Stephen lawrence cover up?

[Von Smallhausen]

They have to be sentenced as juveniles. That's what the law caters for as it stands.

According to the BBC, David Norris received a broken nose and ribs while on remand.

 

[Castiel]

Rumour has it that Police think Dobson is the weak link and that he may be persuaded to give evidence on the other 3 suspects in return for consideration of his sentence.....

 

[DanielMMS]

Finally! They now face 15-20 years in prison. If they had been done 18 years ago they would have been out now, so sucks to be them!

More like 12 years. Since they were under 18 at the time of the crime they will be sentenced as juveniles.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

Rumour has it that Police think Dobson is the weak link and that he may be persuaded to give evidence on the other 3 suspects in return for consideration of his sentence.....

They already have leaned on him according to press reports but he wasn't willing to assist.

 

[dannyjo22]

Rumour has it that Police think Dobson is the weak link and that he may be persuaded to give evidence on the other 3 suspects in return for consideration of his sentence.....

What rumour, why didn't you just say the sun newspaper report

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...der-Dad-Neville-in-plea-for-full-justice.html

 

[Castiel]

What rumour, why didn't you just say the sun newspaper report

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...der-Dad-Neville-in-plea-for-full-justice.html

Well I don't read the Sun, I heard it from a friend who happens to be an Officer, although unrelated to the case.

 

[MrMoonX]

So the worst possible sentence they can get is 12 years?

What a joke.

no they are getting a LIFE sentence with a 12 year tariff before parole, it doesn't mean they automatically get out

also they will always be on licence FOREVER thats a pretty big thing to have the prospect of being recalled to prison and have contact with probation for the rest of your life!

** No need for that, just calm down a bit please **

 

[4T5]

They got HMP which means One of them has to serve a Minimal of just over 15 year tuther has to serve just over 14 years.

 

[Castiel]

They got HMP which means One of them has to serve a Minimal of just over 15 year tuther has to serve just over 14 years.

They could effectively be incarcerated for the rest of their lives...I think people need to realise this, the minimum terms were increased by the judge due to aggravating factors, but they would have to meet the criteria set by a Parole Board before they would be considered for release after these minimum terms have elapsed.

I think it is safe to be of the opinion that unless they show some significant remorse and acceptance of guilt or evidence arises that either exonerates or mitigates them, then they will not see this side of Prison Wall for the rest of their lives.

 

[platypus]

as much as I have little doubt they are guilty and deserve very long sentences I am not sure I could have given a guilty verdict "beyond reasonable doubt" from the evidence I have seen reported

I can't imagine it will hold up as a safe conviction on appeal, either.

The forensic evidence is not 100% reliable, so potentially the conviction is not beyond reasonable doubt. I imagine, if they appeal, they could well have it turned.

 

[4T5]

They could effectively be incarcerated for the rest of their lives...

You don't have to tell me mate as getting HMP was the one & only thing ***** like me feared.
It's the closest we have for literally throwing away the key.

 

[Castiel]

You don't have to tell me mate as getting HMP was the one & only thing ***** like me feared.
It's the closest we have for literally throwing away the key.

Indeed.

 

[TJM]

Rumour has it that Police think Dobson is the weak link and that he may be persuaded to give evidence on the other 3 suspects in return for consideration of his sentence.....

There would have to be a lot more evidence than just Dobson's say-so. He would say they did it, they would deny it and the defence would tell the jury that Dobson had only said it to get out of prison early (which would be true).

This case is so tainted that they shouldn't go after the other three with anything other than forensics (as they did for these two - all of the witness ID evidence was ignored).

I can't imagine it will hold up as a safe conviction on appeal, either.

Why not? The Court of Appeal said the forensics were admissible when it quashed Dobson's earlier acquittal.

The forensic evidence is not 100% reliable, so potentially the conviction is not beyond reasonable doubt. I imagine, if they appeal, they could well have it turned.

Beyond reasonable doubt does not mean 100% certainty of guilt; that would be beyond all doubt, which would be an unobtainable standard of proof in 99% of criminal trials.

 

[Dunks]

You don't have to tell me mate as getting HMP was the one & only thing ***** like me feared.
It's the closest we have for literally throwing away the key.

You don't seem to be the type of guy who would do anything that would warrant that though

 

[4T5]

You don't seem to be the type of guy who would do anything that would warrant that though

/Transformation Complete

 

[Von Smallhausen]

He's an angel is our 4T5.

 

[Dunks]

But that malc30 dude, I wouldn't put it past him!

 

[Meridian]

The forensic evidence is not 100% reliable

As I've already said, it never is. Forensic evidence is based on probabilities, sometimes literally ("Three billion to one"), but more usually just basic: "Very likely that..." etc. The nearest thing to 100% is a physical fit (that bit in spy films where they fit two halves of a banknote together) but these are rare in casework. But when you have several things, all of which are likely to suggest that the odds are that it's the defendant wot done it, then good old Bayes says that certainty approaches. Approaches, but never arrives. Of course not all FS providers use Bayes, but the effect is the same however they state it.


M

 

[dowie]

I'm glad that at least two of these scumbags have been sentenced. Silly thing is that only one of that group of five was probably responsible for the actual stabbing so at least one of those two is probably serving a longer sentence as a result of not talking perhaps out of some mis-placed loyalty or underclass tendency to not 'grass'.

Can only hope that forensic evidence is found implicating the other three or someone starts talking.

 

[jmc007]

I, after watching the programme last night about Stephen Lawrence, would like to retract virtually everything I said earlier in this thread.
Sorry and R.I.P. Stephen.