Inquest of the Police Murder of Mark Duggan

Inquest of the Police Murder of Mark Duggan .

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

.
Hi,

if you wish to be better informed on the murder of Mark Duggan on the 04-Aug-2011 at 18:41hrs. in Ferry Road, London.

Read the inquest report: http://dugganinquest.independent.gov.uk/docs/Jurys_Determination_and_Conclusion.pdf
and you will probably, like me, be utterly dissatisfied at what seems to be a pack of lies when you consider the fact that the police originally claimed there was a ‘shoot out’ and they have totally failed to prove that was not a blatant & gratuitous lie and have in fact failed to prove he was armed, let alone armed when murdered.

In Britain the law states that there should be no death penalty yet here again the police have seemingly murdered a man in cold blood, without evidence and have failed to prove they had ANY evidence he was armed and clearly7 at no time was anyone’s life at risk except that of Mark Duggan.

Reviewing some 30 police murders, not only has not a single solitary police killer been tried for murder I have been unable to find a single instance where the level of brutality of the police has ever saved a single life of a single individual.

I find the section on ‘lawfull killing’ particularly obscene and note even the jury decided that Mark Duggan was unarmed.

There would seem to be absolutely zero justification for the arming of police as they have murdered far more people than they have ever saved.

Consider the simple fact that no police officer was ever charged or tried for the murder of Charles de Menenez and in fact the killer is still a member of the police execution team and the commanding officer who was responsible for the murder Cressida Dick was never censured and was promoted.

In the light of the manners and style of the police of today their position is implausible and untenable consider the total lack of DNA on either the fire arm subsequently ‘found’ and the sock in which it was wrapped!

That the police are willing to protect those who murder in their name is irrefutable as with the police killer of Ian Tomlinson and others.

Read the lack of evidence or proof presented by the police in the Mark Duggan murder yet the killer claims he saw Duggan holding a firearm wrapped in a sock yet there was no such weapon in his vicinity yet later on just such a weapon was found at some distance!

On the evidence presented, and based upon personal experience of police, I do NOT have faith in the police or their claims.
.
Regards,
Greg_L-W.

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL:

Hi,

having posted my article here I received, from a friend who had not read it the following eMail:

Sent: 11 January 2014 09:36
Subject: MARK DUGGAN

Well here we go again! A drug-dealing scumbag running around the streets of London brandishing a firearm (which he no doubt considered an indispensable tool of his trade cum fashion accessory) finally gets on the wrong side of the law, the courts find in favour of the police – and there’s hell on!

The prospect that now faces the British taxpayer is years of forking out for enquiries, enquiries, and yet more enquiries in search of what Duggan’s family and so-called friends refer to as ‘the truth’. As far as I’m concerned the truth is as described, and they are just a bunch of low lives with compensation on their minds. (If they had truly thought anything of him they’d have sought to dissuade him from his chosen lifestyle in my view.)

I know what the Saudis would do in such circumstances, and quite frankly I’m comfortable with it.

REDACTED

& I responded to his lengthy mailing list and others:

 

Hi,

REDACTED you may well find acceptable the barbarism of legal enforcement in the Middle East acceptable with the public slaughter of adulterers, the execution in shows of spectacular cruelty of homosexuals, amputation of limbs including bilateral amputation for relatively minor offences, public flogging of women for driving cars, tacit approval of despotic families enriched by control of all assets and the state, stoning to death as a public participation sport of some miscreants and even the creation of apartheid style ghettos and sentences to years of solitary confinement also, which are prevalent in Palestine, imposed by the vile Zionist occupiers of the land.

I take another view and believe in an unarmed police force – no police force on earth has the training or paygrade to act as public executioners and no man deserves the punishment meted out by police armed death squads, particularly in Countries irresponsible enough to do away wityh the death penalty subsequent to a clear and fair trial!

Perhaps you might care to reconsider your position when you realise that in Britain the police get the issue of firearms wrong on a regular basis using firearms on average 34 times a day in Britain yet infrequently finding the armed response is apposite and quite clearly killing more innocent people than were ever killed per annum by wrongfull imposition of a death penalty after the deliberations of Courts in Britain, in modern times.

I believe that Mark Duggan was most probably an ongoing criminal yet there was absolutely zero credible evidence that he was armed when murdered by a polic officer who lays claim to X-Ray vision having stated he saw Mark Duggan aim a firearm wrapped in a sock at him – a statement not born out by the undeniable fact that no one else saw it and nor was there such a weapon to hand when he was summarily executed on the streets of London.

Indeed Mark Duggan may well have been a criminal but even in consideration of the time when British Justice existed and a death penalty was carried out for the protection of the innocent, protecting them from the actions of potential recidivist killers – Mark Duggan had NEVER committed a capital offence, general bloody nuisance that he may have been.

We have Anthony Charles Lynton Blair and his cabinet who were all too happy to lie and cheat to expand their ambitions and commit and collude in crimes against humanity, war crimes and massacres of civilians in Iraq and without moral or legitimate right to invade and make a crass mess of Afghanistan both of which utterly self serving and irresponsible actions have led to 1,000s of deaths and in both cases have led to the abject failure of British troops when thus used and abused as mercenaries of the ambitions of those I believe to be criminals who have not even been arrested let alone tried for their crimes. Is it perhaps the intention that a British police death squad will execute these criminals on the streets of London when it suits them – to ensure a fair balance of treatment of criminals who have avoided the Courts?

Perhaps you might care to read on and seek to justify your values in the light of my blog posting:

Inquest of the Police Murder of Mark Duggan .

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

.
Hi,

if you wish to be better informed on the murder of Mark Duggan on the 04-Aug-2011 at 18:41hrs. in Ferry Road, London.

Read the inquest report: http://dugganinquest.independent.gov.uk/docs/Jurys_Determination_and_Conclusion.pdf
and you will probably, like me, be utterly dissatisfied at what seems to be a pack of lies when you consider the fact that the police originally claimed there was a ‘shoot out’ and they have totally failed to prove that was not a blatant & gratuitous lie and have in fact failed to prove he was armed, let alone armed when murdered.

In Britain the law states that there should be no death penalty yet here again the police have seemingly murdered a man in cold blood, without evidence and have failed to prove they had ANY evidence he was armed and clearly7 at no time was anyone’s life at risk except that of Mark Duggan.

Reviewing some 30 police murders, not only has not a single solitary police killer been tried for murder I have been unable to find a single instance where the level of brutality of the police has ever saved a single life of a single individual.

I find the section on ‘lawful killing’ particularly obscene and note even the jury decided that Mark Duggan was unarmed.

There would seem to be absolutely zero justification for the arming of police as they have murdered far more people than they have ever saved.

Consider the simple fact that no police officer was ever charged or tried for the murder of Charles de Menenez and in fact the killer is still a member of the police execution team and the commanding officer who was responsible for the murder Cressida Dick was never censured and was promoted.

In the light of the manners and style of the police of today their position is implausible and untenable consider the total lack of DNA on either the fire arm subsequently ‘found’ and the sock in which it was wrapped!

That the police are willing to protect those who murder in their name is irrefutable as with the police killer of Ian Tomlinson and others.

Read the lack of evidence or proof presented by the police in the Mark Duggan murder yet the killer claims he saw Duggan holding a firearm wrapped in a sock yet there was no such weapon in his vicinity yet later on just such a weapon was found at some distance!

On the evidence presented, and based upon personal experience of police, I do NOT have faith in the police or their claims.
.
Regards,
Greg_L-W.
Which can be seen at:

https://gl-w.com/2014/01/08/inquest-of-the-police-murder-of-mark-duggan/

 

Perhaps you might care to give some thought to the cowardly killing of Sheik Saddam Hussein of Iraq or that of Murmar Gaddaffi ruler of Libya who had ruled his peoples for longer than any other incumbent in Africa and had raised both the standards of literacy and wealth, living and health to being if not the highest one of the highest in all of Africa – the reasoning behind the irresponsible invasion of Libya and the West’s involvement is also dealt with on my blog at:

#G0607* – LIBYA – Few Things Are As They Seem!

Posted on 02/09/2011

#G0607* – LIBYA – Few Things Are As They Seem! You may also feel more information is worth having see CLICK HEREAlso HERE “In politics, stupidity is not a handicap.” Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821) Regards,Greg L-W. for all my contact details & Blogs: CLICK HERE  British Politicians with pens and treachery, in pursuit of their own agenda […]

Read the rest of this post…

 

#G0603* – LIBYA’s GREAT Man Made River

Posted on 23/08/2011

#G0603* –  LIBYA’s GREAT Man Made River Hi, just why EXACTLY is NATO slaughtering Libyans and destroying their achievements? No politician has yet given a clear and coherent explanation of EXACTLY why we are attacking Libya. Who gains? Do we seek a puppet government or just a tribal change and what moral right have we […]

Read the rest of this post…

Perhaps you should also be minded that but for the lies and distortion of due process by Lord Cullen it would have been clear that Libya had absolutely zero involvement in the Lockerbie Bombing of Pan Am flight #103 and that there is considerably more evidence to implicate a rogue element of US Intel. Who were involved in the suppression of evidence that the Bush family and associates were involved in the arms and drug industry of the Middle East:

Documents Show: ‘Lockerbie Bomber Was Innocent’.

Posted on 29/02/2012

Documents Show: ‘Lockerbie Bomber Was Innocent’. . Lockerbie Bomber Was Innocent; New Documents Support the Obvious By Keelan Balderson On February 29th, 2012 | Featured Articles, War And Terrorism New documents shed further doubt over the evidence used to convict a Libyan man for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie Scotland, on December 21, 1988. Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, who […]

Read the rest of this post…

May I also remind you that armed police were present at the siege at the Libyan embassy which achieved the sum total of zero to save the life of WPC Fletcher – yet again there was no evidence to link the death of WPC Fletcher to Gaddaffi’s regime, indeed it is believed the shooting was by a scholarship student at Edinburgh University who acted independently on his own initiative and rumour has it that Gaddaffi paid a the prodigious sum, at the time, of £!Million in compensation – not in guilt but in humble generosity.

Just as he agreed to pay a sum of some £2Billion in compensation to the victims of the Lockerbie Bomb, not in guilt but to reinstate Libya as a diplomatic entity on the world stage – one might call it a bribe.

Perhaps you would care to retune your moral compass and make comment on the various blog postings.

 Regards,

Greg_L-W.

My primary correspondent replied; thanking me for my comment and praising the British system where such matters can be openly and freely discussed – a comment I totally endorse!

However another eMail came winging its way from someone on the mailing list:

A comment I found barbarous in its simplicity as it seemed to justify the mass execution of criminals by poorly led and often incompetent and under qualified police death squads!

Sent: 11 January 2014 13:35
To: Greg Lance – Watkins
Subject: Re: MARK DUGGAN

Well, that’s some diatribe! So full of hyperbolic assumptions, wild accusations, slanderous unsubstantiated rumour, and emotive phraseology as to be in no way impressive or noteworthy.

Armed criminal brandishes firearm as he exits vehicle, split-second decision has to be made. Correct decision made. One dead villain. End of story.

 

To which I felt it apposite to respond as follows:
Hi, 

Sadly there was absolutely no credible evidence that Mark Duggan was armed when he was killed!

Astonishingly the killer stated immediately after the event that he had seen Duggan aiming a sock at him which contained a firearm!!!!! Wow – Xray vision!

Further the police announced at a press conference immediately after the killing that Mark Duggan was killed in a ‘Shoot out’ – a shoot out which actually never took place! The police failed to correct this statement until it was proven by the media that no such event took place! How can anyone trust a policeforce that invents such crucial evidence purely for spin?

There was of course no such weapon in his hand when he was killed. Further, despite the number of police etc. there was no claim by anyone that they saw him dispose of a weapon.

We do not have a death penalty in this country by ANY legal means therefore it is unacceptable to have police death squads, particularly when on an average day 34 instances of armed response are made to events that subsequently are rarely responsible response and when the executions that are carried out seen firstly not to save lives nor for crimes that have EVER in modern times been eligible for a death penalty.

I do not agree the implication of your comment that it is acceptable for police to execute people on the streets just because they may be villains. I know of no crime Mark Duggan has ever committed that would have carried a death sentence in the last 100 years – do you?

Regards,

Greg_L-W.

On a more thoughtful plain a friend and colleague responded to my original letter and posting:

 

Sent: 11 January 2014 14:47
To: ‘Greg Lance – Watkins
Subject: RE: MARK DUGGAN

Here is the opposing view to yours.

I still favour, not always but as a general rule, giving the police the benefit of the doubt.

If I was involved in an operation such as the three car stop of Duggan who I knew had a gun and I thought he had a gun, but it turned out after my SPLIT second  decision to shoot him, that my eyes had plays tricked with me and it was holding nothing more than a shadow, then tough luck Duggan you should have acted as a gun carrier. If he couldn’t take the consequence he should have tried going straight.

Do you at least see my point of view?

REDACTED.

I responded:

Hi,

Indeed I hear your point of view but I find it deeply flawed as follows:

‘I still favour, not always but as a general rule, giving the police the benefit of the doubt.’

I contend they have done far too much to earn the distrust of the public, entire communities and myself amongst others.

That they authorised themselves to use firearms on avg. 34 times a day and found that a mere handful of occasions justified (in their opinion) using them shows just how shoddy is their leadership and decision making. You need only think of the incompetence and poor leadership of Cressida Dick in the murder of Charles de Menenez to be aware of how poor is their decision making and leadership.

‘If I was involved in an operation such as the three car stop of Duggan who I knew had a gun and I thought he had a gun, but it turned out after my SPLIT second  decision to shoot him, that my eyes had plays tricked with me and it was holding nothing more than a shadow, then tough luck Duggan you should have acted as a gun carrier. If he couldn’t take the consequence he should have tried going straight.’

Firstly the police did not KNOW he had a firearm. Secondly the killer was very specific that he saw that Duggan had a firearm wrapped in a sock!!! A claim that was palpably garbage and proven to be seconds later when he killed him!
There is no reason to believe the police as they clearly stated that Mark Duggan was shot in a ‘SHOOT OUT’ and briefed the media accordingly, a briefing they never corrected until it was proven to be a lie by the media!
The police clearly mishandled the stop as the manner in which they stopped the car needlessly exposed themselves to fire had Mark Duggan had a firearm, which he did not.

The murderer clearly stated that he saw Mark Duggan had a firearm wrapped in a sock BEFORE such a weapon was found) a firearm wrapped in a sock) some distance from the event and at no time did any of the many present claim they saw Mark Duggan throw ANYTHING in any direction.

‘Do you at least see my point of view?’

Indeed I see your point of view, however I would contend, for the many reasons I have given, that it is unsound.

Do you see my point of view? 😉

Regards,

Greg

His reply was:

 

Sent: 11 January 2014 17:37
To: ‘Greg Lance – Watkins’
Subject: RE: MARK DUGGAN

I think your view is probably better than mine but how come a jury sided with the Police?

Surely 12 members of the public, who know only too well what tossers our Police now are, would NOT have gone along with the sock story etc. 

