Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

riots sparked by police beating 16yr old girl


Little Fish

Recommended Posts

protests began outside police station after man shot by police. police came out and beat 16 year old girl. this is what sparked the riots.

The 16 year old girl was probably part of the group of heavily armed thugs who turned up at the Tottenham police station after those taking part in the peaceful protest over the death of the violent, drug-dealing, handgun carrying scumbag Duggan had already arrived there. She is, more than likely, nothing more than a violent little scumbag with no respect for authority, people's property and people's lives - like a lot of British youth today - and turned up at what started as a peaceful protest with her thuggy mates for no reason other than to cause trouble. If she therefore got a beating with a few police truncheons then she deserves everything she got.

for those calling for state volience against rioters and looters- be careful what you wish for.

I, along with the vast majority of people in this country, am calling for state violence against the thugs and scumbags who have been causing trouble in several of our major cities, trouble which included the burning down of a shop in Tottenham which had flats with families - including babies - living above it and the sociopathic scumbags who mugged a Malaysian student in Barking, east London, who had only been in this country a month and is now in the Royal London Hospital needing a metal plate inserted in his broken jaw. If rioting happens again tonight, or any other night, I fully expect and support the police use of baton rounds and water cannon. And I would like the water from the water cannon to have permanent red dye in it so any of the thugs hit by it will be easy to apprehend and be brought to justice.

These thugs have brought nothing but violence to innocent British people and their property. It's time the state - representing the British people - was violent back.

Edited by Blackwhite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Little Fish

    38

  • FLOMBIE

    22

  • TSS

    15

  • Abramelin

    8

The question is, what did the girl do? Did she attack the police in any way? Or did they just leave the police station, picked out the weakest individual in the group, and started beating her up?

What a bummer that the video is so pixelated; I cannot differentiate any of the persons, or whether the police used its force adequately or not.

This is what happened on Saturday just before the riots started:

On 6 August, a protest was held, initially peacefully, beginning at Broadwater Farm (the estate where a riot occurred in 1985 in which the thugs hacked a policeman to death) and finishing at Tottenham police station. The protest was organised by friends and relatives of Duggan to make a request for justice for the family. The group of some 200 people that marched on the police station included local residents, community leaders, and Duggan family members who were demanding to speak with a senior local police officer. They stayed in front of the police station hours longer than they originally planned because they were not satisfied with the police response to their questions. According to eyewitnesses, a younger and more aggressive crowd arrived at the scene around dusk, some of whom were carrying weapons. Violence erupted on the rumour that police had attacked a 16-year-old girl.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_England_riots

I would bet £100 that that 16 year old girl was not part of the initial peaceful protest over the shooting dead of a violent, handgun-carrying (whether or not Duggan used, or attempted to use, his handgun on the police before he was shot dead is immaterial because handguns are illegal in Britain and he was breaking the law just being in possession of it), drug-dealing gang member by police - who therefore did a good job in ridding our streets and society of him - but was actually part of the violent, heavily-armed gang of young thugs who arrived at the police station later on around dusk looking for a bit of trouble and that she deserved what she got.

Edited by Blackwhite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rolleyes: Really? That would start it all over again. I hope they are thinking: "So ******* what? Lock them up!"

I've found that when it comes to situations where young people are involved, and a spread sense of lawlessness exists that the common man usually responds with. "Bash their heads in/shoot them.".

I am very pessimistic when it comes to other humans.*sighs*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

firstly your intial comments indicate a fact...this is what sparked the riots.

It is a fact that an eyewitness said this.
Followed by another fact 'i tell you how this thing started' ...you are not stating your opinion here you are trying to pass it off as fact. No bias there?
you are taking words out of context, this is what an eyewitness says. I post the information that an eyewitness says this, and I get accussed of defending looting, this thread is an example of how riots start.
if this started the riots, why did no one hear about it before or during the three first days?
that was my point too, although you seem to be saying that its not true because it was not intially reported. I don't have the level of faith in the corporate media you seem to have.
Why should we believe one persons opinion (who is looting) as to why they are doing this?
do you have evidence that the eyewitness is a looter?
Your points pushed as fact are actually opinions that are way off the mark.

the guy is an eyewitness. it is not my opinion that he says this, it is a fact that he says this. watch the first clip in the first post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now we have other eyewitness' reports, one of them is the victim's fiancé, who claim the girl attacked the police:

Duggan’s fiancé, Semone Wilson, commented on the video, showing some level of sympathy for the police involved.

