Racism is an issue but more of an issue is incompetence to me. Yes quota's have to be met now etc etc but how many make-weights still exist in every force (at all levels)? I know there was some press coverage of pensioning off/making redundancy (to include these) ages ago.
Genuine question as I don't know the answer.
Can't find it now - but a decent article in the guardian suggested that one of the accused father's was something of a gangster - who may have had influence on officers / wittnesses etc - leading to the initial mishandling of the case
Detective Davidson (one of the key detectives in the initial investigation) has been accused of receiving bribes from Clifford Norris. He's the Father of David Norris and was at the time himself on the run from poice.
I watched the panarama prgramme on BBC last night and things still amaze me even now. No first aid was ever given at all when the police arrived on the scene and nothing was done until paramedics turned up. Probably futile I know but still, it seems astonishing.
however dalgleish and liverpools refusal to accept that suarez was wrong shows that certain parts of society still have issues (he admits he called evra a negro and 7 times!)
No, I suggest you actually read up on this before stating things as facts. Suarez admits to saying it only once; it is Evra who claimed he said it several times (Evra also abused Suarez initially). Suarez claimed (and has bin backed up by various cultural experts and others) that he intended no offence, that his comments have bin taken out of their cultural context, and you need to understand the cultural aspects of this before judging. He is young, naive and ignorant, and has made a mistake. He accepts this. He contests the claim that he 'racially abused' Evra, and Evra himself has stated he does not consider Suarez a racist. Liverpool FC do not claim he has done 'nothing wrong'. The FA needed to be seen to be acting appropriately, and have taken what they consider to be the right actions. The situation is regrettable, but has bin dealt with. People now need to learn from their mistakes, and move on.
The accusations levelled at England's Brave John Terry are far more serious, if you take the cultural aspect into account. What's the bets Terry will be cleared of being a racist?
Anyway, we digress...
Irrelevant, but I was really impressed with the BBC reporter outside the Old Bailey yesterday; several hours standing in the horrible cold damp, yet was totally on the ball at all times: conducting interviews, filling during the many long boring moments when nowt was actually happening, and keeping viewers informed about all sorts of aspects of the case whilst at all times remaining objective and balanced. Superb job done by the team, there.
How many would be saying "justice is done, thank god, after 19 years" if the jury had found them innocent?
I would be. Because the evidence against them was pretty damning, not to mention the wave of public anger and their 'trial by media'. Nasty scum, undoubtedly, but I would not want to see someone who was actually innocent of a crime get sent down just to appease the public and media hunger for a guilty verdict. I've known people who are no angels, be stitched up for stuff they jolly well have not in fact done, just so's the police could close a case. That's not Justice.
I know. It took a white couple to hold his hand and comfort him. The Police Inspector on the scene made some assumptions 'black gang violence'.
Regardless, utterly regardless he should have thought 'someone is laying in a pool of blood here'. Incompetent idiot.
It's in...
Dobson serve a minimum of 15 years and two months and Norris to 14 years and three months.
Pity it's not longer, but at least they got the maximum.
its scary to think that just arresting them straight away could have provided enough evidence
Hold on, hold on - I'm hardly a pro-police partisan but would an arrest at that point have even been legal?
They didn't need to arrest them, just to search their respective homes.
They were clearly stupid for not destroying every item they were wearing at the time, this is dumber still when you consider the fact that they came from criminal families.
Still, in a pre-CSI age with cruder forensic science capabilities, I guess some people didn't think about this type of thing. If they'd burnt everything after the attack they'd still be free.
Hindsight is a wondeful thing.
Were looking back on early 90's policing 20 years on. Even so ignoring 5 potential murderers after receiving 26 tips about them in 48 hours following the attack is ludicrous.
FFS it still took them another 2 days to bring them in for questioning after Nelson Mandela made a public appeal to the poilce to pull thier fingers out.
They didn't need to arrest them, just to search their respective homes.
Hold on, hold on - I'm hardly a pro-police partisan but would a search at that point even have been legal?
(Or, more precisely, were there any circumstances that would have allowed the police to search all the suspects' homes legally without a warrant? And if not, would the police have been able to make out the grounds for a search warrant from a judge?)
Elfinsafety - Member
Daily Mail now taking credit for the conviction.
Is it not fair to say that front page did pay a part in the whole process?
were there any circumstances that would have allowed the police to search
If the police had investigated properly at the time then i'm sure there would have been enough. There were enough witnesses that brought their alibi's into question.
Jeez even bringing in Acourt for questioning when he ws seen with the bin bag would have given the police the oppurtunity. Potentially caught red handed
I don't want to enter the world of generalisation at all however Anuj Bidve's murder suspects were picked up quite swiftly weren't they? In addition, (again I'm bordering on generalisation) I 'feel' the Greater Manchester Police's response to the riots was more robust and swifter (But then again they had the benefit of 'hindsight' as London happened slightly before)..Scale could have been different(?) however from the press I got the impression that Manchester stepped one step back, regrouped and attacked. Whereas London backed down a whole street...
There is a Police presence at the spot where Anuj died. Sad really that the flowers/tributes have to be guarded 
even bringing in Acourt for questioning when he ws seen with the bin bag would have given the police the oppurtunity. Potentially caught red handed
Hold on Hold on - Yes I mean Arrest.
The basis for arrest didn't change from when they started surveillance 4 days after the attack and when they evntually arrested them 10 days after that.
What are you trying to say? That the the police acted in a timely fashion and didn't given the accused the oppurtunity to get rid of potentially incriminating evidence?
That the police didn't watch the accused walk off with a potential bag of evidence?
the only way they could have got off would have been lack of evidence everyone has known for years they did it
How can everyone know it, if theres no evidence?
Or is it like believing in god, everone knows he exists so therefore must exist?
no evidence doesn't mean they didn't do it.
After 18 years those five are still the only suspects that haven't been written off.
Two of the five have now been convicted.
the only way they could have got off would have been lack of evidence everyone has known for years they did itHow can everyone know it, if theres no evidence?
Or is it like believing in god, everone knows he exists so therefore must exist?
my posts says lack of evidence not no evidence.
The killers ID has been well known and no one seems to think these fellas are not amongst the guilty. It took 18 years to prove it due to the lack of evidence...meaning that a court would accept - there are still 3 more to go
They never sued the Mail did they
It is not like a religious belief, but dont worry I forgive you for thinking it was 
I'm not saying they're inocent, but I'm not entirely sure if I'd been on the jury, based on the evidence the medias told us was shown I could say it was them beyond any doubt.
I'd imagine the jury didn't make their decision based on what's soley been shown in the media.
Suarez claimed (and has bin backed up by various cultural experts and others) that he intended no offence, that his comments have bin taken out of their cultural context
Why was he referring to his race at all? Personally I don't think cultural ignorance is a good enough excuse. He's played in Europe for long enough to know that his comments would be offensive.
You must log in to post.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
