ChatterBank6 mins ago
A Strange Legal Outcome
Besides almost killing a police officer ( Acquitted) he is also charged with Possession of a handgun ( Min 10 years custody) possession of ammunition ( 10years min) No Firearms Certificate. As he was not a police officer or member of the armed forces he would not be entitled to have a handgun in any case. How on earth did he manage to escape all those charges? Must have an excellent brief, a p. poor prosecution councel or a nobbled jury methinks. Slippery as Teflon.
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by retrocop. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
APG
His mother and sister were not under cover cops. They reported the Merc as stolen.It belonged to the husband.
If the accused was MI6 he surely wouldn't of been 'caught' and charged !
A little more information from a better source.
https:/
His mother and sister were not under cover cops. They reported the Merc as stolen.It belonged to the husband.
If the accused was MI6 he surely wouldn't of been 'caught' and charged !
A little more information from a better source.
https:/
The armed police stopped the vehicle because they believed the defendant had been involved in a shooting the previous day. Nowhere does it say they saw the gun, that he was pointing the gun at them whilst he was driving - they suspected he had been armed the previous day. That is all the news reports is telling us.
This is from another source:
"He also denies possessing a self-loading pistol and 9mm ammunition with intent to endanger life, along with others unknown, and possessing ammunition without a firearms certificate over a shooting the previous night in Tottenham."
Surely the 'others unknown' would not have been the people in the car at the time the police officer was mown down; they would have been identified.
It seems to me that he was charged with being in possession of the firearm and ammunition the day before this incident, that he didn't have them in his possession when he was driving the car.
Can that be possible?
https:/
This from the Met Police still makes no mention of a firearm being found at the scene:
"The court heard that police officers investigating reports of a shooting on Fairfax Road in Haringey on 28 October 2019, attended the scene where they found an empty car with bullet holes in it. A witness reported a black Mercedes leaving the scene.
The Met’s Specialist Crime Command launched an investigation into the shooting.
The following day, on 29 October, officers saw a black Mercedes on Tottenham High Road, and armed officers followed the car as it turned into White Hart Lane. When it pulled over, partly on to the pavement and stopped, a firearms officer approached the front of the car and shouted “armed police, show me your hands”.
CCTV and body worn video footage played in court showed how Altun drove forward at speed, throwing the officer onto the bonnet. The officer was left clinging to it as the car accelerated towards White Hart Lane Station. Altun tried to throw him off the car by zig-zagging across the road. After a few seconds, the officer somersaulted across the road onto the pavement, thankfully missing various items of street furniture.
The Mercedes drove off, but officers found it a short time later abandoned on Tiverton Road, with the officer’s mobile still wedged between the bonnet and windscreen."
http://
"He also denies possessing a self-loading pistol and 9mm ammunition with intent to endanger life, along with others unknown, and possessing ammunition without a firearms certificate over a shooting the previous night in Tottenham."
Surely the 'others unknown' would not have been the people in the car at the time the police officer was mown down; they would have been identified.
It seems to me that he was charged with being in possession of the firearm and ammunition the day before this incident, that he didn't have them in his possession when he was driving the car.
Can that be possible?
https:/
This from the Met Police still makes no mention of a firearm being found at the scene:
"The court heard that police officers investigating reports of a shooting on Fairfax Road in Haringey on 28 October 2019, attended the scene where they found an empty car with bullet holes in it. A witness reported a black Mercedes leaving the scene.
The Met’s Specialist Crime Command launched an investigation into the shooting.
The following day, on 29 October, officers saw a black Mercedes on Tottenham High Road, and armed officers followed the car as it turned into White Hart Lane. When it pulled over, partly on to the pavement and stopped, a firearms officer approached the front of the car and shouted “armed police, show me your hands”.
CCTV and body worn video footage played in court showed how Altun drove forward at speed, throwing the officer onto the bonnet. The officer was left clinging to it as the car accelerated towards White Hart Lane Station. Altun tried to throw him off the car by zig-zagging across the road. After a few seconds, the officer somersaulted across the road onto the pavement, thankfully missing various items of street furniture.
The Mercedes drove off, but officers found it a short time later abandoned on Tiverton Road, with the officer’s mobile still wedged between the bonnet and windscreen."
http://
\\ The report is not clear. Where exactly were the firearm and ammunition?// well read Barry
now the Turk ( young turk) was indicted for attempted murder - evil fellow - - - of a policeman
but hey even AB has to follow ENglish law
and what is the guilty state of mind reqd for this
- intention to kill ( for attempts - intention to harn is enough having done it )
Read the article - and there was clearly no intention to kill
and so I would say that he as correctly acquitted
as for the firearm - possessing and going equpped are two different things innit
If the CPS - hi NJ! over egg the pudding - then acquittal will be the outcome - and here not even on appeal
now the Turk ( young turk) was indicted for attempted murder - evil fellow - - - of a policeman
but hey even AB has to follow ENglish law
and what is the guilty state of mind reqd for this
- intention to kill ( for attempts - intention to harn is enough having done it )
Read the article - and there was clearly no intention to kill
and so I would say that he as correctly acquitted
as for the firearm - possessing and going equpped are two different things innit
If the CPS - hi NJ! over egg the pudding - then acquittal will be the outcome - and here not even on appeal
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
News15 mins ago
Crosswords20 mins ago
ChatterBank27 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.