"They would not have attacked her for no reason. She had a bottle in her hand and threw it," she said.

Full article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now we have other eyewitness' reports, one of them is the victim's fiancé, who claim the girl attacked the police:

"Duggan’s fiancé, Semone Wilson, commented on the video, showing some level of sympathy for the police involved.

"They would not have attacked her for no reason. She had a bottle in her hand and threw it," she said."

Full article.

thanks for the extra information.

here is the full quote:

"I heard she went with a champagne bottle. They would not have attacked her for no reason. She had a bottle in her hand and threw it,"

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23976546-youtube-film-of-police-clash-with-girl-16-that-sparked-riot.do

which makes it hearsay. she does not sound like an eyewitness to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard this morning that Britain may suspend peoples use of social media till this ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh boy, I hope they won't go down that road. Wrong tactic in my opinion. It will just make the uproars more comparable to what is happening in the Arab countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard this morning that Britain may suspend peoples use of social media till this ends.

Nah, all they were talking about is doing what they did during the 7/7 bombings, i.e suspending it momentarily whilst dealing with a situation.

Edit - and they are talking about future riots like this (if they occur) not this one.

Edited by The Sky Scanner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It defies logic that the police would attack an innocent girl in front of a couple of hundred hostile witnesses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a fact that an eyewitness said this.

Yes it is a fact they said this. It is not a fact what they said is true. It is also a fact that many 'eyewitnesses' have claimed various reasons for why it started all of which are opinions, and to an extent are worthless. However the way in which you phrased some sentences indicated that this is fact as to why it started as opposed to an opinion expressed by someone witnessing something.

you are taking words out of context, this is what an eyewitness says. I post the information that an eyewitness says this, and I get accussed of defending looting, this thread is an example of how riots start.

no they were not out of context, you did not post the video and say..this is what one eyewitness thinks, you posted it and said 'this is why it happened' with a further comment ' I told you why it started'. Oh and secondly, 'this thread being an example of how riots start' comment speaks volumes, in fact probably negates the need for me to respond but I shall carry on...

that was my point too, although you seem to be saying that its not true because it was not intially reported. I don't have the level of faith in the corporate media you seem to have.

No I am saying if not initially reported then how did every young thug joining in hear or know about the reason they were doing it...contradiction im afraid.

do you have evidence that the eyewitness is a looter?

would them being a looter or not give more credence to their claim (opinion)??? and would it be more valuable than the reasons given by 'looters' explaining why they did it? such as 'to make money'

the guy is an eyewitness. it is not my opinion that he says this, it is a fact that he says this. watch the first clip in the first post.

again see first point above, yes a fact they say this however that doesnt render what they say as fact...big difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It defies logic that the police would attack an innocent girl in front of a couple of hundred hostile witnesses.

doesnt it just....defies even more logic to suggest this wasnt reported anywhere yet this is the reason groups nationwide created this violence :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what do you mean?

why do you not believe the eyewitnesses and people on the ground?

I think the question is why on earth do you automatically believe a nameless faceless person on the net?

Beside it being impossible to tell what's going on in the video, the "peaceful" protest took place in daylight so it's all a load of BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or she just did not know what kind of bottle it was, but saw her throwing it.

"I heard she went with a champagne bottle. They would not have attacked her for no reason. She had a bottle in her hand and threw it,"

she is speculating there was a reason for the attack which suggests she was not an eyewitness to throwing bottles. it suggests she is repeating a rumour, hearsay.

the real eyewitness: "what actually ignited everything was a young female who approached the police standing line and she was set upon by police with batons...the police charged towards her and started hitting her with their batons and this made everyone go up in uproar"

"what was she doing towards the police?"

