UK armed police to wear video cameras

| 09/01/2014

(CNS): British police who carry firearms are to wear video cameras in an attempt to be "more open" following the death of Mark Duggan, the Met Police Commissioner has said. Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe admitted this week that the force must "do more to build trust" after an inquest jury found the 29-year-old was lawfully killed. Duggan was shot dead by police in August 2011 in Tottenham, North London. Duggan, whose death sparked protests that descended into rioting and looting across London and spread to other parts of England, was shot when police stopped a taxi he was travelling in. The BBC reported that following the conclusion of the four-month inquest at the Royal Courts of Justice on Wednesday, his aunt, Carole Duggan, said he had been "executed".

Sir Bernard said he wanted officers to be able to be more open when it comes to the investigations that follow these events.

"In pursuance of that we're going to ask them to wear video cameras, so that we can record this type of incident, and I'm going to meet many people from across London, leaders from the Haringey community, to see what we need to do to work together to improve the confidence in the Met for those members of society who may feel that this has damaged their confidence in any way."

Go to BBC article

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: World News

About the Author ()

Comments (14)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Ed says:


    The only mention of race in these posts (apart from yours, which is overt) have been to say,

    1 That the jury was made up of both black and white people and

    2 “That it mattered not if he were black white or mixed race” ….. he was a scumbag.

    If you had followed the hearing more closely you would know that the lack of DNA on the gun was because it was wrapped in a sock.

    Furthermore, If you knew more about British society than you do from voraciously reading the Daily Mail on line every day, you would know that mixed race people in the UK refer to themselves and are referred to by everyone else, as black.

    Following on from the invention in your previous post that Duggan was in the act of surrendering, you now tell us that the majority of rioters were white.  Really?  Absolute nonsense!  Out of which bubble of thin air did that “fact” come from?

    This is from “Statistics and Ethnicity” published in August 2011:

    1. Over 50% rioters are black, below 30% are white;

    2. Black people are over 10 times more likely to participate in riots than whites.

    3. High unemployment in London -> riots?

    4. Black areas -> riots?

    5. Low social class != riots, low training !=riots;

    6. Black areas = high unemployment;

    7. High unemployment + black areas = riots;

    8. High unemployment + non-black areas = no riots;

    And this is from the reportmade in November 2011, 3 months after the riots:

    1. Black people are heavily overrepresented in all riots but one (Salford).

    2. Over 50% arrested are black in all London riots (up to 82% black, 10% white in Lambeth).

    3. All but two London areas (both central) with above average black population rioted.

    4. Poor and uneducated non-black areas did not riot or had small riots.

    5. Older black people are more likely to riot than whites of any age, including youths.

    6. Whites aged 10-17 are not overrepresented, blacks aged 10-17 are, heavily.

    7. Black Londoners are 2.87 times as unemployed as whites, but 9.65 times more likely to riot.

    Here’s a quote from the Head of Operation Trident in 2011: “about 80 per cent of gun crime in London takes place in the black community.”

    So, before you try to peddle any more of whatever twisted agenda you are promulgating, get your facts right and please try to get that huge festering chip off your shoulder.

    • Whodatis says:

      That would be a very impressive representation of the riot statistics on your part – IF you had paid closer attention to my post:

      "(Let us not forget that "Whites" were responsible for the majority percentage of rioters, looters, arsonists etc across the entire country in the wake of Duggan's shooting.)"

      Riots are but a fragment of the story. Let us bear in mind that Glasgow, Dublin, Limerick, Liverpool and London are (constantly) rated as some of the most dangerous cities in all of Europe.

      (With Glasgow – once hailed as the murder capital of western Europe – always ranking near the top of the list. In fact, it is perhaps the most dangerous in all of Europe. E.g. One list has placed it at #5 between Tirana and Bucuresti! How nice.)

      What percentage of the overwhelming Glasgow and Dublin criminal element are Black I wonder? What percentage is White? Do you have those statistics? Can you now begin to see the absurdity of some of these reports and staitistics?

      As for riots, how many times since the Duggan incident have we seen rioting in Dublin? Bombs even.

      Yes, wherever Blacks exist in the western world as a minority there is always an extensive catalogue of statistics on every facet of their lives. However, when we remove race from the equation and take a step back it is clear to see that there are much bigger problems afoot.

      Anway, I guess we should all thank our lucky stars that we live in this wonderful "Black" (by the UK's standards – according to you) country.

      Such a shame that so many had to abandon their wonderful homelands and come to Cayman for a better life.

  2. 4Cayman says:

    Where are the rights for these officers and families who lay their lives on  line every single day? WTF  criminals  have more rights than law abiding citizens. When are the law makers going to respect  our rights or is it like the pharmaceutical industry, the more sick people the more money they make? So the more criminals in the system the more money the judicial system makes?

    the world is going to hell? 

  3. Whodatis says:

    Mark Duggan was no saint, however that is not the issue in this unfortunate saga.

    Instead, it is a question of whether or not an unarmed man, in the process of surrendering, was shot multiple times and killed by "highly trained" armed officers.

    There are many inconsistencies within the shooting officers's report, eyewitness reports and even the findings of the jury … yet Duggan's was found to be a "lawful killing" on the part of the police.

    • Anonymous says:

      Whodatis once again shows his ignorance. The Inquest jury came to the conclusion that the gun was thrown out of the car by Duggan prior to the shooting. He was shot because the firearms  officer held an honest belief that Duggan was reaching into his belt for a weapon, the jury agreed that this constituted a justifiable shooting.

      At no point was it proven that Duggan was surrendering, the phone footage is far to far away to show the detail and the jury agreed. He was shot twice, (not multiple times as suggested) one to his shoulder and the fatal shot to the chest.

      And to counter the unsaid implication of the Whodatis wisdom session, the jury came from the local area and would almost certainly of comprised of both black and white citizens to ensure complete racial balance. Duggans legal team would have ensured that was the case, so any conspiracy theories of racial bias can be discounted immediately.

      What should be of more concern is the contemptuous manner in which the Duggan family behaved towards citizens doing their civil duty. Personal threats have been made against jurors who are now receiving personal protection from Scotland Yard. But what would we expect from a disfunctional family of uneducated misfits who blame everyone else for their own lack of morality and aspiration.

    • Anonymous says:

      He was an armed man who may have thrown down his weapon prior to being shot, but by travelling with a gun to commit a crime and by having his criminal history, the police officers were entitled to assume the worst and a jury has found the police conduct lawful.  The evidence in support of the alleged disposal of the weapon, seconds before the shots were fired, was inconsistent and weak.  In the heat of a high risk situation the judgment calls were lawful, and Duggan chose to put himself in that position.

    • Anonymous says:

      The jury’s verdict was reached after listening intently to months of detailed evidence.  They did not rely solely upon reports in what are sometimes partisan press reports as you have.

      Duggan was not shot “multiple times”.  He was shot twice – once through the wrist and once in the chest.

      Where did you find the evidence that Duggan was in the process of surrendering?  That was never suggested during the hearing and so you must have invented it.  That is unforgiveable as it is the kind of invention that can stir strong emotions and cause disorder.

    • Anonymous says:

      Whodatis i have to to disagree with you, Duggan was a high roll murderer. he eluded the courts for too long, caused a lot of grief to the citizens in the UK. Whether he brandished a gun at the time, I do not care,

      It was about time the police act and did what they had to do. Back in the days not too long ago,  he would be hunted to be killed at first sight. In today's world we have a species we call men with soft sponges between their legs, not too lang ago these men had hard balls in that same place, and crime were minimal.

    • Whodatis says:

      Hmmm … I won't stay away so long next time – the standard of my usual detractors have fallen quite dramatically.

      • What gun are we talking about folks? The same gun that was "discovered near the crime scene" without a trace of Duggan's DNA thereon? Okay, interesting. (By the way, why would one make gestures as if to shoot at armed police immediately after "throwing away" the gun one allegedly had in his possession and knowing full well one is now unarmed?)
      • Pardon me kind sirs / madams … yes, Duggan was shot (hit) only TWICE by the highest trained British armed personnel – not multiple times. I am sure he appreciates you guys clarifying that particular point … from the grave.
      • Why are you guys playing the race card in response to my post? I said nothing about race. Furthermore, is Mark Duggan "Black"? I ask because the woman that gave birth to him and raised him, amongst her own family, is a White British lady. Or does all of that not matter at times like these? Anyway, I am somewhat happy that the issue was highlighted as it proves a point I was making In an earlier thread: "(Love how terms such as

        (Love how terms such as "mixed" and "multi-ethnic" are suddenly thrown into the mix as certain folks see fit. Let Barack Obama rob an old lady and see how "mixed" is his description on the UK / EU evening news.)

        The fickle nature of CNS posters do not hold much weight with me … at times like these I focus more on official government policy."

      • As for the Duggan family being "uneducated misfits", we really ought not to judge them so harshly. That appears to be quite the norm in the UK today for even our current CoP Baines has made an observation of; 'There are gangs of feral youths who are under no control from adults, parents or anyone else, who intimidate people living in the area, often fuelled by alcohol.'

      • In any event, the headline of this news report, along with a loooong standing reality on the ground pretty much concludes that there is great mistrust / dislike between the people of London / UK and its police force. (Let us not forget that "Whites" were responsible for the majority percentage of rioters, looters, arsonists etc across the entire country in the wake of Duggan's shooting.) That is the real issue at hand. The UK needs to sort that out – however, all the evidence points to the fact that they are too late.

      • We should all be grateful that we live in the wonderful Cayman Islands, shouldn't we? If you disagree, I will assume you are not actually here. Cool?

  4. Anonymous says:

    Lesson for Caymanian youths who carry weapons, you can be shot dead.

    Duggan was a scum bag of the highest order, he indulged in drugs, guns and murder, the world is a better place without him and any other similar piece of low life crap who imposes their will by illegal force. It matters not if he were black, white or of mixed race, he was a violent and despicable human being who thought he could win against trained professionals. Big mistake.

  5. Anonymous says:

    An armed villain on his way to commit a gun crime was lawfully shot and killed.  His problem.  No one rioted because of his death.  Thieves and layabouts decided to steal.  They should have been rounded up in their thousands, jailed for years and fed gruel and water while shackled.  The riots were because the UK has gone too soft on its pond life.

    • Anonymous says:

      Reading his history of crime.(The Daily Mail) some include murder.The police should have shot him long before this.

      I would hope the UK police will continue to clean up the streets of these criminals, any way they can. By all means!!!

      • Anonymous says:

        I don't know Duggan or what he might have done. He probably deserved what happened to him, but these 'highly trained professionals' would have been dubbed 'extra-judicial murderers' if this incident was committed in a certain Caribbean Island. where it is not unusual for the police to be murdered by criminals. And, the first to do the labeling are these so called 'highly trained professionals'. Funny how perceptions change when the shoe is on the other foot?