Dobson and Norris found guilty - 'bout time

[KidKruger]

Interesting comment donohue, in what way do you seriously believe the trial was UNfair ?

[donohoe]

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.

[RosieH]

But donohoe, they've been found not guilty before - were those trials unfair too?

[donohoe]

no i never said that. they stood trial and got found not guilty so why should they be taken back to court now after all this time? in the past you only had one trial and that was it-no matter what the verdict.

[RosieH]

New evidence. Evidence compelling enough that it was enough to overturn the double jeopardy law.

But I figure you know that already.

[KidKruger]

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.

[donohoe]

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

[KidKruger]

From your dedcription it sounds like the same law, this is why the remaining 3-4 Lawrence killers are still at large, no one willing (brave enough) to give evidence.

[DJKillaQueen]

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.

[Huguenot]

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?

[DJKillaQueen]

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.

[MrCheeky]

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

[Annette Curtain]

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.

[Otta]

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.

[Otta]

Oh, and you never did answer WHY you "believe" these two to be innocent.

Come on, convince us!

[ratty]

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

[El Pibe]

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 that he is one!!!

[Annette Curtain]

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

[Otta]

Hmm, perhaps you're right.

Either way, I still want to know (am genuinely interested) why MrCheeky "believes" them to be innocent.

[Santerme]

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.

[KidKruger]

I hear Dobson and Norris ARE planning to appeal their convictions.

Dissapointing. But positive news for a couple of the above posters perhaps.