"she just approached the police saying the community demanded answers and justice must prevail and they just set upon her"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I heard she went with a champagne bottle. They would not have attacked her for no reason. She had a bottle in her hand and threw it,"

she is speculating there was a reason for the attack which suggests she was not an eyewitness to throwing bottles. it suggests she is repeating a rumour, hearsay.

the real eyewitness: "what actually ignited everything was a young female who approached the police standing line and she was set upon by police with batons...the police charged towards her and started hitting her with their batons and this made everyone go up in uproar"

"what was she doing towards the police?"

"she just approached the police saying the community demanded answers and justice must prevail and they just set upon her"

Let me get this straight. A 16 year old girl from Tottenham approached a policeman with a champagne bottle in her hand(!) and said :-

"the community demanded answers and justice must prevail" :huh:

Does this sound implausible to anyone else?

Edited by itsnotoutthere
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the question is why on earth do you automatically believe a nameless faceless person on the net?

the eyewitness provides a detailed and precise account. I have not seen any reliable evidence to contradict what he says. it was reported on the bbc, so "nameless, faceless on the net" is not correct.
Beside it being impossible to tell what's going on in the video, the "peaceful" protest took place in daylight so it's all a load of BS.

the eyewitness says he has been there since 5 o clock, so all we know is that it happened after 5 o clock. why do you intimate that the protest was not peaceful? does that not say a lot about yourself that you believe with no evidence that it was a violent protest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this sound implausible to anyone else?

Let me get this straight. A 16 year old girl from Tottenham approached a policeman with a champagne bottle in her hand(!) and said :-

"the community demanded answers and justice must prevail" :huh:

if you want to get it straight, you need to look at the evidence and leave the hearsay aside.

is it plausible she had a champagne bottle? seems fishy to me. not the sort of thing a young girl from tottenham would have in her possession. not the sort of thing she would take to a demonstration after her friend (reported by the guardian newspaper) has been killed by the police, and not the sort of thing that would be recognised so specifically.

is there a first hand report of a "champagne" bottle? I can't find one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we allowed to be candid and say 99% of the participants were Black people & Asians

Or for stating the truth is that to be considered racist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you want to get it straight, you need to look at the evidence and leave the hearsay aside.

is it plausible she had a champagne bottle? seems fishy to me. not the sort of thing a young girl from tottenham would have in her possession. not the sort of thing she would take to a demonstration after her friend (reported by the guardian newspaper) has been killed by the police, and not the sort of thing that would be recognised so specifically.

is there a first hand report of a "champagne" bottle? I can't find one.

By her friend do you mean Mark Duggan, the guy that carried an illegal hand gun around the streets of London?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you want to get it straight, you need to look at the evidence and leave the hearsay aside.

You haven't provided any evidence, you have provided one person's view - we don't know if that view is correct or misleading. So what evidence have you got that this girl was set upon by the police (and for no apparent reason too)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You haven't provided any evidence, you have provided one person's view - we don't know if that view is correct or misleading. So what evidence have you got that this girl was set upon by the police (and for no apparent reason too)?

He read it in the Guardian. That bastion of liberal values & promoter left wing ideology.

Edited by itsnotoutthere
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we allowed to be candid and say 99% of the participants were Black people & Asians

Or for stating the truth is that to be considered racist.

start your own thread if you think skin colour is important. don't derail this one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He read it in the Guardian. That bastion of liberal values & promoter left wing ideology.

Well my wife's brother is in the Met, traffic division (Croydon) ....so I know a little of what happened from a closer source...but i'll still wait and see if Little Fish can find some good evidence......afterall, there were hundreds of people there, surely one has got some decent phone footage of the unprovoked attack on this girl ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You haven't provided any evidence, you have provided one person's view - we don't know if that view is correct or misleading. So what evidence have you got that this girl was set upon by the police (and for no apparent reason too)?

he was an eyewitness to the events, he described precisely what happened, he says the police set upon the girl with batons. if you want to believe that that did not happen then you are denying the evidence.

you do know that eyewitness are used by courts as evidence right? yet you say without evidence that this is not evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.