Mark Duggan family agree settlement with Met over death

Mark Duggan

Image copyright
Jeff Moore

Image caption

Mark Duggan was shot by police in Tottenham who believed he was carrying a weapon

The family of Mark Duggan, whose death sparked riots across England in August 2011, has settled a damages claim against the Met over his shooting.

Mr Duggan, 29, was killed by police who believed he was carrying a gun and posed a threat.

The High Court heard mediation had taken place between the two parties last month and terms had been agreed.

Mr Duggan’s family said the two sides agreed to “bring all proceedings… to a conclusion and move forward”.

In a statement, they added the two parties had “reached an agreed position without acceptance of liability on the part of the Metropolitan Police Service or its officers”.

Image copyright

Image caption

Rioting erupted in August 2011 following a peaceful protest

The terms of the settlement will remain confidential at the request of the family.

The Met said neither party would make “any further comment about the terms of the settlement or the mediation”.

In 2014, an inquest jury found Mr Duggan was not holding a weapon when he was shot, but concluded he had been lawfully killed.

Image copyright
Getty Images

Image caption

Rioting spread to other parts of England

The jury heard Mr Duggan was shot after armed police intercepted a minicab he had been travelling in.

Officers had been following intelligence that indicated he was part of a gang and had arranged to collect a gun.

After the 29-year-old got out of the cab, one of the firearms officers – referred to as V53 – shot him twice, including once in the chest.

A pistol, wrapped in a sock, was later found on grassland behind railings 10-20ft (3-6m) from Mr Duggan’s body.

Jurors concluded Mr Duggan had dropped the gun when the minicab came to a stop, but decided that V53 had “honestly believed” he still had the weapon and acted lawfully in self-defence.

Mr Duggan’s family challenged the decision but were ruled against by the High Court and Court of Appeal, while the UK Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *