-
-
I just hope that Doreen and Neville Lawrence and Duwayne Brooks can find some peace in their shattered lives now.
And ultimately the Met must be congratulated for keeping on keeping on, admittedly under the constant insistent pressure from Doreen Lawrence and others. -
The Met as it is today, maybe, but I still feel great anger at the mess they made of the case in the days following the murder.Originally posted by amateur51 View PostComment
-
-
Eltham is only a few miles from me and I know the spot where it happened.
I agree with all the above. RIP Stephen Lawrence.Comment
-
One might hope, with the advances in forensic science, that the others involved may eventually be brought to justice.Comment
-
Good - insofar as anything good comes out of this case. I had had my concerns since from reportage the forensics seemed pretty threadbare, but of course we weren't in on every moment of the trial.Comment
-
You felt just as I did, S-A, but (as you say) we weren't there, and the media are not very good at reporting evidence, anyway.Comment
-
Whilst echoing all of the above sentiments, I hope the court has got it right this time. There've been too many miscarriages of justice in recent years in order to get a verdict.Comment
-
It seems that there was an awful lot of circumstantial evidence which was withheld from the jury, but they were convinced without it. And the prosecution must have been confident that the evidence presented was strong enough.Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View PostIt isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
The sentences are likely to be half as long as they would have been had the crime been committed over age 18. They will be free before they get to our ages. The law needs to be changed in this respect fast. People pay tax at 16. They used to work and pay tax at 14. Many of these crimes are being committed at a younger age than 18. And many of those convicted are considerably above 18 when they are convicted. Why is this matter not being addressed by Parliament?
There also needs to be a whole new tranche of legislation to support victims' parents, before, during and afterwards. The strain on the Lawrence family has been enormous. There should be a public body which takes up cases for them so they can be kept out of the public eye. 10 year old Damilola Taylor's mother arguably collapsed and died because of the pressures. Currently those who seek justice, either via the law or not, end up suffering the most and that isn't morally acceptable.
It hasn't been a good time for Mr Taylor. Within a very small number of years both men convicted of his manslaughter were released. The first was seen associating with gangs and is back in custody. The second was released in 2011. Their cousin has been given the OBE for turning his back on crime and doing good deeds. He is also about to become a film star. Some have said that the award was inappropriate. Others argue that it is wrong to condemn a person for being a member of a family.
The award could be seen to have a political dimension. A message to gang members that they too could be honoured for a change of course. I see the argument. However, it appears grossly insensitive to the Taylor family. Taylor's father complained. The mother of the man with the OBE retorted "Damilola Taylor’s dad has p****** me off now". I really don't like the sound of that, or her, and it all looks very wrong to me. How old is he? 24. He's been a reformed character for 8 years.Last edited by Guest; 03-01-12, 18:38.Comment
-
As they have been convicted of murder, they will be sentenced to life imprisonment - the only possible sentence. As to when they will be released (if at all) the trial judge will set a minimum period in custody. Whether they are in fact released at that point will depend on whether they are thought nearer the time to be a threat to safety. That judgement will be based on assessments by many people of their behaviour and attitudes while in custody. In this case, I'd expect that their racism will be significant.Originally posted by Lateralthinking1 View PostComment
-
Maybe you can clarify this point. It can be 30 years for those aged 18 and over when the crime is committed. Racial considerations can be taken into account as weight to sentence. My understanding is that it can be 12 years, not 30 years, for those aged under 18 when the crime is committed whatever the racial considerations. What parts am I not understanding? On this basis they would be out of prison before the age of 50. One of their fathers was involved in very serious crime in middle age.Last edited by Guest; 03-01-12, 18:39.Comment
-
-
The Independent reports - "The recommended starting point for Dobson and Norris' sentence tomorrow will be around 12 years because they were 17 and 16 respectively at the time of the attack. However the judge may increase this because of the racially motivated aspect of the case, and the fact that they realised that one of the group might use a knife".
The Guardian reports - "The judge must set a minimum term after which they may be considered for parole. In setting that term, the starting point in the case of a racially aggravated murder is 30 years. Without aggravating factors, it would be 15 years.
However, an offender who was under 18 when he committed murder must be sentenced to detention at Her Majesty's pleasure. Dobson was 17 and Norris was 16 in April 1993. Since they are now adults, they can expect to serve their sentences in adult prisons. But the starting point for an offender under 18 is 12 years, even if the offence is racially motivated".Comment
Comment