Stephen Lawrence MURDERERS

[Bold Seagull]

Do you TRULY not know the answer to that question ?

12 members of the jury did not think the evidence was 'tainted beyond belief'. If you have additional information that cements your assertion that it is 'tainted beyond belief' why were you not asked to present this for the case of the defence?

As with any forensic evidence, the jury has to rely on the expert witnesses, and in this case the argument that the blood could only get into the fibres was compelling and effectively ruled out cross contamination given the blood would have been dry a few hours after the event.

 

[Nibble]

No, you bore me full stop, whether you agree with me or not.

That's becuse you are a bigoted moron who thinks he's enterig a debate in fact you are just spouting racist crap and believe it to be some kind of legtimate argument. There is no point trying to debat with you as you have the same agenda on every post, in that sense ou can get rather dull too old bean

 

[WATFORD zero]

I'll try a third and final time, but suspect i won't get an answer

Bushy, you said that you 'have no doubt they were involved'

So why aren't you pleased that they have been convicted ?

 

[Publius Ovidius]

That's becuse you are a bigoted moron who thinks he's enterig a debate in fact you are just spouting racist crap and believe it to be some kind of legtimate argument. Thereis no point trying to debat with you as you have he same agenda on every post, in that sense ou can get rather dull too old bean

No weak effort there by nibble. point to Bushy 40-15 on the Bushy serve

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Nibble has 30 points as a point of order.

 

[User removed 4]

That's becuse you are a bigoted moron who thinks he's enterig a debate in fact you are just spouting racist crap and believe it to be some kind of legtimate argument. There is no point trying to debat with you as you have the same agenda on every post, in that sense ou can get rather dull too old bean

Type this while having a bit of a hissy fit did we ?

 

[Billy the Fish]

If by fair trial you mean that no one in the jury will have been exposed to the case by a third party then you are living in dream world. It's the 21st century and the outline of pretty much any case can be found with the press of a few buttons on a phone these days. Are you suggesting that anyone in the public eye or a case in the public interest will be thrown out simply because it will be in the media.

Edna posted some insighful words on here a while back, and concluded that sometimes you have to put your faith in people to be objective and deliver the correct verdict.

I'm not saying I've got the answers, but this case is a bit of an impossible situation. The media coverage means that everyone pretty much knows they did it, I know what you're saying about trusting people to be impartial but the human brain doesn't really work like that, I'm pretty sure it's impossible for anyone to be impartial in this case.
The right result has come, but not in the right way. That is the fault of the OB who botched the original investigation.

It probably would've been better for everyone if they'd all just had a nasty "accident" somewhere along the line.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

Type this while having a bit of a hissy fit did we ?

And there we have it...game set and match to Bushy. Nibble can go away until there is something else contentious on here he can spout off about, or learn some lines I suppose

Disclaimer " can't we all just get on together"

 

[Kumquat]

Thats the trouble, there arent any, you either have sites like civil liberty with their obvious bnp agenda, or the searchlight style ones,the mainstream media is too shit scared to offer any alternatives either, you only have to witness the way rod liddle has been censored by the spectator on this.

I think you're making it clear which one you prefer though...

 

[Barrel of Fun]

A special Stephen Lawrence edition of Panorama tonight at 8pm.

Here is a clip...

BBC News - Stephen Lawrences mother visits his grave in Jamaica

 

[Billy the Fish]

come on Bushy, trying to find a paki in Bangladesh will be like trying to find a needle in a hay-stack eh?

Surely that would be like looking for hay in a haystack

 

[Publius Ovidius]

I'm not saying I've got the answers, but this case is a bit of an impossible situation. The media coverage means that everyone pretty much knows they did it, I know what you're saying about trusting people to be impartial but the human brain doesn't really work like that, I'm pretty sure it's impossible for anyone to be impartial in this case.
The right result has come, but not in the right way. That is the fault of the OB who botched the original investigation.

It probably would've been better for everyone if they'd all just had a nasty "accident" somewhere along the line.

This 100%

 

[User removed 4]

I'll try a third and final time, but suspect i won't get an answer

Bushy, you said that you 'have no doubt they were involved'

So why aren't you pleased that they have been convicted ?

