Jump to content

Dobson and Norris found guilty - 'bout time


KidKruger

Recommended Posts

they was already made guilty before they even went to court, according to the papers. if they had been found not guilty how long would it be before they was dragged back to court? it was a non guilty verdict before so that should have been the end of it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

donohue if it was your son who was butchered at a bus stop you may have a slightly different view, the fact that in the past there was one trial and 'that was it' doesn't mean it should always be the case, especially when the original case fell apart not because the accused were innocent, but because of the over zealous way in which the case was prosecuted by the CPS / Police.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

for your information someone very close was stabbed to death in 2000 in bermondsey just after his 21st birthday! no one has ever been charged for this even though police and others know who did the crime, they could get no one to give evidence in court. the police have never seemed to be interested in pursuing the case. one law for some and different law for the rest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And let's not forget that it was the parents of Stephen Lawrence who made sure that this case was never closed. Sometimes it takes dogged proaction to make things happen in the face of impossible odds.


I also think it perfectly reasonable to re-examine evidence as new techniques for doing so become available. What matters is that those who are guilty are brought to justice irregardless of how long it may take to do so.


Had Stephen Leawrence been murdered today (as indeed many are) the case would have been dealt with differently and those responsible may well have been brought to account within months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't personally know whether they were guilty or not - but it is clear that everyone in the case (idiot coppers, prosecution, defence, expert witnesses, juries, judges) learnt that they were.


I'm surprised that donohue or MrCheeky would want to let these guys go free for what is clearly a horrible crime just to cock a snoot at the 'authorities'. It's a shameful opinion.


Yes, overturning double jeopardy does create a threat of poorer initial casework and vexatious litigation - but it has been used so few times that it is unfair to apply this suspicion in practice.


As for HAL9000 shit-stirring, why do you do it? What is wrong in your head?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think hal is stirring. To be fair he is only looking at the evidence in the same cold way that an appeal lawyer would examine it. And the law is a game in that respect. The guilty can remain innocent as long as guilt is 'not proven'.


Hals point regarding mitocondrial DNA with regards to Norris is a valid one. I've read enough about genetics over the years to be a suprised that mitoDNA would be considered conclusive enough. I would be very interested to read the court transcripts in relation to this.


Having said that though I am of the opinion they are guilty and only poor police and forensic investigation at the time has allowed them to avoid justice until now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't think hal is stirring. To be fair he is

> only looking at the evidence in the same cold way

> that an appeal lawyer would examine it. And the

> law is a game in that respect. The guilty can

> remain innocent as long as guilt is 'not proven'.

>

> Hals point regarding mitocondrial DNA with regards

> to Norris is a valid one. I've read enough about

> genetics over the years to be a suprised that

> mitoDNA would be considered conclusive enough. I

> would be very interested to read the court

> transcripts in relation to this.

>

> Having said that though I am of the opinion they

> are guilty and only poor police and forensic

> investigation at the time has allowed them to

> avoid justice until now.



I think the term is presumed innocent until proven guilty.


A reserved judgement whilst under suspicion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ha ha, Huguenot says you have a shameful opinion,

> so you call him a dickhead, and a shallow minded

> arsehole, then say he's making personal attacks.

>

> Brilliant.


Like

Link to comment
Share on other sites

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In all fairness I think he may have been reacting

> to Annette calling him a knob, though he's not

> doing any favours to himself in dispelling the

> notion!!!


No you're right.


I take that back, what I should have said is he's a knob & a tosspot.



My apology.



NETTE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MrCheeky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> wat a dick head you are with your personal attack

> . just goes to show shallow minded arseholes like

> you should sometimes keep there mouths shut


I love irony...well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • More interested in the future than the past. 
    • The plans The developer Berkeley Homes have submitted a planning application to redevelop the Aylesham Centre close to the junction of Peckham High Street and Rye Lane, containing Morrison’s supermarket, car park, & petrol station, Aylesham shopping arcade and most of that side of Rye Lane between Hanover Park and Peckham High Street. The application is for a mixed housing, retail, leisure and commercial development, in buildings ranging from 5 to 20 storeys. Impact Local people who have studied the detailed plans think that the development would dominate the historic town centre which has evolved since the 18th century, and would ruin the Conservation Area which was awarded in 2011 'to preserve and enhance its character and appearance'. More than 65% of the homes to be built in this unimaginative over-bearing development will be unaffordable by most people who live in Southwark, and provide inadequate open and green space for this part of Peckham. Need for discussion This is such an important issue for south London that it needs wide discussion before the Council Planning Committee takes its decision (not before next Spring). A free on-line talk and discussion to clarify the heritage issues we all need to think about is being held on Monday 11th November 7-8.30pm. All will be welcome. Please register on this link: https://Defend-Peckhams-Heritage-2024.eventbrite.co.uk There are several other key issues raised by the plans which are being examined in the Aylesham Community Action (ACA) campaign. You can find the link to all that and other useful information here: www.linktr.ee/acapeckham The zoom session is being arranged by Peckham Heritage the local group that has grown from the community work alongside the restoration of nine historic buildings in Peckham High Street through the Townscape Heritage Initiative. We hope that EDF members who value local heritage will be able to attend the session to hear and take part in the discussion, and report back to this topic so the discussion can continue.
    • I did see a few Victoria bound 185's on East Dulwich road around 5pm this evening. Coming from the Rye end and heading toward Goose green
    • I cant quite pinpoint where she is exactly. But currently notice I am not hearing her this evening!! She has a microphone? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...