Gordon R Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 that the jury knew what was expected of them. That is an insult to the jury. They heard all the evidence - you didn't. I suppose they were nobbled like the forensics witnesses. It's Dallas, JFK, the grassy knoll - conspirators at every turn. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartynGT4 Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 What is the problem with two killers being convicted. I rely on the judge and jury, but the world and his wife seem to rely on "a feeling". They are not at the trial, hear no evidence, but form an opinion based on what? Priceless. Couldn't agree more! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeyboots Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 ZOG was always gonna find then guilty :yp: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ack-ack Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 Just seen some of the covert footage on the news, it was like a scene from clockwork orange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 Well you see I don't see it that way at all, a lad got murdered by a gang of thugs who should have but didn't get put away at the time for a great many reasons we could all argue about till the cows come home. Things eventually caught up with them and now they will get put away for a small amount of time (which you and I would consider heinously unjust had it been a member of our family the scum had killed incidentally) You're reading a bit too much into this and forgetting to remember the good that's come out of it. Murderers belatedly put away. I don't think I'm 'reading' anything into 'this',nor 'forgetting' anything,just happen to think sitsinhedges has made some good points;it doesn't mean I disagree with your opinions nor does it mean I'm of the opinion the correct verdict wasn't reached.Perhaps you should read my initial post in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 I don't think I'm 'reading' anything into 'this',nor 'forgetting' anything,just happen to think sitsinhedges has made some good points;it doesn't mean I disagree with your opinions nor does it mean I'm of the opinion the correct verdict wasn't reached.Perhaps you should read my initial post in this thread. Point taken . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz2202 Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 Bottom line it looks like two more **** holes are getting banged up. The streets no doubt a better place for it Daz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodcock11 Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) Not unedited. Yep, I saw extracts when it was released first time around. Anyways, that goes to motive. The forensic stuff did the rest. I haven't seen or heard that evidence but the jury seemed happy.... Could not agree more Mungler Having followed the case as best as an outsider can, read all the reports and tried to consider the evidence put forward both by the prosecution and the defence, I have no doubt that the jury came to the right verdict and that the Judge's summing up was impeccable. Inevitably there will be an appeal - that is their right under the British legal system and at least there is no death penalty so the appeal is not time limited. Whilst not wishing to pre-empt any further legal proceedings, to my mind these two ghastly avowdly racist individuals are guilty and I hope that Stephen Lawrence's family will now have some feeling of closure after far too many years, the delay nor least being due - if we are kind - to the "incompetence" of certain elements of the Metropolitan Police - at least the intervening years have indicated to me that the Met are much, much more responsive, sensitive and pro-active to this sort of hateful crime nowadays and for that we must be truly thankful. Edited January 3, 2012 by woodcock11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oisin og Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 ZOG was always gonna find then guilty :yp: Why am I not surprised at this reaction! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onefulham Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 Had to look up ZOG, what a dumb load of **** ! Unless means ex King ZOG of Albania ??!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigeonblasterian Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 Really looking foreward to the sentencing of the cowardly racist thugs.Just hope the sentence is the maximum allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algiz Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 The way I understand it a gang of youths attacked this black lad in a racist incident and one of them stabbed him. 18 years later two blokes get convicted of murder based on DNA evidence putting them on the scene. Now I don’t know if I’m missing something here but; One person actually did the stabbing, so how can two of them be convicted for murder? Also the DNA puts them at the scene, but that doesn’t prove either of them actually stabbed him, could have been one of the other three. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Joint venture is what you are forgetting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigeonblasterian Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 One person actually did the stabbing, so how can two of them be convicted for murder? Is that so then what do you know what others do not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algiz Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Is that so then what do you know what others do not. He received two stab wounds, and as far as I’m aware both came from the same knife, certain I’ve never seen it said otherwise.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigeonblasterian Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 He received two stab wounds, and as far as I’m aware both came from the same knife, certain I’ve never seen it said otherwise.... Both stab wounds from the same knife that was never found.But how do you know they were made by the same person or is it just assumption on your part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Algiz - There were 5 people there - if they were in it together, they can all be convicted, whoever made the fatal blow. I fail to see what you are trying to prove. Even if you are correct that only one person wielded the knife - it doesn't matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulf Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 I would have found them not guilty on the basis of the evidence brought to the caught. The racist ranting does not make them the killers and the forensic evidence was IMO unnsound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 That is why you were not called as a forensic expert.The ones who did testify convinced a jury. Presumably their evidence consisted of more than "forensic evidence was IMO sound". :good: Why do totally unqualified people tell forensic experts that they are wrong? Perhaps they have been in secret forensic training for years, which makes their opinion better than the professionals. :hmm: You have to laugh. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigeonblasterian Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulf Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 That is why you were not called as a forensic expert.The ones who did testify convinced a jury. Presumably their evidence consisted of more than "forensic evidence was IMO sound". :good: Why do totally unqualified people tell forensic experts that they are wrong? Perhaps they have been in secret forensic training for years, which makes their opinion better than the professionals. :hmm: You have to laugh. :lol: The clothing of both the suspects and the deceased were kept in the same room whilst the blood dried and then stored in deteriorating selotape closed bags...... how can the forensics be compelling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algiz Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Algiz - There were 5 people there - if they were in it together, they can all be convicted, whoever made the fatal blow. I fail to see what you are trying to prove. Even if you are correct that only one person wielded the knife - it doesn't matter. Doesn’t it? Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? As in guilty of the actual crime in question... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onefulham Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 They have been found guilty so ARE guilty, they can and will appeal, they have that right. As said before it doesn't matter who held the knife if it is judged a joint venture they are all guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 I reckon the other three are cacking it at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 The interesting bit is actually the racist motive. Once you establish that it was an unprovoked and racist attack then you are left looking for a gang of 5 white racist thugs with the motive and capability to stab someone to death for no reason other than the colour of their skin. The police video = motive (but as per the above a very particular and specific motive). It turns out this lot were well known locally for being racist nutters with knives and for the best part of the last two decades no one (police, defence, local intel, Crimewatch etc) have been able to suggest anyone else (keep bearing in mind that you are looking for a very specific group of 5 white young men who are racially motivated and capable). Then add on being picked out by the eye witnesses in a line up, an obsession with knives, lying in interview, the bogus alibis and then.... the forensic stuff, well I'm just surprised it didn't get to Court sooner or in a better "package" but that was because the police really cocked it up. Ah ah, and on that point whilst I don't like Doreen Lawrence I have to respect her persistence in getting the system changed - as the documentary pointed out, what happened with Stephen Lawrence changed the face of policing or rather how the police now approach a murder investigation from the start (including the administration of first aid). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.