Review of Duggan inquest
Discussion
Andehh said:
I'm sorry, this strikes me as a matter of zero importance? How much longer does this need to be dragged on for?
A nasty bit of work got what he deserves. Open and shut case with society cheering from the stands!
A nasty bit of work got what he deserves. Open and shut case with society cheering from the stands!
Also if anyone seriously thinks a policeman would knowingly shoot an unarmed scrote they are delusional
Lost soul said:
Andehh said:
I'm sorry, this strikes me as a matter of zero importance? How much longer does this need to be dragged on for?
A nasty bit of work got what he deserves. Open and shut case with society cheering from the stands!
A nasty bit of work got what he deserves. Open and shut case with society cheering from the stands!
Also if anyone seriously thinks a policeman would knowingly shoot an unarmed scrote they are delusional
davidball said:
So the review of the inquest findings may be delayed due to holidays. How convenient.
Yes, "how convenient". Because delaying it a little bit more means... um... an unspecified advantage to those who'd "conspire" to delay it.The minds of fools...
Although what do we expect from someone who was seriously trying to argue any police involvement with a fatality should automatically be charged with murder and go to Crown Court.
OP, when you don't get the outcome you want, what reasons, excuses and blame do you have mentally stored to shield you from having to consider your own thinking is flawed?
It took the Met over 26 years to apologize for shooting an unarmed woman during a raid they eventually conceded should never have taken place. Another catalogue of incompetence and arrogance. I pity you fools who think it is ok to kill unarmed people. Your blindness will let the UK descend into a police state where your every move will be monitored. Oh wait, it already is.
davidball said:
The same goes for La Liga.
I expect Bohally is talking about Duggan, not Groce. So I am. Obviously.
Nice contradiction in your logic and top double standards BTW. An inquest jury find the police acted lawfully in Duggan and you won't accept that, yet an inquest jury find police failures in Groce and you're happy to accept that.
If it weren't so stupid it'd be funny.
The radio isn't that relevant as the area behind has armour covering it. So does the collar bone, although the part where it's fused to the sternum could be exposed from some angles. It's much closer than 7-10 inches.
They were fortunate to not get shot in the face (below the helmet).
They were fortunate to not get shot in the face (below the helmet).
pork911 said:
Lost soul said:
Andehh said:
I'm sorry, this strikes me as a matter of zero importance? How much longer does this need to be dragged on for?
A nasty bit of work got what he deserves. Open and shut case with society cheering from the stands!
A nasty bit of work got what he deserves. Open and shut case with society cheering from the stands!
Also if anyone seriously thinks a policeman would knowingly shoot an unarmed scrote they are delusional
the accused said:
Oh sorry! I thought she died from causes related to her shooting. If they die some time AFTER the shooting even if it's as a consequence of the shooting that probably doesn't count as murder, does it?
The year and a day rule applied back then, but even now it wouldn't. But since the officer was found not guilty of the required mens rea for a related offence, I can't see how any of it is relevant. the accused said:
I take it the shooter INTENDED to kill her (or he wouldn't have shot her), so I suppose that must mean a charge of almost equal gravity.
You shoot to stop, not kill. the accused said:
Hang on! He was exonerated wasn't he? Does that mean the accomplices become automatically exempt from any involvement on a level of blame?
Well if there's no offence in the first place, what do you think? No crime was intending in the planning and unplanned joint enterprise doesn't exist when it's not foreseen by the others and the principal act is in 'a different league'.
the accused said:
how DID this badged assassin escape the consequences of his actions?
Ask the jury. the accused said:
Wasn't he (and the accomplices in joint enterprise) also directly responsible for triggering the Brixton Riots?
It really depends on what 'joint enterprise' you're applying. If the actual one, then no. If some made-up fantasy world one, then perhaps. Feel free to search the internet to learn about it.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff