Mark Duggan's family have said they will fight for justice after an inquest jury concluded by a majority of 8 to 2 that he was lawfully killed by police.

Mr Duggan was shot dead by armed officers in August 2011 in Tottenham, sparking riots across England.

Following the inquest at the Royal Courts of Justice, his aunt Carole Duggan said he had been "executed".

Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley offered a meeting with Mr Duggan's family.

There were angry scenes outside the court, with supporters of Mr Duggan's family chanting "murderers" at Assistant Commissioner Rowley as he read a statement.

Jurors concluded Mr Duggan did not have a gun when he was shot by officers who surrounded a minicab he was travelling in.

But the jury said it was more likely than not that Mr Duggan had thrown a gun from the vehicle just before he was killed. The weapon was found about 20ft (6m) away from the scene.

A policeman's life was saved by his radio last night after gunman Mark Duggan opened fire on him and the bullet hit the device.
Armed police immediately returned fire and Mark Duggan, 29, who was under surveillance, was shot dead in the street in north London.

The policeman, who has not been named, was wounded in the shooting and taken to hospital. But last night he was discharged.

Police sources said the dead man was a "well known gangster" who had been under surveillance by officers investigating gun crime in a pre-planned operation in Tottenhan Hale. They added that the police officer had been saved after the bullet fired at him struck his radio.

An eyewitness said that a police officer had shouted to the man to stop "a couple of times", but he had not heeded the warning.

The police just don't give a fuck. No accountability whatsoever.

I hope you don't live near Tottenham, mate.

The Police smeared his character right from the off and the press perpetuated the claims.

With that in mind you'd think it would be difficult to get a jury without any preconceived ideas about Duggan as a person.

Or maybe he was going to shoot them using the power of his mind.

If someone shot you dead whilst you had no gun merc, I bet you'd be chiding yourself for not having had your gun in your hand.


Out here though, shooting unarmed folk is called murder. Be they gangsters, TV presenters, pop stars or cub scouts.

If someone shot you dead whilst you had no gun merc, I bet you'd be chiding yourself for not having had your gun in your hand.


Out here though, shooting unarmed folk is called murder. Be they gangsters, TV presenters, pop stars or cub scouts.

I've been thinking, but since the last census, it would make it very easy to profile the jury 'they' want for high profile cases such as this one

knobmeup wrote:
Befor you go blabbing your big fucking cornish gob off..maybe you want to research the shootings at the Bell and the Arrifs
Fucking no mark pasty eating cunt

I've been thinking, but since the last census, it would make it very easy to profile the jury 'they' want for high profile cases such as this one

Mark Duggan inquest jurors ‘may be anonymous’

The coroner at the inquest into the death of Mark Duggan could take the rare step of granting jurors anonymity, it has emerged.

Judge Keith Cutler has told a pre-inquest review hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice that he is considering the step to make jurors feel “more comfortable”.

He will hear arguments on whether to take the step at a hearing in July.

I wasn't making any comment about Dougan, Ent, I was just speculating on jury's. If he was such a 'cunt' as you so eloquently put it, then it would null and void a thought I have been having about the census and how 'they' can make use of it to their own ends. OK?
The case as I understand it was against the police for unlawful killing of Dougan. I might be wrong as I haven't in all honesty paid much attention to it. The point being, if our police are supposed to be trained to such a high level, then they wouldn't have shot an unarmed man regardless of his 'record'.
But for somebody like yourself..I take it you see no problem in shooting unarmed civilians regardless of whether you even know if they have a record or not.......not very professional for somebody who declares himself to have been in the military hey?