05 January, 2012
Stephen Lawrence
I was going to write something here about the conviction of Gary Dobson and David Norris but Anna Raccoon has pretty well covered everything I would have said and with greater clarity and thoroughness than I would have managed.
There is also the Spectator commentary by Rod Liddle to which Treacy J took exception and forbade the jurors to read. The following text is from a third-party source so I cannot vouch for it.
Stephen Lawrence the person was killed in a depressing but unremarkable attack by a bunch of overconfident young thugs. Was the attack racially-aggravated? Probably. Was the attack racially-motivated? Dunno, that's actually a different question.
More to the point, does it matter? If the group had attacked a pair of bespectacled posh young White toffs from Blackheath who had had the temerity to wander onto their territory, would that have been less heinous? Would the attackers have been charged with murder aggravated by class hatred and a commission of inquiry set up to investigate institutional dioptrophobia in the Met?
Anyway Dobson and Norris have not been convicted of killing Stephen Lawrence the person, they have been convicted of killing St Stephen the political symbol.
£50million spent, the legal system trashed, the police reduced to gibbering diversity-sensitive cowards scared to say boo to a golliwog. Good value, eh?
You tell me.
There is also the Spectator commentary by Rod Liddle to which Treacy J took exception and forbade the jurors to read. The following text is from a third-party source so I cannot vouch for it.
Now, here's a good one. The judge in the Stephen Lawrence murder trial told potential jurors that they must approach the evidence 'with a clean slate'. That is, not be inclined to prejudge the issue as a consequence of having been assured, repeatedly, for the last twelve years, by the entire press, that the men accused are disgusting racist bastards and definitely guilty. Judge Treacy might as well have told the jurors that they must approach the case 'by eating fifteen Jacobs cream crackers, without any water or other emolument, inside one minute'. The case is a charade, and a vindictive charade at that.
A few years ago two of the men not now facing a retrial were sentenced to eighteen months in prison for having thrown an empty paper cup in the direction of a black policeman. Eighteen months! But of course they were not sentenced to eighteen months for having thrown an empty paper cup in the direction of a police officer, they were sentenced to eighteen months for the crime of having not been found guilty of the murder of Stephen Lawrence.
I don't think that they are very nice people. So I suppose it's ok that we invent a new system of justice to ensure they get banged up.
Stephen Lawrence the person was killed in a depressing but unremarkable attack by a bunch of overconfident young thugs. Was the attack racially-aggravated? Probably. Was the attack racially-motivated? Dunno, that's actually a different question.
More to the point, does it matter? If the group had attacked a pair of bespectacled posh young White toffs from Blackheath who had had the temerity to wander onto their territory, would that have been less heinous? Would the attackers have been charged with murder aggravated by class hatred and a commission of inquiry set up to investigate institutional dioptrophobia in the Met?
Anyway Dobson and Norris have not been convicted of killing Stephen Lawrence the person, they have been convicted of killing St Stephen the political symbol.
£50million spent, the legal system trashed, the police reduced to gibbering diversity-sensitive cowards scared to say boo to a golliwog. Good value, eh?
You tell me.
# posted by Edwin Greenwood @ 10:18 
Comments:
<< Home
"Was the attack racially-aggravated? Probably. Was the attack racially-motivated? Dunno, that's actually a different question."
I was going to say 'Maybe if anyone ever finds 'madame X', we'll know at last...'
But imagine my surprise at seeing that Wiki link altered since I posted a refernce to it at - among others - Insp Gadget's blog and Anna Raccoon's.
It used to read: "“In February 1999, officers who were investigating the handling of the initial inquiry revealed that a woman had telephoned detectives three times within the first few days after the killing.[13]
In 2004, the police stated: “The witness who appeared on the right of the scene and walked into Rochester Way with Stephen and Duwayne behind is very important to us. We know who this witness is, she knows who she is, we know what she knows. She has never made a statement. This witness may have been the catalyst for the attack.”…”
And that excerpt has now vanished into the ether.
Strange times.
I was going to say 'Maybe if anyone ever finds 'madame X', we'll know at last...'
But imagine my surprise at seeing that Wiki link altered since I posted a refernce to it at - among others - Insp Gadget's blog and Anna Raccoon's.
