreed Duggan did have a gun but had thrown it before the police where on the pavement. If they are right about this, the officer in question seems to have made a very unfortunate judgement call (I accept this must be extremely difficult in the moment).

I have heard a lot people comment along the lines of "well he was a scumbag, he deserved it anyway" but the police are not there to decide the fate of suspects, that is for the courts, everyone deserves a fair trial no matter what their history.

 

[emyandpotato]

Wondering what everyone's opinions/feelings are on the case and it's outcome.

Do you feel it was a justified shooting? Do you think the right decision has been reached? Do you feel he was an innocent non violent man?

Edit: I do think it was justified aswell.
They knew he was going to buy a gun, the fact he threw one away doesn't mean he didn't have another.
He has a track record of violent friends and was arrested several times.
I understand a family want to see the best in their child but I think his mother does need to accept that Mark Duggan has a violent man who many were afraid of.
A non violent man is not out to purchase an illegal firearm after all.
I really do feel that ultimately it was his own life choices that led to his death far more than the police.

Regardless of how Duggan conducted himself the rest of the time, it is only the immediate threat the officer faced that should be taken into account when considering this IMO. If the officer really did believe his life was in danger at that moment then yes he was justified in defending himself.

After reading the inquest notes it seems the jury mostly agreed Duggan did have a gun but had thrown it before the police where on the pavement. If they are right about this, the officer in question seems to have made a very unfortunate judgement call (I accept this must be extremely difficult in the moment).

I have heard a lot people comment along the lines of "well he was a scumbag, he deserved it anyway" but the police are not there to decide the fate of suspects, that is for the courts, everyone deserves a fair trial no matter what their history.

This. Though of course it must have been a very difficult call and who can say when they're in that situation what they're thinking and what their gut reactions are.

 

[special_kala]

Did they not find a gun 6m away which shows he had a gun and threw it.

IMO the polices actions were justified

 

[sue_88]

Yes as Duggan was leaving the vehicle he had the gun.

In that moment the officer had no idea he was going to throw it or pump a bullet in his face.

Totally justified, the officer protected himself, his colleagues and the public from another weapon in London.

You buy/obtain a gun to use it not look at it!

 

[lhancock90]

I was asking for opinions on the whole situation so that does include his history and character sorry if I didn't make that clear. Particularly because of how angrily his family are protesting how wonderful and anti violence he was yet, that doesn't seem to be the case.

Regarding the actual shooting, Yeah I just think they knew he had one weapon, he could of had more.

 

[hayz_baby]

It will always be a difficult situation when in pitch black u need to decide weather this individual has a weapon that could be used or not. Highly trained or not.
It always seems to be a similar scenario, I have never had any dealings with te police, I'm an innocent person that goes about my day. I know there have been cases in the past when this is not the case but it seems there are so many "innocent" people out there who are very quick to claim that the police are out to get them but if u are able to ask them honestly and get a true honest answer, they have been or will b breaking the law.
We will probably never know what happened that night, I do think there was some justification as the policeman at the time who shot him must of felt his life was in danger. I don't believe that he was executed nor do I believe the police were out to get him.
The ony thing I would say from another perspective is if the jury accept that he didn't have the gun on him at the time surely it would suit an open verdict rather then lawful killing. Maybe they are trying to just close the book on this. But maybe there shouldn't be an answer, as no one is able to fully answer. Maybe a verdict of open verdict may have been suitable in regards to the case and it's findings

 

[Lina]

The jury couldn't have really come to another conclusion, as the officer believed Mark had a gun, thus it becomes somewhat irrelevant that he didn't at the time of the shooting.

I do have mixed feelings about Mark's portrayal in certain parts of the media. The issues surrounding gangs are so complex and one does not and should not become a legitimate target by being part of one.

This article sums up my feelings on the issues. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/13/dont-demonise-gangsters-theyre-human-too

 

[Noodlebear]

I am a law abiding citizen and wouldn't wish harm on anyone so it wouldn't even cross my mind to try and obtain a gun. This man was such a massive red flag and I think the police were totally justified. Yes, a man's fate should be decided by the courts but our police have a right to protect themselves if they feel they are at risk. It was his terrible choices that resulted in his death. I feel for his family but trying to blame other people for what happened is only going to drag this out and cause them more pain.