Sorry, been a bit busy with replies, why aren't I pleased ? because this was an agenda rather than a trial, I believe the evidence was too tainted to have been allowed at trial, I dont believe that they could have got a fair trial considering the media frenzy, and i certainly dont believe that we have a judiciary that is totally seperate from political influence.

 

[Nibble]

Type this while having a bit of a hissy fit did we ?

No, on my Mum's old laptop which requires the hitting power of Thor to type properly. Plus if you are going to correct, do it correctly.

 

[User removed 4]

I think you're making it clear which one you prefer though...

Well of course I am, thats not to say I agree with everything on the site,to be honest I havent looked at it , I got the address from googling Richard Everett.

 

[User removed 4]

And there we have it...game set and match to Bushy. Nibble can go away until there is something else contentious on here he can spout off about, or learn some lines I supposeDisclaimer " can't we all just get on together"

Learn some lines ?? How long does it take to master " do you want fries with that ?

 

[severnside gull]

We have a system of trial by peers and whether or not the outcomes are sometimes surprising it is infinitely preferable and less liable to misrepresenting the view of the wider society or to corruption than trial by judges alone. I would have to raise an eyebrow at the decisions in this case based solely on the evidence that we have been privy to (which is not all of the evidence seen and heard by the jury by any means lest we forget) but those who rail at the iniquities of the criminal justice system seem to me to either be jumping on a bandwagon which is every bit as media driven as anything they might take offense at, or to have not fully considered the alternatives whether knowingly by virtue of personal bias or unwittingly otherwise. My view is that there is little in this case that points to a travesty of justice as such although it will doubtless go to appeal and the judge in his summing up was very clear as far as I can understand to emphasise the issue of reasonable doubt. Realistically the ability of any person individually or collectively to view the issues in a trial entirely dispassionately can be questioned but it does seem to me that the essential purpose of the law is to represent the people and, more specifically, the views that the people (as an entity) hold at any particular juncture. It is as such a moveable feast which changes as society changes. To criticise the jury system (or this jury per se) for adopting a stance which reflects society's current mores seems to me to be as fatuous as it is dangerous as there is no other foundation on which to build a cadre of law and an associated principal of justice being served. I certainly wouldn't term anyone a fascist and in truth I have no real sense of anyones' politics on here as so much of what is said is posing and posturing. Arguing the apparent merits of a specific case does however appear eminently reasonable to me whilst, on the contrary, using that single case as a blunt object to restrict the representation and engagement of the archetypical man in the street whom the jury system represents is unreasonable in the extreme. If there is an argument for change in the legal system then it must be made dispassionately and with much wider reference but it must also encompass the essential requirement that the law represents as much as it bounds the people. Insofar as none of us are omnipotent there will always be room for error (whch is essentially why we no longer allow capital punishment) no less so any alternatives that I have ever seen proposed. Indeed for all the reasons that I mistrust those alternatives I worry more about the appeal system than I ever do about a jury trial.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Good. Perhaps the family can gain a crumb of mental peace now.

I do hope so.

I remember one occasion when the Albion were playing at Gillingham and the Bracknell posse were travelling to the game by train. The seats next to us were occupied by Stephen Lawrence's father and his lawyer, who were on their way to a meeting about the case. Overhearing their conversation (as you do, on trains), it was very obvious what a decent family the Lawrences were, and how distressed they felt about the fact that justice was being denied to them. It is incredible how long this has dragged out.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I'm sure it is boring for you Bushy but rest assured I shall challenge your idiotic, racist statements time and time again and if you keep posting your uneducated twaddle on here you will get very bored of my posts indeed.

To be fair he hasn't made a racist comment ( at least not in this thread - I don;t know about others ). He's commented on the ability of the justice system to give a fair trial after such heavy media attention. There's a "wierdo" in Bristol who quite clearly would have never got a fair trial thanks to our blood thirsty media.

 

[Nibble]

Learn some lines ?? How long does it take to master " do you want fries with that ?

That is f***ing genius. Actually I'd never work in a fast food outlet. Too many blacks.