An inquest jury has largely vindicated London police over a fatal shooting that set off a wave of rioting across England, finding that officers acted lawfully when they shot 29-year-old Mark Duggan through the chest.
The jurors' decision - by a majority of eight to two - could play a critical role in shaping the nation's understanding of the riots more than two years ago, the worst civil unrest to hit England in a generation.
Duggan's family reacted with shock and one family member shouted an obscenity at jurors as they left the court. Outside the courthouse, supporters chanted "no justice, no peace" and nearly drowned out a police press statement.
Authorities said policing in the capital was proceeding as usual following the decision.
The riots began the day after Duggan's death on August 4, 2011. A wave of looting, fighting, and arson caused hundreds of millions of pounds in property damage and killed five people - three of whom were run over by a car while trying to protect their shops.
Images of masked youths raiding department stores, of massive fires, and of police skirmishes shocked a country only a year away from the Olympic Games.
Some argued that Duggan's death amounted to the murder of an unarmed man, and that anger over what they called an unjustified killing had tapped a country-wide undercurrent of rage over unemployment, inequality, and police abuses.
Others portrayed the rioters as opportunistic criminals, using outrage over the death of a gangland figure as an excuse to indulge in looting and mayhem.
Police and other officials came under scrutiny over their role in the killing in part because they didn't properly notify Duggan's family of the death and because misleading briefings led journalists to wrongly believe Duggan had shot at officers before being killed.
After allegations of cover-up and foot-dragging, an inquest was finally opened on September 16, hearing testimony from roughly 100 people, including witnesses, pathologists and police officers.
Inquests are held in Britain to investigate violent or unexplained deaths, and even though they don't rule on guilt or innocence, they often play an important role in establishing the facts surrounding controversial cases.
One of the central questions in this case related to whether Duggan had a gun, and whether it was on him. A pistol was recovered a few meters from the scene. The officer who shot Duggan said he was sure the gun was in Duggan's hand as he opened fire, but supporters insist Duggan was unarmed.
The jury's conclusions backed the supporters' story, finding, again by a majority of eight to two, that Duggan did not have a gun in his hand when he was shot.
Nevertheless, the jury found that officers at the scene genuinely believed Duggan was armed when they killed him.
Share
