Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder (1993) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Jan 12 - 05:51 AM "Sam" might have a point about the emphasis placed on race crime. Such murders are mercifully very rare (though another did occur last week), but not the murder of black youths which is a major plague in this country. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder (1993) From: Arnie Date: 04 Jan 12 - 05:17 AM The hope now must be that these two will accept the reality of their guilty verdict and give evidence against the other three murderers in return for a lighter sentence. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder (1993) From: GUEST,Sam Hudson Date: 04 Jan 12 - 05:03 AM Like many living in the UK today, we are sick and tired of carpet slipper treatment concerning race. What about those who burn the union flag at the homecoming of dead service men and women. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder (1993) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Jan 12 - 04:35 AM Stephen's father Neville Lawrence, who said that along with the intervention of Nelson Mandela, who met the Lawrence family after the murder, this newspaper's (Daily Mail) campaign was the crucial turning point in the case: 'I was in Jamaica when you ran that headline but the people who were running the campaign at the time phoned immediately to tell me what you had done. 'I was very pleased, but I admit that at first I was frightened, too, because I realised the implications. If you name people as murderers you have to be pretty sure you have the proof or you'll be in trouble. 'But the fact that the Mail – which is a very influential newspaper – went out on a limb for us showed how committed you were to the case. Not a lot of editors would have done that. Not a lot would have chanced it. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2081914/Stephen-Lawrences-parents-lead-tributes-Daily-Mail.html Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2081914/Stephen-Lawrences-parents-lead-tributes-Daily-Mail.html#ixzz1iTpQArp7 |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder (1993) From: Stilly River Sage Date: 03 Jan 12 - 06:59 PM I don't know this case in the UK, but perhaps some of you recall the mockery of a trail that happened around OJ Simpson. He also was acquitted in the criminal trial. I suspect the line "Senior judges ruled that the trial could go ahead even though Dobson had been acquitted following a 1996 private prosecution by the Lawrence family" offers a clue - this sounds to be the equivalent of a civil trial here in the U.S., when individuals or companies sue each other for various reasons. While the prosecution in the Simpson trial was evidently unable to prove the case, the civil case had a different set of standards to meet to find guilt and the Brown family won their suit and took Simpson to the financial cleaners. I'd be willing to get that the "private prosecution" is the same and wouldn't affect a criminal prosecution. Not a sad day at all for British Justice, if minority citizens finally begin see crimes against them prosecuted and generally treated as a serious matter. SRS |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder (1993) From: MGM·Lion Date: 03 Jan 12 - 05:12 PM Peter Laban ~ that is a quote from me, from some way back, which you appear to be replying to. To which I rejoin: yes, I know. So what is your point? ~M~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder (1993) From: GUEST,Sam Hudson Date: 03 Jan 12 - 05:07 PM The outcome of this case was decided months ago, the judge was clearly directing the jury due to government pressure despite the fact that the evidence against the two chaps was contaminated and the case against them failed miserably several years ago. A bald female blasted the British police tonight saying they were incompetent and their ability to solve crime was anything but reassuring. I would fully understand if she decided to leave Britain now the case is over to live in some other jurisdiction in which she felt safe. A sad day for British justice. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder (1993) From: Lonesome EJ Date: 03 Jan 12 - 04:33 PM It seems to me the principle of Res Judicata is a rather fundamental doctrine of most governments in the world where incarceration and punishment is not allowed to become a tool of repression by the government, and particularly bearing on the suppression of those in opposition to said government. The danger in weakening such a fundamental principle is the loss of protection for all of us, even when additional proof comes to light. In the same way Freedom of Speech allows a Ku Klux Klansman to rail against blacks, Jews and immigrants, it allows those in diametric philosophical opposition to the Klansman to question the unrestricted and illegal use of power by the government. We should never celebrate the fundamental erosion of an important right in the name of a short term and specific satisfactory result without considering the long term implications. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder (1993) From: GUEST,Peter Laban Date: 03 Jan 12 - 04:00 PM Well, the difference, is that poor Anne Frank was killed legally, according to the laws in force where she had the misfortune to be living at the time. Anne Frank died of typhus while in Bergen Belsen. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder (1993) From: goatfell Date: 03 Jan 12 - 03:51 PM the two have been found guilty |
Subject: BS: Stephen Lawerance From: goatfell Date: 03 Jan 12 - 03:49 PM Stepen Lawrance mureders have found guilty now to get the other three, a good result |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Richard Bridge Date: 25 May 11 - 06:36 PM I'm sure I posted about the Contempt of Court Act and its relationship to common law contempt. I'm beginning to think the post eater is getting personal. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: MGM·Lion Date: 25 May 11 - 04:56 PM ---Anne Frank was a teenager who was killed by a state led by fascist thugs, because she was Jewish. Stephen Lawrence was a teenager who was killed by fascist thugs because he was black. What's the difference?