Register to Comment
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    SilverSpurs SilverSpurs is offline
    SilverSpurs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,886

    The curious case of Stephen Lawrence

    This case has been resurrected in recent weeks as a new prosecution will be launched into this horrific killing of teenager Stephen Lawrence at a bus stop in south London.
    An interesting viewpoint has come from Lee Jones of Oxford University who asks some very awkward questions.

    Firstly, the level of innuendo and wink-wink-nudge-nudge that has gone on for years regarding the five who were suspected of the crime despite their acquittal in court. Aren't we all innocent until proven guilty and the prosecution failed spectacularly in court.
    Secondly, three in-depth investigations of the suspects failed to produce a smoking gun, even an undercover sting operation that lasted for months.
    Thirdly, the poor performance of the eyewitness under cross examination has conveniently slipped the public psyche.
    Fourthly, everyone has the right to silence and they most likely exercised that right under their solicitors advice.
    Fifthly, the stuff about one of the dads bribing jurors is just fantasyland stuff.
    Sixthly, like in the OJ case the timeline looks extremely narrow although not impossibly so.

    A point not covered in the article is the failure to establish a motive. Why would these five men launch such a random and savage attack on Stephen Lawrence in front of potential witnesses? Just because he was dark skinned??? This in my mind further weakens the case.

    'The Boys Who Killed Stephen Lawrence'?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #2
    toughbutfair toughbutfair is offline

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    12,655

    The right to silence should be removed. Why not just say where you were?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #3
    Lord Muck Savage Lord Muck Savage is offline
    Lord Muck Savage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,823

    Given the endemic amount of knife crime associated with black youth gangs in London and elsewhere in the UK it’s a fair bet that this was another such incident involving blacks only.
    S Lawrence was the son of African immigrants who are generally despised by the Afro Caribbean (West Indian) black community already established in Britain since the 1950s

    Africans on the other hand regard the West Indian as ‘of a lower order’, not merely because of their former slave status, but because they’re also contaminated with White blood.
    S L was singled out because of his ethnicity
    Simply, accusing and stitching up a few hapless white youths isn’t going to wash for what is a Black interracial problem.
    Last edited by Lord Muck Savage; 27th June 2011 at 07:33 PM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #4
    Mitsui2 Mitsui2 is offline
    Mitsui2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    24,406

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Muck Savage View Post
    Given the endemic amount of knife crime associated with black youth gangs in London and elsewhere in the UK it’s a fair bet that this was another such incident involving blacks only.
    S Lawrence was the son of African immigrants who are generally despised by the Afro Caribbean (West Indian) black community already established in Britain since the 1950s

    Africans on the other hand regard the West Indian as ‘of a lower order’, not merely because of their former slave status, but because they’re also contaminated with White blood.
    S L was singled out because of his ethnicity
    Simply, accusing and stitching up a few hapless white youths isn’t going to wash for what is a Black interracial problem.
    It would seem from your certainty about this case that you have some evidence that should be passed on to the relevant authorities. Or are you just indulging in wishful thinking?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #5
    SilverSpurs SilverSpurs is offline
    SilverSpurs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,886

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Muck Savage View Post
    Given the endemic amount of knife crime associated with black youth gangs in London and elsewhere in the UK it’s a fair bet that this was another such incident involving blacks only.
    S Lawrence was the son of African immigrants who are generally despised by the Afro Caribbean (West Indian) black community already established in Britain since the 1950s

    Africans on the other hand regard the West Indian as ‘of a lower order’, not merely because of their former slave status, but because they’re also contaminated with White blood.
    S L was singled out because of his ethnicity
    Simply, accusing and stitching up a few hapless white youths isn’t going to wash for what is a Black interracial problem.
    There was wink-wink-nudge-nudge at the time that Stephen Lawrence was a small time drug dealer who was killed by a rival or a commander. There was no evidence offered to support this hypothesis and the rumour rightly died quickly.
    I just think the wink-wink-nudge-nudge regarding those five men should also die now that they were acquitted in court.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #6
    SilverSpurs SilverSpurs is offline
    SilverSpurs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,886

    So where is the compelling evidence against the 5? They may well have been very nasty people who lawyered up but that doesn't make them murderers and neither does their prescence not far from the crime scene. The eyewitness was torn apart under cross examination so whats left?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #7
    ocoonassa ocoonassa is offline
    ocoonassa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    7,128

    Quote Originally Posted by SilverSpurs View Post
    A point not covered in the article is the failure to establish a motive. Why would these five men launch such a random and savage attack on Stephen Lawrence in front of potential witnesses? Just because he was dark skinned???
    Because they were racist thugs and he gave them some lip isn't it?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #8
    Lain2016 Lain2016 is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    8,746

    Quote Originally Posted by toughbutfair View Post
    The right to silence should be removed. Why not just say where you were?
    What about Habeus Corpus as well, if you're innocent you dont need that...why not just use the "we know they're guilty because they look it" method instead
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #9
    SilverSpurs SilverSpurs is offline
    SilverSpurs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,886

    Quote Originally Posted by Lain2016 View Post
    What about Habeus Corpus as well, if you're innocent you dont need that...why not just use the "we know they're guilty because they look it" method instead
    Excellent point. The alternative to a rules based system for convicting people is to allow people to be convicted because the state "knows" they are guilty. The former will allow a number of guilty men to slip the net the latter will see a number of innocent men caught in the net. The choice is yours.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #10
    NFD100 NFD100 is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    344

    Quote Originally Posted by toughbutfair View Post
    The right to silence should be removed. Why not just say where you were?
    The automatic right to silence was removed in England and Wales in 1994. Courts can and do draw inferences from silence. The police caution... "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment