US Teen guilty of British Tourists' murder

Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
59,180
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-17540508

Looks like a fairly clear cut case and the murderer has been caught/found guilty due to the fact that he was so incredibly stupid...

putting aside the stupidity of murdering two random people for no apparent reason he did so very close to home and was spotted running back into to his home immediately after, then proceeded to brag about what he'd done to several of his friends (who've later testified against him).

Interestingly enough though, given the other high profile Florida shooting in the news, the hate crime aspect hasn't even been mentioned in this case.

An overzealous/trigger happy neighborhood watch member who may/may not have muttered 'coons' on a call to emergency services, then proceeded to confront someone who he deemed suspicious (simply because he was black and wearing a hoodie) and some how ended up shooting him in the confrontation that followed has, quite rightly, generated a fair bit of outrage re: racial profiling and claims that it constituted a hate crime. Not to mention the rather inept local police not pressing charges.

In the above case with these British tourists, (not mentioned on the BBC article) the criminal actually phoned a friend to say that he'd spotted two 'crackers' walking through the housing project and that he was going to rob them. and then proceeded to quite clearly murder them and brag about it.

Given how much fuss is caused by just the possibility of a racial slur having been made in a case where the victim was black (the whole news story isn't so much about the blatantly excessive use of force by the neighborhood watch guy but has turned into one of race) its quite a contrast to see a case where the murderer clearly racially profiled/selected the victims because they were white and used the term 'crackers' to describe them yet the racial/hate crime aspect is never touched upon.

IMO dealing with a problem such as racism isn't helped if some aspects of it are over hyped and others are just completely ignored.
 
I read about this when it first happened. Those 2 guys should have really known better. Probably thought they'd have a laugh going to an authentic American ghetto like on one of those retarded Bravo tv shows. Maybe post pictures on facebook of how ironic and clever they are.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
 
They were drunk and lost and stated that they were lost before they were shot... to try an infer that they deserved it or had it coming is pretty facetious.

is a black guy wearing a hoodie in a gated development with armed security/neighborhood watch any more or less out of place than two white guys walking through a mostly black public housing project?

In both cases the victims were perceived to be out of place, their race most likely played a part in this and is the reason why the shooter first approached them. In the case with the tourists it was to rob them, in the case in the gated development it was because he thought the victim was there to rob his neighbours.
 
The difference is that one was shot be someone who was acting in an official case and the other was performed by a criminal nobody.

You expect that sort of racist behaviour from a criminal on a housing estate but not somebody legally armed with a gun and trying to act in an official manner.

It shouldn't make a difference but it's how officials are perceived.
 
I read about this when it first happened. Those 2 guys should have really known better. Probably thought they'd have a laugh going to an authentic American ghetto like on one of those retarded Bravo tv shows. Maybe post pictures on facebook of how ironic and clever they are.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Your compassion is an example to us all.

Posts like are the reason forum anonimity should be a privilege not a right.
 
Interestingly enough though, given the other high profile Florida shooting in the news, the hate crime aspect hasn't even been mentioned in this case.

An overzealous/trigger happy neighborhood watch member who may/may not have muttered 'coons' on a call to emergency services, then proceeded to confront someone who he deemed suspicious (simply because he was black and wearing a hoodie) and some how ended up shooting him in the confrontation that followed has, quite rightly, generated a fair bit of outrage re: racial profiling and claims that it constituted a hate crime. Not to mention the rather inept local police not pressing charges.

I don't understand the outrage associated with this case, is there any evidence that the neighbourhood watchman didn't ask in self defence? Why should he have been arrested if no such evidence existed? Didn't he have cuts and bruises to his face and head when the police arrived as well?
 
Crackers was a term used by the slaves towards the whites who used to "crack the whip"

Not all slave owners were white. Generalising like that is what made it a racist term.

There were hundereds if not thousands of "freemen of colour" that "cracked whips".

It's why I posted my answer as vague as possbile. I'm sure if stock was that interested he would find out himself where it came from and realise that.

Bias is fun.
 
Not all slave owners were white. Generalising like that is what made it a racist term.

There were hundereds if not thousands of "freemen of colour" that "cracked whips".

It's why I posted my answer as vague as possbile. I'm sure if stock was that interested he would find out himself where it came from and realise that.

Bias is fun.

Cracker. Originally the white slave driver because he would "crack" the whip, hence the noun cracker.

Blacks would only use the term cracker against white slave drivers and not the freemen of colour.
 
Cracker. Originally the white slave driver because he would "crack" the whip, hence the noun cracker.

Blacks would only use the term cracker against white slave drivers and not the freemen of colour.

Oh, so free men of colour that owned slaves didn't use whips. I see.

If I really wanted to be pedantic, I could just suggest it's nothing to do with race and it was a name given to poor famers that grow corn. IE. Corn Crackers, or even the fact that cowboys were called crackers.

There are lots of theories really, but in this context it's generalising by future generations of abolished slavery not the actual slaves. To them anyone with a whip could have been called "cracker".

I repeat, (before you paste some website saying that only whites were called cracker) Bias is fun.
 
Last edited:
Interesting as listening to the summing up yesterday they quality of the witnesses giving evidence where shockingly poor with no hard evidence against the teen other than statements from witnesses with a poor track record themselves.

A group of us went to Georgia with work and a couple of guys stayed in town drinking. They decided as you would do here to walk back to the hotel, nice evening etc.

Halfway back they decided to call a taxi from a pay phone and when the operator heard their accents and told them where they where, he told them not to move sent a taxi and kept talking to them on the phone. They had stupidly wandered into an area two white boys wouldn't survive long at night :D

Bit of a stupid thing to do as Georgia is still one of the most racist places outside of Luton I've visited :D
 
Phone call from prison saying 'they found the bullets'.......'that's the only thing that's gonna %$%^ me up.'

DNA and prints from the two victims trousers so at least puts him at the scene

Allegedly carried a gun

Though I do find it strange they have tried him as an adult and but claim they won't consider the death penalty because he isn't an adult :confused:
 
"crackers" in this case meant druggies or nutcases, how on earth you put a wiki meaning for this is beyond me.

As for stereotyping, a black kid with a hoodie walking in a white gated community is going to attract attention in the same way two drunk whites in a black ghetto.
 
Back
Top Bottom