--- Well, the difference, Peter, is that poor Anne Frank was killed legally, according to the laws in force where she had the misfortune to be living at the time. This reply is no attempt to justify any thuggish killing of anyone, but simply as a factual answer to your question. I still hope that the disgusting creatures who killed poor Stephen will belatedly get their just deserts this time around. ~Michael~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Dave the Gnome Date: 25 May 11 - 04:49 PM I think if more up to date evidence or evidence that negates that previously given is used to acquit people previouly found guilty - as in the George Davis case - then by the same token it should also be possible to re-try someone previously found innocent. It has been accepted for many years that better forensics and better systems can cast doubt on any prior case. Whether the defendant was found guilty or innocent should be irrelevent and such newer evidence should be able to overturn any prior ruling. Just my 2 penn'urth. DtG |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Peter the Squeezer Date: 24 May 11 - 02:13 PM Anne Frank was a teenager who was killed by a state led by fascist thugs, because she was Jewish. Stephen Lawrence was a teenager who was killed by fascist thugs because he was black. What's the difference? I hope that they all, victims and criminals, get the justice they deserve, maybe without the interference of the gutter press this time. Maybe one of our legal Catters (Richard perhaps), might like to comment? |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Fred McCormick Date: 24 May 11 - 10:05 AM it won't. Long technical reasons but I think it's basically to do with the fact that DM issued this challenge after they had been acquitted at the previous trial. My feeling is that this prosecution would not have been issued if the Crown didn't feel they had a very good chance of sustaining convictions. I just hope that enough evidence now comes to life to incarcerate the other three as well. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 19 May 11 - 04:38 AM When the previous attempts to convict failed, the much maligned Daily Mail named 5, including theses 2, as the murderers and challenged them to sue. They declined. I hope that does not jeopardize this trial. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: alanabit Date: 19 May 11 - 12:39 AM It is a difficult case. The police have long been sure that they have identified the thugs who murdered Stephen Lawrence, but have as yet been unable to obtain evidence convincing enough to get them banged up. I can well imagine that it was also difficult to get witnesses to testify against these violent young men for fear of reprisals. While I understand the concerns of our American friends, I hope that convictions are possible this time around. Our streets must be made safe for the likes of Stephen Lawrence, not the beasts who murdered him. That is our priority. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: catspaw49 Date: 18 May 11 - 07:05 PM Yeah.....Happy to remain with Double Jeopardy. Much as I see the point, I also have no trust in human beings. One group of justices decide one thing, a different group another. By the end of the Johnson administration the Supreme Court had effectively ended the death penalty in the United States. Than along came Nixon at a time several Supremes left the court and Tricky Dicky got his guys in. Zoom....Death Penalty!!!! Spaw |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Rumncoke Date: 18 May 11 - 06:57 PM To have a retrial after an acquital there has to be significant new evidence, and it is considered before a new trial can be started. I'm afraid I forget who considers it, but the system was put in place as advances in forensic techniques meant that old verdicts could be appealed and in some cases reversed by a simple DNA test on evidence kept in storage. It seemed only fair that the same techniques which proved someone innocent after being found guilty could also be used in a second accusation after a not guilty verdict. Anne Croucher |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: MGM·Lion Date: 18 May 11 - 02:35 PM Mrrzy ~~ see my post of 10.56 AM. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Mrrzy Date: 18 May 11 - 02:31 PM Wow. That must make for some interesting legal wrangles. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Fred McCormick Date: 18 May 11 - 12:06 PM No. The law was changed some years ago. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Mrrzy Date: 18 May 11 - 12:00 PM Whoa - doesn't the UK have double-jeopardy? If one was already acquitted of the crime, how can he be re-tried, new evidence or no? |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: MGM·Lion Date: 18 May 11 - 11:41 AM Couldn't agree more, Fred! |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Fred McCormick Date: 18 May 11 - 11:23 AM M. Absolutely. I'll happily fall out with anyone about the monarchy or the economic system or the spending cuts. But if there's a more terrible crime than killing someone because you don't like the colour of their skin, I have yet to find out what it is. |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: MGM·Lion Date: 18 May 11 - 10:56 AM Here's something we are at one about, Fred. It would be an absolute disaster if they contrive to weasel out of responsibility for that atrocity yet again. Let's all just hope that won't happen. Thank goodness for modern evidence of the DNA sort; and for the sensible change in the law which came in its wake whereby a re-prosecution could be allowed, even after an acquittal, with great safeguards, if significant new evidence emerges. ~Michael~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Leadfingers Date: 18 May 11 - 10:53 AM The endemic racialism of the Met was at least highlighted by the original enquiry ! Lets hope the 'New Evidence' gives a satisfatorary result |
Subject: BS: Stephen Lawrence Murder From: Fred McCormick Date: 18 May 11 - 09:50 AM I've just heard, via AOL news, that a new trial is to be convened for the Stephen Lawrence murder. The full story is below. Let's hope that justice is properly served this time. Two men are to face trial for the racist murder of black teenager Stephen Lawrence after new scientific evidence was uncovered, it can now be reported. Gary Dobson, 35, and David Norris, 34, are due to go before an Old Bailey jury in November accused of the "calamitous" crime. Senior judges ruled that the trial could go ahead even though Dobson had been acquitted following a 1996 private prosecution by the Lawrence family. Stephen's parents Neville and Doreen Lawrence were at the Court of Appeal to hear the decision. Mr Lawrence said he was "pleased". Mrs Lawrence said: "Perhaps somewhere down the line we will finally get justice for him." Mr Lawrence, an 18-year-old A-level student, was stabbed to death in Eltham, south east London in April 1993. "The murder of Stephen Lawrence, a young black man of great promise, targeted and killed by a group of white youths just because of the colour of his skin, was indeed a calamitous crime," said the Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge. The ruling was announced by Lord Judge sitting with Mrs Justice Rafferty and Mr Justice Holroyde. It followed a prosecution application to quash Dobson's earlier acquittal. He had been cleared of murder at the 1996 trial, along with Luke Knight and Neil Acourt, after purported identification evidence was ruled inadmissible. But Dobson was charged with the crime again, along with Norris, last September, although it could not be reported at the time for legal reasons. Lifting the blanket reporting restrictions on the case, Lord Judge said the prosecution application to quash Dobson's acquittal was based on new scientific evidence relating to a grey bomber jacket and a multi-coloured cardigan which it was said "closely links" Dobson to the attack. The Crown Prosecution Service and the Metropolitan Police welcomed the ruling, which followed an application by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer QC. |