The Stephen Lawrence Trial

[ronthenekred 10]

 

Incidentally did you think OJ Simpson was guilty..?

 

Other than 6 million police cars and more helicopters than Apocalypse now chasing him, no. Innocent as hell.

[Glamrocker 10]

I would base the fact that Stephen's (RIP) friend Duwayne Brooks was there on the tragic night when he witnessed his childhood friend being killed by these vulchers is enough rather than the above. Also given the new evidence with the case (DNA).

 

18 years of suffering for the Lawerence family is far too much. I hope they get some peace when these scum are locked up for good.

Proof that a fair trial is impossible ,You have already tried,convicted and sentenced the pair.If you watched the TV news the other night when the lad gave evidence he actually ran quite a bit away from the scuffle ,now if he was scared I guarantee he wasnt looking back.Now Im not making excuses for the accused but I am not a barrister and I picked up on it so Im damn sure the defence team will certainly pick up on it and question what he actually saw.Just because witnesses are giving evidence for the prosecution doesnt make it a 100% accurate version of the event,if that were the case quite a few miscarriages of justice wouldnt have been reversed.

[Glamrocker 10]

I forgot to add. A newpaper I have forgot which one I maybe wrong but the DailyMail comes to mind labelled them as murderers & said they could sue if they were wrong. To date they have not sued.

You continue to furnish proof of the impossibility of a fair trial.I would imagine the newspaper involved would be prosecuted for such a accusation whilst the case was still live,plus the fact that it would give the defence a reason to call for a mis-trial

[Frank Sidney 11]

They killed a young man based on the colour of his skin. Let's not get it twisted.

 

Next......FYI.....follow the case

 

I was too young when the OJ case happened. I won't make judgement until I have researched the case .

 

eh, you aint even researched this case, never mind one in the past! I'm pleased you find the Daily Fail a source of fact!!

[bizzle 10]

eh, you aint even researched this case, never mind one in the past! I'm pleased you find the Daily Fail a source of fact!!

 

I have more than you. According to you Duwayne Brooks was not even a witness or whatever you implied . I do not want to play tit for tat on something serious. I will leave that to you.

 

I am surprised the DailyMail labelled them given their history. Why would it please me don't be so immature. I don't take pleasure on issues as serious as this unlike you who clearly does Like I said previously they could have sued but have not to date...Mmmm I wonder why

Edited November 21, 2011 by bizzle

[Frank Sidney 11]

I have more than you. According to you Duwayne Brooks was not even a witness or whatever you implied . I do not want to play tit for tat on something serious. I will leave that to you.

 

I am surprised the DailyMail labelled them given their history. Why would it please me don't be so immature. I don't take pleasure on issues as serious as this unlike you who clearly does Like I said previously they could have sued but have not to date...Mmmm I wonder why

 

Duwayne didn't see who did it. That's all I'm saying. If they did it I don't care less if they get locked up. I'm not defending them..The thread is about them being found guilty before the trial, as you have already stated..

[Frank Sidney 11]

They killed a young man based on the colour of his skin. Let's not get it twisted.

 

Next......FYI.....follow the case

 

I was too young when the OJ case happened. I won't make judgement until I have researched the case .

 

Mmmmm. There's something quite not right with that answer...

 

The OJ trial was AFTER the Stephen Lawrence one....

[ElasticMan 10]

Why do you keep saying there is no evidence? Its almost is if you want them to be found not guilty?

 

Dobson and Norris are accused of being two of a group of five youths who killed Lawrence. They were charged after new forensic evidence emerged during a cold case review of the case exhibits by scientists.

 

The prosecution claims that fibres, blood and hair found on the clothing of both men places them at the scene and proves their guilt.

 

Link

[Frank Sidney 11]

Why do you keep saying there is no evidence? Its almost is if you want them to be found not guilty?

 

Dobson and Norris are accused of being two of a group of five youths who killed Lawrence. They were charged after new forensic evidence emerged during a cold case review of the case exhibits by scientists.

 

The prosecution claims that fibres, blood and hair found on the clothing of both men places them at the scene and proves their guilt.

 

Link

How can someone be guilty until all the evidence is heard...? I don't care what happens to them if they are guilty they deserve all they get...But this is not a fair trial. They will be found guilty whatever happens.

 

I could ask you a similar question. Why do you claim they're guilty until you've heard all the evidence? Can you not see that its me who's being reasonable, and you who is not...

 

Furthermore, have you ever heard of the Birmingham Six and numerous other "fitted up" supposed guilty parties...?

[janie48 96]

Furthermore, have you ever heard of the Birmingham Six and numerous other "fitted up" supposed guilty parties...?

 

spot on.

..............

Edited November 21, 2011 by Ms Macbeth
fixed quote tags

[Halibut 12]

Furthermore, have you ever heard of the Birmingham Six and numerous other "fitted up" supposed guilty parties...?

 

spot on.

 

Do you believe that the accused are innocent?

Edited November 21, 2011 by Ms Macbeth
Fixed quote tags

[janie48 96]

spot on.

 

Do you believe that the accused are innocent?

 

well in the case of the Stephen Lawrence trial i don't.

Edited November 21, 2011 by Ms Macbeth
fixed quote tags so people can understand who said what