Riot in Tottenham

Great game doe

 

http://www.twitter.com/HemelNews

Lucky bloke then. I'm sexy as ****

 

And the big box of Whey Protien powder on the far left :biggrin:

True say blud...

 

About bloody time someone done something to the Magic Roundabout!

This does take me back to my youth and the 1980's Tory government. Just waiting for Luton to kick off now in March Farm

 

I drove round there today aswell, people of Hemel probably don't know what they're rioting about, some of it really is awful

For example I was in boots and there was a big massive stand for pregnancy tests on special offer. There was 2 left in the entire shop.

I then went outside and about 50m later saw two 15 year old's heavily pregnant.

 

And another one
http://twitpic.com/62npjm

 

Latest news : Gazza has just turned up in #Enfield with a fishing rod, some chicken and 2 cans of beer.

 

The Guardian tomorrow are running with the front page story that the bullet in the radio was police issue and the victim's gun was found in a sock

If this turns out to be true then the police are going to be in big trouble

 

Would not be surprised if the police did murder him. It would simply surprise me that they were thick enough to think they would get away with it.

The guy was obviously dodgy and a threat to society (much like a lot of the Tory's hired henchmen) but the police do not have any excuse to do what they want and break the law. It's no surprise that tensions have boiled over. People are finally getting sick of what the pigs do and get away with every day.

 

Enlighten me...

 

This hemelnews twitter is a hoax page, considering a photo he just posted is from Northern Ireland...

 

Thats probably the local rug dealers..

 

But they have "for no valid reason" more than once.

It's all starting to fall apart now, they usual police lies are starting to be exposed.

Funny how they are happy to give the press all the info to rip someone apart when the incident happens, but then hide behind an IPCC enquiry when the family/friends want to know what happened.

So, so far, it's emerged that he didn't shot the cop, it was a cop who shot the radio. How long before we find out he was handcuffed already, wasn't armed and was shot in the face? - but there still won't be any prosecution as there is "insufficient evidence" leaving them able to say whatever they like again next time.

Anyway, the looting was nothing to do with this, they were just opportunist thieves who took advantage of the fact that a couple of police cars had been set light to after the police had refused to speak to the family.

 

After the 'Eml STI crews busy Friday night in Wally World rioting over the lack of pregnancy kits in town did ensue last night.

One mother said " I need ta no if my kidz r ginna 'ave anova bruva or sista. My house aint big enough fa six kidz so i'z hoping for a house in Boxmoor now coz it aint az ruf. But I aint gonna no now till Monday and I'm worried some slappa will get on to council b4 me and knick my new house init".

 

Ah, the benefit of hindsight from the comfort of an armchair is easier for sure. An honestly held belief that a man is a suicide bomber is a valid reason in law. The law on self-defence is quite wide. With JCdM for example there were clear organisational and equipment failures (hence the Met broke health and safety law) but the individual officers acted in good faith.

Hold on - on this occasion the IPCC were on scene within hours and have led all of the media response. I don't believe the Met have actually said anything other than to confirm a man had been shot by officers and that another officer had been hospitalised in the early stages when asked by 24/7 news channels for comment. From that point on the IPCC has published statements of fact and the media (and frankly the public) have jumped to massive assumptions.

A lot of the stories about Duggan have come from the media digging in to his story and finding not very deep down plenty of people prepared to say he was a crack-dealing gangster involved in black-on-black crime of the sort that would bring him to Op Trident's attention and that since his cousin was murdered in March he was known to carry an illegal firearm.

No, it's been rumoured by a Guardian journalist who has as her main concern the selling of newspapers. It's then been picked up by other papers who have not added to it in any way with any evidence. It's n

How long? I reckon never given the IPCC have already debunked the 'execution style' killing rumours that spread on twitter etc :dismay:

 

its hard to put much faith in what the authorities say after instances like this. it wasn't too long ago they were saying people were playing 'tag' with police officers and releasing doctored images of victims to the press to suggest they were middle easterm, as though that in itself would excuse things. (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2678733.ece)

 

If they "act in good faith" why do they feel the need to lie about what happened. They knew that they had released incorrect info about Stockwell and about the G20, and only corrected it bit by bit as people found out the correct info from other sources. This seems to be heading the same direction.

