Crosswords0 min ago
Are We Now Getting Nearer The Truth?
37 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
////armed police, who gave evidence anonymously, described how they opened fire on Mr Duggan because they saw him get out of the cab holding a loaded gun////
How could they see it was loaded, or even real for that matter?
(see link below for photo)
http://
How could they see it was loaded, or even real for that matter?
(see link below for photo)
http://
Wonder why it was transferred to the Bailey. Perhaps somebody decided that an 'East End' jury was not the best to try the case when they were split the first time. Don't think it would have stopped the riots; the man was still shot, rightly or not.
If by 'the truth', you mean the real reason he was shot, we are not nearer it. All we have now is proof that the gun was supplied to him, not whether the officers were justified in law in shooting him
If by 'the truth', you mean the real reason he was shot, we are not nearer it. All we have now is proof that the gun was supplied to him, not whether the officers were justified in law in shooting him
baldric: "How could they see it was loaded, or even real for that matter?"
Are you suggesting that the police should have the gun independently examined before they decide it's a threat?
"Er excuse me potentially armed man, would you mind awfully telling us if you gun is real and/or loaded or hand it to our expert who will let you have it straight back so we can then determine if can legally shoot you?"
Any "gun" is aassumed to be real and loaded until determined otherwise.
Think it through!
Are you suggesting that the police should have the gun independently examined before they decide it's a threat?
"Er excuse me potentially armed man, would you mind awfully telling us if you gun is real and/or loaded or hand it to our expert who will let you have it straight back so we can then determine if can legally shoot you?"
Any "gun" is aassumed to be real and loaded until determined otherwise.
Think it through!
We know the law on this:
It is lawful [for the Police] to shoot someone if they believe he is holding a gun.
even if he is unarmed - this was established years and years ago in the Gilbraltar shootings and also with someone called Stephen Waldorf who was, people with long memories will recall, filled full of lead whilst he drove a Yellow Mini. - and then dragged out of his car and pistol whipped
Oh the good old days how I miss them
the only issue, which comes and goes is why these people who know they are unarmed, raise their hands as if they were armed when they know they aren't. Because if they do that, they end up dead.
ho hum bring back the birch !
It is lawful [for the Police] to shoot someone if they believe he is holding a gun.
even if he is unarmed - this was established years and years ago in the Gilbraltar shootings and also with someone called Stephen Waldorf who was, people with long memories will recall, filled full of lead whilst he drove a Yellow Mini. - and then dragged out of his car and pistol whipped
Oh the good old days how I miss them
the only issue, which comes and goes is why these people who know they are unarmed, raise their hands as if they were armed when they know they aren't. Because if they do that, they end up dead.
ho hum bring back the birch !
Quite PP, and Mr Waldorf got substantial damages, it being established that the police had got the wrong man, but one who happened to be driving a car which had come under suspicion when it belonged to, or was registered to, someone else.Your cynical tone is not misplaced. The good old days are not altogether gone. There was a Brazilian whose death on a tube train didn't seem to fit in with a defence of self-defence or protection of the lives of others
Danger UXD, you'd thoroughly approve of the French. In towns like Nice and Marseille there are regular drive-by killings, and other murders, of gangsters. These get reported in the local press in laconic terms and described by the police as 'a settlement of accounts' viz between gangsters. You can almost see the officers giving a Gallic shrug and thinking "That's one less to worry about" while shoving the thin file to the back of the drawer! The only one I read of which attracted more interest was when the gangsters shot one of their own and an innocent girl who was with him. The police and public were indignant about that; killing the girl was indefensible when she was never going to be able to identify the killers!
Blasted AB use of symbols! Try again
Right Baldric - it was a stupid thing for the Police to say
/they saw him get out of the cab holding a !loaded! gun/
Obviously that is impossible.
All they needed to say was that /they saw him get out of the cab holding a gun/ and their @rses would be covered in Law
Right Baldric - it was a stupid thing for the Police to say
/they saw him get out of the cab holding a !loaded! gun/
Obviously that is impossible.
All they needed to say was that /they saw him get out of the cab holding a gun/ and their @rses would be covered in Law
Quite, aog. Any claim that the officer knew it was loaded only goes to his credibility since you can't normally tell that from a distance, but it's immaterial to a plea of self defence. If the object was a chair leg 'aimed' at a person but the circumstances were such as to create a reasonable belief that it was a gun aimed at them, they would be entitled to shoot the holder dead. They would be in reasonable fear for their own life.
// armed police, who gave evidence anonymously, described how they opened fire on Mr Duggan because they saw him get out of the cab holding a loaded gun //
Odd then that the firearm was recovered on the other side of a fence from where the taxi was stopPed. It was four or five metres away, wrapped in a sock and did not have Duggans fingerprints or DNA.
Odd then that the firearm was recovered on the other side of a fence from where the taxi was stopPed. It was four or five metres away, wrapped in a sock and did not have Duggans fingerprints or DNA.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.