Mark Duggan: An Incomplete Inquest
This is where British justice falls down – a lot. No witnesses saw Mark Duggan throw a firearm away and yet a jury decided by a margin of nine members to one that he was in possession of it and got rid of it. On what factual evidence were they basing this conclusion? None that I can tell.
This is not the first time that I have seen juries reach verdicts based on no factual evidence at all; a friend of mine won an appeal against conviction for a particularly nasty crime, but this meant the case had to go back for retrial and he was convicted again, even though there was no evidence to support the prosecution; the police simply hadn’t bothered to investigate whether anyone else could have committed the alleged crime, or whether a crime had even been committed.
This raises a lot of questions, and answers one.
That question being: Is the British legal system really the best it could possibly be?
- ☕ Support Vox Political on Ko-fi or donate via PayPal
- 📘 Buy our books — political analysis and satire you won’t find elsewhere
- 📨 Join the mailing list for real headlines, direct to your inbox
- 🔗 Follow us on Facebook and Twitter/X
4 Comments
Leave A Comment
you might also like
- ☕ Support Vox Political on Ko-fi or donate via PayPal
- 📘 Buy our books — political analysis and satire you won’t find elsewhere
- 📨 Join the mailing list for real headlines, direct to your inbox
- 🔗 Follow us on Facebook and Twitter/X
- ☕ Support Vox Political on Ko-fi or donate via PayPal
- 📘 Buy our books — political analysis and satire you won’t find elsewhere
- 📨 Join the mailing list for real headlines, direct to your inbox
- 🔗 Follow us on Facebook and Twitter/X
- ☕ Support Vox Political on Ko-fi or donate via PayPal
- 📘 Buy our books — political analysis and satire you won’t find elsewhere
- 📨 Join the mailing list for real headlines, direct to your inbox
- 🔗 Follow us on Facebook and Twitter/X
it appears more and more THE POLICE CANT BE TRUSTED .AFTER HILLSBOROUGH AND THEN PLEBGATE AND NOW THIS !!!
If he didn’t have a gun in his possession at the time, whilst he still may have posed a threat, this couldn’t have a serious threat. In my opinion he was assassinated by a gun ho officer who saw an opportunity to either get revenge or inthe officers opinion rid society of a menace. Still illegal, this guy was illegally killed.
[…] Reblogged from TheCritique Archives: by Martin Odoni The outrage is perfectly understandable, but it is also more reasonable than some people seem to imagine. […]
Reblogged this on Beastrabban’s Weblog.