Jump to content

The Stephen Lawrence Trial


Recommended Posts

Trial by media.

 

The accused have already lost.

 

No they haven't. if, bu some miracle, they are found guilty, an appeal will be lodged on those very grounds. I find it unlikely, given the unreliable collection and handling of forensic evidence, that they will be found guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No they haven't. if, bu some miracle, they are found guilty, an appeal will be lodged on those very grounds. I find it unlikely, given the unreliable collection and handling of forensic evidence, that they will be found guilty.

 

If it was up to the judge then I'd agree, but a jury? They'll find them guilty..

 

I'm unsure of the legal aspects of a trial. Can a judge direct a jury to reach a verdict? I don't know..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No they haven't. if, bu some miracle, they are found guilty, an appeal will be lodged on those very grounds. I find it unlikely, given the unreliable collection and handling of forensic evidence, that they will be found guilty.

 

They've just had a report on the news that Dobson's coat has a piece of blood on it which must have actually gone on at the murder scene as it was wet and absorbed in the fabric not a dry flake. And it can't have been a dry flake which got wet as they become too sticky to absorb. It must have got on there at the murder scene when Stephen was bleeding.

 

It was looking really bad but I think this is their ace in the hole and they may well have got Dobson at least.

 

I do hope so, I really believe they did it, I am from the area where it happened and know people in common and have had encounters with them. Don't want to say to much while the trial is still on but I would be amazed if they hadn't done it. That's why they banned jurors from the 5 surrounding boroughs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They've just had a report on the news that Dobson's coat has a piece of blood on it which must have actually gone on at the murder scene as it was wet and absorbed in the fabric not a dry flake. And it can't have been a dry flake which got wet as they become too sticky to absorb. It must have got on there at the murder scene when Stephen was bleeding.

 

It was looking really bad but I think this is their ace in the hole and they may well have got Dobson at least.

 

I do hope so, I really believe they did it, I am from the area where it happened and know people in common and have had encounters with them. Don't want to say to much while the trial is still on but I would be amazed if they hadn't done it. That's why they banned jurors from the 5 surrounding boroughs.

 

Doesn't it strike you as odd that one of the main suspects has had blood on his clothes, that were in the possession of the police, for 15 years and the police have never found it? I appreciate that mistakes can happen, but this does seem amazing. Especially with the publicity and pressure on the police to get a conviction. I wonder how many case reviews there have been and how many times the clothing have been examined? And by how many different specialists? Wouldn't all the evidence have been examined a hundred times or more, especially when its well known that everybody thinks they did indeed do it.

 

I feel there are three reasons for this. Either all the police officers who have dealt with the case are former Keystone Cops, the accused are being fitted up, or there's been an unbelievable amount of genuine errors that have just come to light.

 

When they're found guilty I feel its only a matter of time before there's an appeal...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't it strike you as odd that one of the main suspects has had blood on his clothes, that were in the possession of the police, for 15 years and the police have never found it? I appreciate that mistakes can happen, but this does seem amazing. Especially with the publicity and pressure on the police to get a conviction. I wonder how many case reviews there have been and how many times the clothing have been examined? And by how many different specialists? Wouldn't all the evidence have been examined a hundred times or more, especially when its well known that everybody thinks they did indeed do it.

 

I feel there are three reasons for this. Either all the police officers who have dealt with the case are former Keystone Cops, the accused are being fitted up, or there's been an unbelievable amount of genuine errors that have just come to light.

 

When they're found guilty I feel its only a matter of time before there's an appeal...

 

I understood that at the initial time of investigation there was not the technology available to find particles that small or a least meaningfully analyse them but at the point of reinvestigation where they were found this technology was available.

 

Plus for a long time it wasn't reinvestigated because due the the double jeopardy laws it was pointless reinvestigating it when the suspects couldn't be prosecuted so the evidence was just sitting about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understood that at the initial time of investigation there was not the technology available to find particles that small or a least meaningfully analyse them but at the point of reinvestigation where they were found this technology was available.

 

Plus for a long time it wasn't reinvestigated because due the the double jeopardy laws it was pointless reinvestigating it when the suspects couldn't be prosecuted so the evidence was just sitting about.

 

I don't know about your first point..it may be right. I agree with the second point...I wasn't aware these two had been tried before. I knew there was a case that collapsed so no verdict could be reached...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understood that at the initial time of investigation there was not the technology available to find particles that small or a least meaningfully analyse them but at the point of reinvestigation where they were found this technology was available.

 

Plus for a long time it wasn't reinvestigated because due the the double jeopardy laws it was pointless reinvestigating it when the suspects couldn't be prosecuted so the evidence was just sitting about.

 

My bold - that does not apply in this case, surely, as there never has been a criminal trial due to insufficient evidence? My understanding is that as you highlight, there is new technology available which has made it possible to gather enough evidence for the CPS to make a case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My bold - that does not apply in this case, surely, as there never has been a criminal trial due to insufficient evidence? My understanding is that as you highlight, there is new technology available which has made it possible to gather enough evidence for the CPS to make a case.

 

Dobson was tried and acquitted:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-13454894

 

It is the double jeopardy repeal which has allowed him to be retried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.