It used to read: "“In February 1999, officers who were investigating the handling of the initial inquiry revealed that a woman had telephoned detectives three times within the first few days after the killing.[13]
In 2004, the police stated: “The witness who appeared on the right of the scene and walked into Rochester Way with Stephen and Duwayne behind is very important to us. We know who this witness is, she knows who she is, we know what she knows. She has never made a statement. This witness may have been the catalyst for the attack.”…”
And that excerpt has now vanished into the ether.
Strange times.
The 'anti-white' segment of the establishment flexes its muscles openly for the first time.
BTW, according to McPherson, racism can be unconscious; but is detectable or definable by third parties. So how far are we from state-sanctioned "Witch-smeller Pursuivants" hauling people off the streets for the crime of being 'Unconsciously Racist'?
BTW, according to McPherson, racism can be unconscious; but is detectable or definable by third parties. So how far are we from state-sanctioned "Witch-smeller Pursuivants" hauling people off the streets for the crime of being 'Unconsciously Racist'?
# posted by 
: 05 January, 2012 15:34
: 05 January, 2012 15:34
I personally find it amusing that the only photo of St SL used in the media shows him giving a black power salute, which is fairly strong circumstantial evidence that he himself was a 'racist'...
# posted by : 05 January, 2012 20:46
: 05 January, 2012 20:46
As with you Edwin, I found Anna Raccoon's two posts on the subject spot on. She reminds us how the murder became a cause celebre almost from the off, and how the flawed judgments in the Macpherson report have clouded, rather than clarified, perceptions about the murder for the past dozen years.
Sometimes distance helps; Anna's posts, and Dalrymple's demolition of Macpherson written for City Journal nearly 3 years ago (http://www.city-journal.org/2009/19_2_otbie-racism.html)were both composed from their respective refuges in southern France. Yet both writers have put the London based commentariat to shame with the acuity and freshness of their analysis-certainly when compared to the vacuous 'debate' held on Newsnight following the convictions a couple of nights ago(the hook around which Anna composed her second brilliant post).
Sometimes distance helps; Anna's posts, and Dalrymple's demolition of Macpherson written for City Journal nearly 3 years ago (http://www.city-journal.org/2009/19_2_otbie-racism.html)were both composed from their respective refuges in southern France. Yet both writers have put the London based commentariat to shame with the acuity and freshness of their analysis-certainly when compared to the vacuous 'debate' held on Newsnight following the convictions a couple of nights ago(the hook around which Anna composed her second brilliant post).
# posted by : 06 January, 2012 00:07
: 06 January, 2012 00:07
"And that excerpt has now vanished into the ether."
No, not quite - the wayback machine captured it for posterity:
http://web.archive.org/web/20090123002558/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Lawrence
No, not quite - the wayback machine captured it for posterity:
http://web.archive.org/web/20090123002558/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Lawrence
# posted by : 06 January, 2012 00:37
: 06 January, 2012 00:37
@Diane Abbott's Finnish Nurse
404 error, that would be an interesting find, please try again.
On the subjest of "hate crime" I'd still like to know what would happen if a Trangendered Person (of whatever ethnicity) went out and murdered a random Normo in a fit of self-pitying hatred?
404 error, that would be an interesting find, please try again.
On the subjest of "hate crime" I'd still like to know what would happen if a Trangendered Person (of whatever ethnicity) went out and murdered a random Normo in a fit of self-pitying hatred?
"I personally find it amusing that the only photo of St SL used in the media shows him giving a black power salute..."
I guess that's why The Blessed Doreen opened up the family album yesterday for a big photospread in 'The Mail'..?
"No, not quite - the wayback machine captured it for posterity"
Oh, well done! :)
I guess that's why The Blessed Doreen opened up the family album yesterday for a big photospread in 'The Mail'..?
"No, not quite - the wayback machine captured it for posterity"
Oh, well done! :)
For ref: this was the appeal about the paper cup incident.
@JuliaM. Gosh, that's very interesting.
Better take a copy of this before it goes puff.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/278943.stm
Police in Britain are stepping up appeals for a woman who they believe could be a vital witness in the inquiry into the murder of the black teenager, Stephen Lawrence.
The two officers who investigated the handling of the initial inquiry revealed that the woman had telephoned detectives three times within the first few days after the killing.
Deputy Chief Constable Bob Ayling and Detective Chief Superintendent David Clapperton, from the Kent force, were speaking publicly for the first time about what they believe might have been the motive for the murder.
Mr Clapperton said it was possible that Stephen was stabbed by someone who wanted to join a gang led by two prime suspects in the case. he two officers also criticised the original investigation by the London force, saying it was cobbled together -- and that crucial evidence had been ignored.
