Gordon R Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Mungler - objective and accurate. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Algiz Doesn’t it? Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? As in guilty of the actual crime in question... They were presumed innocent until their conviction. They are guilty of the actual crime. That is the law. You need to read up on "Joint Venture". ____________________________________________________________________________________ Raja Clavata - very relevant. I hope they are having sleepless nights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CZ550Kevlar Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Sky have dropped to an all time low and got Jesse Jackson on for an interview, can`t stand the bloke and churns my stomach!! and he has the nerve to call other people racist, he is 100% a racist but he`s allowed to, go figure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 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. I think you missed the part where the police watched them, covertly, just after the incident and filmed one of them with a sealed up black bin bag putting it in a car and say what you will of the possibility that it was rubbish etc. why didn`t the (institutionally racist) police do anything about that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 The Defence Team would have had a long hard look at the forensic evidence and done their best to discredit it, so I suspect that armchair experts on here would have little chance of placing doubt in the Jury's mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canis Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 While appreciating that the events would have been devestating to his parents, There are a about 50 murders in london a year, and this one is only still memorable because of the media storm that the mother caused by playing the racism card. how many other murders result in a a memorial plaque( with police vigil and then CCTV camera's to stop people defiling it)? The one issue that intreagues me, having been living only about 8 miles away from where the killing took place is whether there is any truth in the rumours that the killers where looking for Laurence in particular rather than it being a random racist attack. A jury has found these guys guilty,and that fact aside any information regarding the case would be subject to varying layers of at best spin and at worst disception therefore to be honest any discussion we have on the whys or wherefores of the case would be based on supositions and thefore are pointless. If the appeal fails, it will set an interesting legal precedent be interesting for the future application of forensic evidence as it would apear the case hung on this issue ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 The one issue that intreagues me, having been living only about 8 miles away from where the killing took place is whether there is any truth in the rumours that the killers where looking for Laurence in particular rather than it being a random racist attack. I think the Judge covered that point in his sentencing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigeonblasterian Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 That is two of them put away for a while.I hope the rest of the gang will be feeling uneasy now that two have been sentenced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imissalot Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Really looking foreward to the sentencing of the cowardly racist thugs.Just hope the sentence is the maximum allowed. We don't have the death penalty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 We don't have the death penalty But if we had would the jury have found them guilty or would they have chickened out and said not guilty? Not because thats what they believed but just because they were afraid to sent someone to the gallows? Thats the big flaw in the death penalty debate, juries wouldn't convict and more killers would walk free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex C Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Having sat on a jury before, the courts just do not let you sit and hear all this stuff with absolutely no idea of what they are on about. It all gets explained in very clear easy to understand language. If the judge even thinks for a moment that its getting too scientific / technical, he halts things and has it explained in simple terms. On one of the cases i was on he actually made the jury deliver a not guilty verdict on a load of drug dealers, because although there was a raft of forensic evidence of drug use and sale, it could not be directly attributed to one of the occupants of the drug den which the police had raided. We were all convinced that they were all guilty. He wouldnt allow us to deliver a guilty verdict. I suppose what i am driving at is that the forensic evidence has to be pretty water tight or the judge would have put a stop to it pretty quickly. Also from what i have gathered there is no ''new'' evidence, just advances in modern science which has made it possible for a clearer picture of that terrible night to be painted. At the end of the day a young man was cut down in his prime by a gang of racist thugs, they have now been convicted. Money well spent. I for one would applaud the officers involved for their relentless pursuit of the guilty parties. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CZ550Kevlar Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 i know i`ll get flamed for this but when a white person is killed by a black person it`s murder, but when it`s the other way round it`s a racial murder? i have seen enough in London to know that gangs roam the streets looking for white people on "their turf", what i`m trying to say is if the racism card is going to be played lets have a level playing field first, or am i expecting too much in equality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 Got any examples? If you watched the Beeb docu you would have seen that the police were slow to respond to the initial 999 call and when they did arrive they focused on the black friend Dwatne (who notwithstanding being distraught and waiting for the police to attend) became the prime suspect to the extent the police even failed to conduct a basic sweep of the area to find and collect the gang of 5 white lads seen running off in a very particular direction. Now what are your example(s) of black gangs attacking a white person, a biased to the point of botched police response and thereafter failure by the courts to do anything? This one was high profile and remained high profile because it was so obviously "out of order" from day 1. To not call it how it is and to suggest that this is just another case and example of positive racial bias because of the constant attention the case received (and yet to ignore the dead boy's mothers's quest for justice and own attempted private prosecution) is IMHO a poor show. I await examples of racially motivated black gangs attacking white victims and failed police prosecutions etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 Got any examples? If you watched the Beeb docu you would have seen that the police were slow to respond to the initial 999 call and when they did arrive they focused on the black friend Dwatne (who notwithstanding being distraught and waiting for the police to attend) became the prime suspect to the extent the police even failed to conduct a basic sweep of the area to find and collect the gang of 5 white lads seen running off in a very particular direction. Now what are your example(s) of black gangs attacking a white person, a biased to the point of botched police response and thereafter failure by the courts to do anything? This one was high profile and remained high profile because it was so obviously "out of order" from day 1. To not call it how it is and to suggest that this is just another case and example of positive racial bias because of the constant attention the case received (and yet to ignore the dead boy's mothers's quest for justice and own attempted private prosecution) is IMHO a poor show. I await examples of racially motivated black gangs attacking white victims and failed police prosecutions etc. Do you honestly believe that a white gang would have got off so lightly as these people if the tables had been turned? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070562/Muslim-girl-gang-kicked-Rhea-Page-head-yelling-kill-white-slag-FREED.html None of the defendants were charged with racial aggravation and the judge said he felt the attackers may have felt they were the victims of unreasonable force as the victims boyfriend tried to defend her. Equality before the law Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 In that case they were quickly caught, arrested and put before the Court. What the Judge did on that day is to the greater extent out of the hands of the police and the CPS. Incidentally, they got reduced terms on the basis they put their hands up quickly, appeared sorry and all of their kids would have gone into care. That being said, I disagree with the term imposed by that Judge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 In that case they were quickly caught, arrested and put before the Court. What the Judge did on that day is to the greater extent out of the hands of the police and the CPS. Incidentally, they got reduced terms on the basis they put their hands up quickly, appeared sorry and all of their kids would have gone into care. That being said, I disagree with the term imposed by that Judge. You know, I was going to respond to your post but what a waste of time it would be. Just go bury your head in the sand, eh. You obviously feel more comfortable that way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 sitinhedges - Mungler has said - give me examples fitting his criterion.You appear to be unable to do that, but resort to a snide dig. Bit sad really. :no: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 All this talk of forensic evidence being compelling is only because the defence and many armchair detectives on here don't actually know the truth about just how difficult it is to exclude any possibility of contamination at the point of collection. I'm sure that some of the coppers on here will have experienced open evidence bags laid for months in car boots or used as mats in footwells, evidence being transported in open bags before being sealed at the station by someone working through the pile of open bags and the hap-hazard storage and transporting of exhibits from one store to another. The forensic guys only comment on what they have in the sealed bags delivered to them. It's nothing like CSI Miami. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 You know, I was going to respond to your post but what a waste of time it would be. Just go bury your head in the sand, eh. You obviously feel more comfortable that way That's not an answer though is it? In the case you refer to the police immediately went into action, got a collar, the file went to the CPS who were all up for a prosecution, a prosecution was brought.... and at this point I have no doubt that both the victim, the police and the CPS were hoping for a decent and stiff custodial term to be imposed by the Court. It fell over when it was left to the Judge, but the rest of the process was carried out. I am as right wing as you can get without tipping over the edge to "nut nut" and I lament at the Country's immigration policies, but I won't try and defend the indefensible. What gets me about the Stephen Lawrence debacle (and also the Jean Charles DeMenez gig) was that after the event the "rumour mill" goes into over drive and it's difficult not to get sucked in - after Stephen Lawrence all the rumours went round that it was gang related, he was in a gang, he was targeted for nonsing up a sister of one of the 5, it was because he had got a relative of one of the 5 pregnant and beat her up... it was all a smear in an attempt to defend the indefensible. It's now clearer that he was a young lad from a straightforward and strict home, in higher education who wanted to be an architect and who happened to be black and who was in the wrong place at the wrong time and who got murdered by people whom we all now know to be white scum. If it comes to taking sides, well you only need to look at "the 5" to know which side you want to be on. Incidentally, anyone catch "the 5" profile and background "round up" that was run in the Times yesterday - wow, in a word "criminal-record-tastic". Same thing with that Jean Charles fella - wrong place, wrong time and dropped on the spot by some coppers whose intel network clearly showed that it was thick squad out and looking to give it large. After the event the rumour mill went into action to somehow justify, defend or lessen the impact of what was undeniably a complete cock up. The rumours were