The Metropolitan Police stated that officers were attempting to arrest Duggan on suspicion of planning an attack and that he was in possession of a handgun.

The circumstances of Duggan's death resulted in public protests in Tottenham,[2] which led to conflict with police and escalated into riots across London and other English cities.

[4] He was known to be in possession of a BBM Bruni Model 92 handgun, a blank-firing replica of a Beretta 92 pistol, converted to fire live rounds.

[6] Conflicting accounts of the events leading up to Duggan's death were provided by the Metropolitan Police,[7][8] attracting criticism and suspicion from invested parties and other supporters.

[34] According to an unnamed firearms officer at the trial of Kevin Hutchinson-Foster in September 2012, Duggan pivoted out of the cab and pulled a selfloading pistol or handgun from his waistband.

[40] According to another eyewitness cited in The Telegraph, a police officer had "shouted to the man to stop 'a couple of times', but he had not heeded the warning".

[37] A Metropolitan Police Federation representative asserted that the officer who killed Duggan had "an honest-held belief that he was in imminent danger of him and his colleagues being shot".

[44] A local equality advocate said that the IPCC initially had no knowledge of these events, but later stated that it had sanctioned removal of the vehicle and then requested that it be restored to the scene.

[59] On 31 January 2013, Kevin Hutchinson-Foster was found guilty of supplying the gun to Duggan, during which he admitted using the same weapon to beat Osadebay.

[72] At about 17:30 BST on 6 August 2011, Duggan's relatives and local residents marched from Broadwater Farm to Tottenham Police Station.

[81] Then British Prime Minister David Cameron rejected a causal relationship between the death of Duggan and the subsequent looting.

[90] On 12 August 2011 the IPCC announced that in the immediate aftermath of the incident they may have given misleading information to journalists to the effect that shots were exchanged between Duggan and the police.

One of those who left said "I have been alarmed to learn that not only have the IPCC broken their own guidelines by giving out erroneous information to journalists regarding the 'shoot-out' involving Mark Duggan and police that didn't actually happen.

"[94] On 29 February 2012 the IPCC upheld a complaint that the Metropolitan Police had not adequately informed Duggan's family of his death on 4 August 2011.

[97] In late March 2012 the IPCC indicated that the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 made it impossible for the organisation to reveal information obtained during its investigation into Duggan's death, making it doubtful if a public coroner's inquest into the killing could ever be held.

[62] Referring to the officers who killed Duggan, an IPCC spokesperson announced on 2 August 2013 that "We have found no evidence to indicate criminality at this stage."

[5] In December 2019, Forensic Architecture called for the 2011 case to be reopened, claiming that a virtual model of the shooting casts doubt on its findings.

[102] Police stated that "no officer had done wrong" but announced that the person who shot Duggan would not remain on active firearms duty.

[105] The defendant denied the charge and gave his explanation for the presence of his DNA on the gun by alleging he had been beaten with the weapon by a gang that included Duggan.

[106] During the trial, prosecutor Edward Brown QC of QEB Hollis Whiteman contended that Duggan travelled to Leyton to collect the gun from Hutchinson-Foster, before driving to Tottenham with it.

[109][110] According to the evidence given by the cab driver and corroborated by one policeman present at the scene, Duggan got out of the taxi and ran in an attempt to escape.

[8] Frustration with the official investigation mounted in May 2012 when it was announced that the 31 police witnesses would not be required to answer questions—instead submitting written testimony.

Writing in The Guardian, he stated: The IPCC has broken its own guidelines by giving out erroneous information to journalists regarding the "shoot-out" involving Duggan and police that didn't actually happen.

[129] He says that members of Duggan's community feel ignored and lied to by authorities,[128] writing in March 2012: "In August 2011 the word on the streets was that 'they executed Mark'.

Representing the Duggan family, Michael Mansfield QC said the IPCC's position was "utterly unacceptable", and warned them they would be in contempt if they refused the coroner's order.

[136] Foote denied making the claim that Duggan had fired at police, saying he was "surprised" that early reports of the incident described a "shoot out".

[142] Two witnesses testified that they saw a police officer move something from the minicab to the place where the gun was found, 20 feet away from Duggan's body.

"[144][145] Miss J was standing 50 metres away from the scene (with a fence in between),[146] and the final IPCC report noted that there were, "many discrepancies between her accounts, which overall lessens the weight that can be attached to her observations, as they render her evidence unreliable and contradictory.

Military surgeon Jonathan Clasper testified that it would be difficult to imagine Duggan throwing his gun 20 feet after being hit by the two shots.

[160] Following the inquest, a case was brought by Duggan's mother to the High Court seeking judicial review, arguing that the coroner's directions to the jury were legally incorrect.