Re: Guilty at last : Tue Jan 03, 2012 7:19 pm  

Asim wrote:

Credit to Paul Dacre and the Daily Mail for not letting it lie.

More credit to Stephen's parents.

Re: Guilty at last : Tue Jan 03, 2012 7:23 pm  

Mintball wrote:

Lawrie L wrote:

I think this case is far too murky and I think a line has been drawn so quickly underneath it that it has left others who may be guilty off

I disagree on the "so quickly" – it's almost a generation.

But yes, I do understand why people might feel a tad suspicious.

As mentioned previously, the case remains open on the Met's books, apparently. This case was only possible – as I understand it – because of developments in forensic science and technology. Who is to say what may occur on those fronts in the future?

Can you honestly see the Met going deeper into the case knowing 2 men have now been found guilty? Don't get me wrong I think more than 2 did it however I think the Met will (again) unfortuantly let this drift away now

Re: Guilty at last : Tue Jan 03, 2012 8:08 pm  

Lawrie L wrote:

Can you honestly see the Met going deeper into the case knowing 2 men have now been found guilty? Don't get me wrong I think more than 2 did it however I think the Met will (again) unfortuantly let this drift away now

I can absolutely see it, on the basis that the Met needs to be seen to do things properly after a series of cock ups.

Re: Guilty at last : Tue Jan 03, 2012 8:16 pm  

Bit easy to criticise the police,isn't it ? I don't think that defender of the indefensible Mr Mansfield did very well when he tried prosecuting in this matter;and he had the easier task via a private prosecution. There are difficulties when Labour MP's are currently banging on about joint enterprise. This MP is black and won't send her child to a school situated in the area she represents.Story There are also a number of others - who unlike the MP did not attend that democracy which is Cambridge University - and they have numerous meetings on the subject -Scroll Down Credit to the Daily Mail for their stance back at the time.

Bit easy to criticise the police,isn't it ? I don't think that defender of the indefensible Mr Mansfield did very well when he tried prosecuting in this matter;and he had the easier task via a private prosecution. There are difficulties when Labour MP's are currently banging on about joint enterprise. This MP is black and won't send her child to a school situated in the area she represents.Story There are also a number of others - who unlike the MP did not attend that democracy which is Cambridge University - and they have numerous meetings on the subject -Scroll Down Credit to the Daily Mail for their stance back at the time.

Re: Guilty at last : Tue Jan 03, 2012 9:02 pm  

Don't like this story at all. There was only ever going to be 1 outcome, and in not this trial, then in the next or the 1 after that. Have an awful lot of sympathy for family,friends and victims of crime, but a few questions arise.
1/ Did any eyewitnesses put any of the 5 accused at the crime scene?
2/ Would it have taken 3 trials to get a guilty verdict if it was white on white or black on black?
3/ How convenient for a speck of blood to be found matching the accused.
4/ What are the odds for an appeal?
5/ Was'nt 1 of the DNA " experts" discreditted during questioning?
6/ Considering the police 1st thought this was drug related, what info (if any) did they have about Stephen Lawrences' background?

Don't get me wrong, what I have read and remember reading of these scum, then either justice or rough justice has been done, but I smell media frenzy and PC obsessives having a big say in the outcome.

Re: Guilty at last : Tue Jan 03, 2012 9:05 pm  

SCR-SeaDiver wrote: Bit easy to criticise the police,isn't it ? I don't think that defender of the indefensible Mr Mansfield did very well when he tried prosecuting in this matter;and he had the easier task via a private prosecution. There are difficulties when Labour MP's are currently banging on about joint enterprise. This MP is black and won't send her child to a school situated in the area she represents.Story There are also a number of others - who unlike the MP did not attend that democracy which is Cambridge University - and they have numerous meetings on the subject -Scroll Down Credit to the Daily Mail for their stance back at the time. Genuine question - what was the Daily Mail's stance in 1993 (not 1997)?