that he was implicated and they all knew it but couldn't prove it, there was a bomb in the bag and then the argument slid into "well he was an illegal immigrant and so shouldn't have been in the country and if he had adhered to the country's immigration laws he wouldn't have been on a train and wouldn't have got shot so it's his fault after all". Incidentally, all of the above rumours were relayed to me my some close friends who at the time worked in the police service. I am no tree hugger or Guardian reader but I like to think I know right from wrong. You will all be pleased to know that I am "done" and I'll stick my head back in the sand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpkiller Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 talking about a fair trial and impartiality, could you imagine sitting on the jury for a bunch of racist white thugs who killed a black lad after all this media attention then find them Innocent? they would all have their picture in the media and be dead by the end of week oh and i thought you couldn't be tried for the same crime twice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 It might be worth asking yourself how the reporting and classification process works. If, for example, a white lad is attacked by 4 black lads the attending officers may not register it as a racially motivated crime and newspapers may not report the ethnicity of either parties. I don't think the papers are actually allowed to do so, because in the past they have had to allude to the ethnicity of criminals by saying things like "Operation Trident is investigating". I think many people who live or work in areas where they are in a minority will tell you that these attacks happen, but it's not allowed to be reported as such. I remember the furore when the old National Front ( scum ) reported that 85% of muggers were black and 85% of victims were white. It was condemned as a racist campaign, but nobody actually disputed the figures. When does "profiling" become "racism" ? In those NF ( scum ) days would the police have been justified in moving on gangs of black teenagers from known mugging areas ? I wouldn't want to call that one. More recently we have heard that gangs of Indian youths have systematically sexually exploited white teenage girls. Should we warn these girls that the young Indian lad who claims he loves her might be setting her up to be raped by his friends ? Some part of common sense says yes, political correctness says no. I'm sorry if this sounds like a racist rant, it isn't supposed to, but there are some tough choices to be made here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 talking about a fair trial and impartiality, could you imagine sitting on the jury for a bunch of racist white thugs who killed a black lad after all this media attention then find them Innocent? Why not? If it turned out they were all abroad on the night of the murder then it's pretty clear they didn't and couldn't have done it no matter how objectionable they may be as individuals. they would all have their picture in the media and be dead by the end of week When have you ever seen a picture of a Jury in a newspaper? If a photo was taken, then the camera would have to make it past security screening and whoever took and or published the photo would end up doing a massive stretch inside. oh and i thought you couldn't be tried for the same crime twice? That's what they thought too. The answer is "not quite". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 It might be worth asking yourself how the reporting and classification process works. If, for example, a white lad is attacked by 4 black lads the attending officers may not register it as a racially motivated crime and newspapers may not report the ethnicity of either parties. I don't think the papers are actually allowed to do so, because in the past they have had to allude to the ethnicity of criminals by saying things like "Operation Trident is investigating". I think many people who live or work in areas where they are in a minority will tell you that these attacks happen, but it's not allowed to be reported as such. I remember the furore when the old National Front ( scum ) reported that 85% of muggers were black and 85% of victims were white. It was condemned as a racist campaign, but nobody actually disputed the figures. When does "profiling" become "racism" ? In those NF ( scum ) days would the police have been justified in moving on gangs of black teenagers from known mugging areas ? I wouldn't want to call that one. More recently we have heard that gangs of Indian youths have systematically sexually exploited white teenage girls. Should we warn these girls that the young Indian lad who claims he loves her might be setting her up to be raped by his friends ? Some part of common sense says yes, political correctness says no. I'm sorry if this sounds like a racist rant, it isn't supposed to, but there are some tough choices to be made here. No I agree with all of that. I'm a great fan of statistics. Whilst it maybe that there are a higher density of non whites in City areas, the proportion of crime carried out by that demographic is still higher. The knock on is that the prison population is pro rata made up with a higher number of non whites. I agree that in knowing all of that targetting certain "groups" makes sense. It goes back to the probabilty that if you are targeting a suicide bomber don't spend too much time frisking the 80 year old white lady at the airport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 I won't try and defend the indefensible. That phrase has been at the forefront of my mind throughout this thread. Talking of phrases, given the nature of this whole case I'm frankly amazed at the number of references on here to "pulling the race card". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashman Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 Talking of phrases, given the nature of this whole case I'm frankly amazed at the number of references on here to "pulling the race card". I raise you with Diane Abbott's latest car crash: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082527/Diane-Abbott-racist-tweets-MP-faces-calls-resign-divide-rule-comment.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 I'm afraid you won't raise me Very stupid comments those from somebody that should (must) know better - she needs to be held to account for that! 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.