SCR-SeaDiver wrote:Bit easy to criticise the police,isn't it ? It's certainly not difficult, especially given the cack-handed way they went about the investigation from the first moment they attended the incident. From sheer incompetence to potential corruption, the Met failed spectacularly from beginning to end. Have a read of what Paul Foot has to say. Or take a look at "Justice for Stephen" once it appears on the ITVplayer site.

SCR-SeaDiver wrote:Bit easy to criticise the police,isn't it ? It's certainly not difficult, especially given the cack-handed way they went about the investigation from the first moment they attended the incident. From sheer incompetence to potential corruption, the Met failed spectacularly from beginning to end. Have a read of what Paul Foot has to say. Or take a look at "Justice for Stephen" once it appears on the ITVplayer site.

Chris28 wrote: Genuine question - what was the Daily Mail's stance in 1993 (not 1997)? Bit of background HERE mate. Maybe Dacre was after a bit more plastering?

Chris28 wrote: Genuine question - what was the Daily Mail's stance in 1993 (not 1997)? Bit of background HERE mate. Maybe Dacre was after a bit more plastering?

cod'ead wrote: Chris28 wrote: Genuine question - what was the Daily Mail's stance in 1993 (not 1997)? Bit of background HERE mate. Maybe Dacre was after a bit more plastering? So like the rest of the media then, the square root of feck all. Some of this praise of the Daily Mail is pretty sickening tbh

cod'ead wrote: Chris28 wrote: Genuine question - what was the Daily Mail's stance in 1993 (not 1997)? Bit of background HERE mate. Maybe Dacre was after a bit more plastering? So like the rest of the media then, the square root of feck all. Some of this praise of the Daily Mail is pretty sickening tbh

The two convicted will be sentenced today - but not at today's prices. Because of their age at the time of the offence, they must be sentenced as juveniles. Also, because at that time the element of 'racially aggravated' offending (which would mean an adult would serve a minimum of 30 years) had not yet been brought in, it will also not apply. So they will be ordered to be 'detained at her majesty's pleasure' and will be given a minimum term before they can apply for parole which is likely to be unfairly short to most eyes.

It is to be hoped that any parole hearing will not grant the application unless they have admitted their offences and given a full and frank account to the police of who was there and who did what.

I don't remember a national newspaper,before or since,risking the law of libel in this country,in pursuit of justice.
Just for cod'head I shall give you an example of where newspapers failed - of course now we all know News Corporation were in bed with the Labour Party.
You will recall the Soham murders - 2 young girls murdered by Ian Huntley.
David Blunkett MP - the home secretary - demanded the sacking of the Chief Constable of Humberside/Hull.
The Hull police authority refused to comply.
Blunkett was,while home secretary,having carnal knowledge of the wife of another man,and sorting out a passport for her slave/home help/cleaner.
The police officers avoiding the nasty people and spending their time protecting Blunkett and the press would know this.People in the home office would not 'blow the whistle' or they would lose their job - like the bloke from Sheffield did when he went to the press about that female politician whose name I cannot recall.
Shortly after Blunkett left his post and John Reid took over 52 people lost their lives in the most horrific manner on London Transport.Although Reid stated the Home Office was 'not fit for purpose' and British born terrorists had been allowed to do what they want during the tenure of Blunkett - the responsibility of the then home secretary was never called into question.
Perhaps cod'head feels - just like he does regarding HULL FC - that once a person leaves office they are no longer held responsible.

With regard to the main topic - huge respect to Duwayne Brooks - who must have been traumatised and terrified by the whole episode and what followed.
He did write a book which was withdrawn sometime later on the request of Doreen Lawrence.
I recall a female solicitor assisted him greatly and he stayed with friends in the midlands.
Would certainly have experienced post traumatic stress disorder.
He has shown remarkable courage in a number of ways.
Be nice if the modern press could follow the examples shown earlier by the Daily Mail - and Duwayne Brooks
who certainly sussed Michael Mansfield pretty quickly.

Blimey. That was so surreal it could have been penned by Dalí.

Yes, in 1997, almost 4 years after the murder. How outraged were they in 1993? How many times did they repeat the accusation after 1997? Who met the Home Secretary to discuss the case - Paul Dacre? Why was MacPherson started?

The Mail taking the credit for yesterday - have a look at Dacre's 12 minute (yes, 12) speech about it - takes a hell of a lot from the Lawrences, Duwayne Brooks, the forensic team, the CPS and counsel (all of whom Mr Lawrence praised yesterday as "faultless").

I'd love to see a graphic of the mind-map that takes us from Soham to the 7/7 bombings, while all the time, keeping the Lawrences in the loop

That would look like it was painted, I suspect, less by Dalí and more by Pollock.

Without wishing to go o/t and to support Coddy, around 12,000 other people in Hull feel the same way