As to carrying a gun was he not even gun running and did he not discard the weapon onto the grass? Did they find the shoe box?

Even so I stand by my point, OK so not totally applicable in this case, that in the split second it would take for a villain to shoot me I might react to shoot him first and under these circumstances tragic mistakes will happen. 

REDACTED

My reply was:

Normal

Hi,

To answer your questions the lazy way 😉

 ‘I think your view is probably better than mine but how come a jury sided with the Police?’

The jury is by nature intimidated by the law and I would contend the law itself is at fault which on the one hand shows the society to have abrogated on its duty of care for the innocent by failure to ensure a death sentence can be imposed for certain crimes such as murder one, aggravated rape and habitual abuse of children sexual or severe which all too often lead to recidivist repeat! Thus I contend it is morally repugnant to then arm police death squads where the police are so inept they have an avg. 34 armed responses a day yet find that only a tiny number required an armed response per annum and all too often lead to the execution on the streets of those innocent of any capital crime.

That Paul Boteng and Jack Straw were each unable to provide examples of ANY specific life being saved by the use of police firearms when they responded to FoI requests. Further on behalf of the Home Secretaries office they were unable to state the number or type of firearms that were at the disposal of the British police!

I would contend the jury came to a perverse decision based upon a failure to competently interrogate the police who clearly were working on a mere hunch that the miscreant was armed and despite zero evidence beyond the word of a criminal informer, undeclared, that Duggan was armed – a crime for which he had no track record the gratuitously assumed he was armed and could be expected to fire his ‘SOCK’ which the police killer, uncorroboratedly, stated contained a firearm loaded and aimed at him and the jury were told that the police informed the media in a press conference afterwards that Mark Duggan was executed in a ‘SHOOT OUT’ which subsequently transpired to be untrue and which the police failed to correct until proven to have lied!

‘Surely 12 members of the public, who know only too well what tossers our Police now are, would NOT have gone along with the sock story etc.’

12 individuals who spent 3 brain stunningly boring months listening largely to the police stories and police presentation of their ‘STORY’. I understand the police claimed there was a shoebox found in the taxi (empty) further there was no publicly presented claim that it bore DNA evidence that Mark Duggan had ever touched it likewise the sock and the firearm subsequently found some distance away.

As to carrying a gun was he not even gun running and did he not discard the weapon onto the grass? Did they find the shoe box?

The sock and the firearm subsequently found some distance away. – for which there was no plausible way evidenced as to how Duggan may have transported the gun to the distant grassy bank! Let alone without any DNA. There would seem to be no clear evidence with any reasonable plausibility which shows Mark Duggan to have been armed beyond police claims they had been informed by some ‘snout’ of questionable authenticity and reliability and a claimed shoebox and a distant firearm wrapped in a sock neither of which can be linked to Mark Duggan by DNA or clear evidence trail!

‘Even so I stand by my point,’ 

I would contend you and the Governme3nt have failed to make ANY valid case for suspension of a legally enforced death sentence under very specific terms and the subsequent arming of incompetent police who authorise 34 instances a day of police executioners on the street when patently they are inappropriate even by their stamndards in all but a hand full of occassionas per annum.

‘OK so not totally applicable in this case, that in the split second it would take for a villain to shoot me I might react to shoot him first and under these circumstances tragic mistakes will happen.’

More competent police would not put themselves in a potential line of fire and thus would have no need of firearms particularly as they have proven completely incompetent to provide and identify a single instance where their use of a firearm has saved a single life, let alone beyond reasonable doubt! This in the week when a police employee has been arrested for rape and blackmail in North London and another police officer has admitted to having lied with regard to Mitchell re ‘Plebgate’ and claims he will resign! A resignation which I trust the police will have the integrity to reject so that he can be dismissed with ignominy prior to his lengthy prison sentence and loss of any and all pension rights.

Regards,

Greg

 I trust these exchanges help clarify the situation and my thoughts on the issue

.