I didn't realise that the info had come from the IPCC, the stuff I had seen had quoted it as coming from "Met sources". The IPCC should be done under the Trade Desciption act, they are not really independent anyway, which is probably why it's easy to confuse who the info comes from.
It's difficult to claim the public jumped to massive assumptions, unless people have inside knowledge, they rely on the media to inform them, and the media unfortunately seem to take what the police/IPCC say at face value.

I agree, it is still rumour, but they are quoting it as from an IPCC source.

I didn't realise they had debunked that yet. I heard it from source who told me the Stockwell and G20 stuff the day it happened and have been proved right later.

None of this answers why the police had not spoken to the family before the riot happened, when it is their policy to offer liason officers in any suspicious death.

 

The IPCC is independent and has got nothing to do with the police hiding behind them.

Enough with the straw man. He was an armed man, confirmed by the ballistics report, well known by police for being a violent and dangerous criminal, who was a threat to the public, and to the lives of the police officers in that operation, it's no wonder that they thought their lives were in danger so they shot him.

The regulation is not, being shot at first, it is whether the officers feel there is sufficient threat to their lives, or to the lives of the public, which they obviously thought there was.

 

None of this would have happened if the idiot wasn't carrying a gun in the first place.

 

the ipcc is actually under the auspices of the home office. as are the police.

 

You're confusing 'the police' with individual police officers. My personal opinion is that the police shouldn't bother engaging with the media and that there should be a blackout in these situations. Allow the IPCC to issue their statements at their leisure. Of course there would be criticism from the 24/7 news channels starved of their oxygen. But it would prevent accusations from the tin-foil hat wearers of cover up.

I agree. They're rabidly anti-police.

However, to answer the point with tongue no longer in cheek I would say they are very independent, by law those who work for them can't have any police history and they often bend over backwards to distance themselves from the police. The problem is this - who by trade are experts at investigation? The police. But the IPCC commissioners tend to have been human rights lawyers, social workers and their ilk. They're basically a bunch of amateurs playing at detectives.

The IPCC's latest statement specifically denies that he was 'assassinated' with a number of shots to the head as per the rumours. They say his family could confirm this as they've seen his body.

If he has been shot while handcuffed then that would be murder.

Probably because it's an IPCC investigation. It has nothing to do with the police. We the public wanted this situation. We wanted the police to have nothing to do with investigating deaths involving them. Usually that's not possible because the IPCC take 24-36hrs to get on the scene and events run too quickly. This time they were there very quickly and so assumed command.

Why didn't the peaceful protesters go to their HQ rather than Tottenham Police Station?

 

Can you post me a link to that, as I can only find 2 statements from the IPCC and neither mention that:

Friday
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/05/man-shot-police-london-arrest

Yesterday
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...statement-following-death-of-Mark-Duggan.html

Also, neither of those say he was armed (although personally I suspect he was - but that again is only speculation), only that a non-police issue gun was found at the scene, which was another of the bits you said was a "fact".

Have I missed a statement somewhere, which BBC, Guardian, Telegraph have also missed?

 

At no point have I said he was armed ??? I've said no such thing and have been at pains since my first post just to point out the facts. I did however say that the media have found plenty of people prepared to say he was known to carry a firearm. Two totally different things.

Anyhow, for your perusal:

http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/Pages/pr070811_statement.aspx

 

Thanks, will read it. Sorry if I accused you of saying he was armed, it was said by so many people on the thread early on, I assumed you had. It will be interesting to see how much of the early speculation was true if/when more actual facts come out.
I'd like to know where half the newspapers get their "facts" from.

 

From the link you posted it says:
"The Chair and Commissioners must not have worked for the police in any capacity prior to their appointment."

That's only the 13 people at the top of the structure, the other 400 can have worked for them, which would be the one's doing the investigation.

 

No, they thought he was someone else connected to the failed bomb attacks on 21st July. They followed him by mistake.

 

Who cares?

Only guilty people run from the police. They tried to stop him and he ran onto the tube! Of course they thought he was a terrorist.

Moral of the story is don't run from the police, especially into a tube station for Christ's sake.

My cousin, who lives in the building next to the one that was burnt out, told me he was armed. That is where I am getting my information from. My other cousin owns one of the flats that was burned down.

I consider that very reliable information until such time as it is proven wrong.

 

Simple. They make it up or print hearsay. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story...

 

That's still a reason though isn't it? They didn't randomly pick him out of a crowd say 'let's shoot him'.

By the way I'm not defending their actions.

 

The IPCC is headed by a former Police Officer, that is not independent.