SCR-SeaDiver wrote: Bit easy to criticise the police,isn't it ? I don't think that defender of the indefensible Mr Mansfield did very well when he tried prosecuting in this matter;and he had the easier task via a private prosecution. There are difficulties when Labour MP's are currently banging on about joint enterprise. This MP is black and won't send her child to a school situated in the area she represents.Story There are also a number of others - who unlike the MP did not attend that democracy which is Cambridge University - and they have numerous meetings on the subject -Scroll Down Credit to the Daily Mail for their stance back at the time. Genuine question - what was the Daily Mail's stance in 1993 (not 1997)?

Re: Guilty at last : Tue Jan 03, 2012 9:35 pm  

I can see how it would link them being at the scene, but how does this prove they killed him?

Re: Guilty at last : Tue Jan 03, 2012 10:16 pm  

The two who have gone down are nasty pieces of work.

Nevertheless something doesn't ring right about this case. Seems like trial by media, some questionable forensics and the overwhelming need for someone to be found guilty of whaty was a horrid, racially motivated crime.

Would not surprise me if the Criminal Cases Review Commission got hold of it and the convictions were ruled unsafe on appeal.

[Durham Giant]

Re: Guilty at last : Tue Jan 03, 2012 10:37 pm  

When you are going on the information you hear in the press it is easy to have questions about the verdict ( i know i did) BUT as more information about the evidence comes out it does seem more convincing.

I have a feeling that the judge and the prosecution did everything they could to make it appeal proof. However, the decision by the defence not to call forensic experts to challenge the prosecution case seems odd. Were they incompetent, not confident it could be challenged or are they saving it for an appeal.

I just hope that the ACOURT's get their comeuppance

Re: Guilty at last : Wed Jan 04, 2012 1:43 am  

Live Wired wrote:

Don't like this story at all. There was only ever going to be 1 outcome, and in not this trial, then in the next or the 1 after that. Have an awful lot of sympathy for family,friends and victims of crime, but a few questions arise.
1/ Did any eyewitnesses put any of the 5 accused at the crime scene?
2/ Would it have taken 3 trials to get a guilty verdict if it was white on white or black on black?
3/ How convenient for a speck of blood to be found matching the accused.
4/ What are the odds for an appeal?
5/ Was'nt 1 of the DNA " experts" discreditted during questioning?
6/ Considering the police 1st thought this was drug related, what info (if any) did they have about Stephen Lawrences' background?

Don't get me wrong, what I have read and remember reading of these scum, then either justice or rough justice has been done, but I smell media frenzy and PC obsessives having a big say in the outcome.

1. Apart from the deceased's friend, who was running for his life, there were no eyewitnesses.
2. Probably not, since if it had been white on white, it may well have been properly investigated in the first place. As today hopefully it would now be.
3. How absurd. A conspiracy "plant" theory of yours, is it? Even the defence didn't run that one. The bloodstain in the jacket was dried into the weave. It was a microscopic drop of blood, but the significance of it is that it HAD dried into the weave - meaning (obviously) that it had to have been in liquid form in order to sink INTO the weave. As it was Lawrence's blood, that sort of clinched it.
4. I had a look on Oddschecker but the bookies aren't offering any.
5. No.
6. They knew his background was that prior to the night in question he was alive. they also knew he was black, and therein lay the foundations of how it took 18 years to get to today. WTf are you suggesting with that question, anyway?

At least the racist scumbags will spend most of the rest of their lives in jail, but it's little cause for celebration, and of course the rest of the gang who attacked Stephen Lawrence have never been convicted and probably now never will be.

But there has been no media frenzy. At all. There will be something of a splurge now the convictions have been secured, but while the trial took place - what frenzy would this be?

Last. unless you can give us at least some clue about your startingly barking suggestion as to how "PC obsessives" have influenced the conviction of these two, I can't comment on this absurdity. Who are these obsessives? Nelson Mandela maybe? Macpherson?