Yep, Madame X might be able to shed light on who stabbed whom and why. Gang initiation, sexual jealousy, that enforcement whereby talking to the wrong man gets you a hiding and him taught a lesson...but that might undermine the racial elements of the case and we can't have that.
Montagues and Capulets, Jets and Sharks. It's a mistake to be misled by the overlay of race. That's not what it is really about.
@JuliaM. Gosh, that's very interesting.
Better take a copy of this before it goes puff.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/278943.stm
Police in Britain are stepping up appeals for a woman who they believe could be a vital witness in the inquiry into the murder of the black teenager, Stephen Lawrence.
The two officers who investigated the handling of the initial inquiry revealed that the woman had telephoned detectives three times within the first few days after the killing.
Deputy Chief Constable Bob Ayling and Detective Chief Superintendent David Clapperton, from the Kent force, were speaking publicly for the first time about what they believe might have been the motive for the murder.
Mr Clapperton said it was possible that Stephen was stabbed by someone who wanted to join a gang led by two prime suspects in the case. he two officers also criticised the original investigation by the London force, saying it was cobbled together -- and that crucial evidence had been ignored.
Yep, Madame X might be able to shed light on who stabbed whom and why. Gang initiation, sexual jealousy, that enforcement whereby talking to the wrong man gets you a hiding and him taught a lesson...but that might undermine the racial elements of the case and we can't have that.
Montagues and Capulets, Jets and Sharks. It's a mistake to be misled by the overlay of race. That's not what it is really about.
@banned:
Oops - not sure how that http snuck in there.
You can either go to the wayback machine URL (http://www.archive.org/web/web.php) and slap the wikipedia URL into the searchbox - then you can follow the chronological censoring to your hearts content.
or this might work for you (it still has the section of interest) :
web.archive.org/web/20100822075632/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Lawrence
Oops - not sure how that http snuck in there.
You can either go to the wayback machine URL (http://www.archive.org/web/web.php) and slap the wikipedia URL into the searchbox - then you can follow the chronological censoring to your hearts content.
or this might work for you (it still has the section of interest) :
web.archive.org/web/20100822075632/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Lawrence
# posted by : 06 January, 2012 18:43
: 06 January, 2012 18:43
Here's my difficulty with all this: once we start labelling any crime as motivated by hate or racism we get into difficult waters. Are the Scots a different race to the Welsh? Are all the Romanians begging on the streets of London a separate race to me? Is it all just how it appears on the outside?
How is race measured? if it is some old fashioned notion of width of nostrils or curl of hair, we aren't getting very far. As one copper said somewhere, he always breathes a sigh of relief when trouble is between people of the same colour. It saves an enormous amount of paperwork and form-filling.
We are further floundering in that the social engineering of various do-gooders over the years (all, I am sure, with good intentions) now distorts the approach the police must take.
A murder is a murder, but some murders surely do not deserve more resources thrown at the investigation because the outward appearance of skin colour and a cry of "race!" influences the actions.
I do not know if the SL pair found guilty did what they did because of colour alone. I would suggest that some dislike of people of other colours is occasionally down to a difference (and non-appreciation) of attitudes and approach to life. probably one that many do not share. I have seen people of a certain difference to me swaggering about and behaving badly, but am I wrong in disliking them because of what they are saying all too loudly and doing rather than skin tone?
Post a Comment
How is race measured? if it is some old fashioned notion of width of nostrils or curl of hair, we aren't getting very far. As one copper said somewhere, he always breathes a sigh of relief when trouble is between people of the same colour. It saves an enormous amount of paperwork and form-filling.
We are further floundering in that the social engineering of various do-gooders over the years (all, I am sure, with good intentions) now distorts the approach the police must take.
A murder is a murder, but some murders surely do not deserve more resources thrown at the investigation because the outward appearance of skin colour and a cry of "race!" influences the actions.
I do not know if the SL pair found guilty did what they did because of colour alone. I would suggest that some dislike of people of other colours is occasionally down to a difference (and non-appreciation) of attitudes and approach to life. probably one that many do not share. I have seen people of a certain difference to me swaggering about and behaving badly, but am I wrong in disliking them because of what they are saying all too loudly and doing rather than skin tone?
# posted by : 07 January, 2012 19:23
: 07 January, 2012 19:23 << Home
