A new national day has been announced by the PM... 'Stephen Lawrence day'!

First topic message reminder :




https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/697970/stephen-lawrence-day-april-22-theresa-may-racist-murder-25-years-Doreen-Eltham





https://www.channel4.com/news/lawrence-murder-trial-the-forensic-evidence





http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/the-rod-liddle-article-which-threatened-stephen-lawrence-trial-as-it-had-barely-begun-51305/

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Didge...

'... counted as "white" in some statistics of the US government...'


Is irrelevant to the figures I put up... where the different racial/ethnic groups are clearly defined!!!


So stop twisting...

Tommy, you proved you are a racist idiot

As again many Hispanics are classed as white, around 90%

Again your views are just more examples of the racist steotypes that you hold of black people

Now I asked you to back up your racist claim, where you claimed this invented view you had of black people was widespread. Instead of providing evidence off views of black people . You were even more idiotic and racisat and provided me with a number of black people in prison. Without a clue how any single one was in prison, or the views they have. Let alone the millions of black Americans who are not in prison, with the views they have. You just stupidly associated crime commited by blacks in America, to be associated with some warped sterotype you have on black people

You are nothing more than an idiot and the worst racist one at that

Now, for the last time

Post up evidence to back your claim

If you cannot, it simple further proves what a racist idiot you are.

"Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions." - George W. Bush (who I don't want to like)

Didge...

'... counted as "white" in some statistics of the US government...'


Is irrelevant to the figures I put up... where the different racial/ethnic groups are clearly defined!!!


So stop twisting...

Still no evidence of the attack on SL being racist...

nicko wrote:What about the Soldier hacked to death by two scumbag Muslims ? Why not a "day" for him ?
Did no one see the full length picture of him giving the black power salute?  Only the top half of the photo is shown,   why is that ?

Yes you could start a petition.


The whole country grieved for that soldier. It was a brutal murder which distressed us all.
But one small comfort for his mum was that the evil killers were immediately jailed. 
The killers happily handed themselves in.

Lawrence's killers ran off like cowards and evaded justice for years. Which compounded the distress of his bereaved family. They paid for a private prosecution which failed..... money down the drain!

Tommy Monk wrote:From a 2009 article...

'...But the Lawrence murder took on a wide social significance because of its racial overtones. .....

But there was a LOT more to it than that.
This was a  landmark case in many respects. And a lightning rod too.


A lengthy & expensive enquiry by Mcpherson unearthed corrupt, illegal, sharp practices in the local police force.
New safeguards and new legislations were introduced.

 
Another grave injustice here was that the police looked for dirt on this family, to smear them with, desperate to deflect from their own many failings. They spied on the family in a very invasive and illegal manner for months. Found nothing.


Remember all the wealthy celebs who were spied on by News of the World (and paid millions in compensation afterwards?) Well that is what the police did, they committed a serious crime on a family already bereaved. Then they offered trite apologies.


There were many strands to this case, let's not even pretend any aspect of it was straightforward.

Jules wrote:

nicko wrote:What about the Soldier hacked to death by two scumbag Muslims ? Why not a "day" for him ?
Did no one see the full length picture of him giving the black power salute?  Only the top half of the photo is shown,   why is that ?

Yes you could start a petition.


The whole country grieved for that soldier. It was a brutal murder which distressed us all.
But one small comfort for his mum was that the evil killers were immediately jailed. 
The killers happily handed themselves in.

Lawrence's killers ran off like cowards and evaded justice for years. Which compounded the distress of his bereaved family. They paid for a private prosecution which failed..... money down the drain!

The islamist terrorist scum didn't 'happily hand themselves in' at all...!!!


They tried running towards police, to attack the police with their machetes... and were both shot!!!


Their involvement and guilt is completely undeniable... as is the religiously motivated aspect of it... as it is also undeniable as being another barbaric islamist terrorist atrocity...


However... the SL attack is totally different... no real clear evidence on who the attackers were, no evidence on motive, no evidence that it was 'racially motivated', no evidence that it was random or not, no evidence that the attacker/s had intent to kill or if it was intent to just inflict injury etc...


None of this is known... no evidence for any of it...!!!


We all know the 'official story' that the media & authorities have been peddling all these years...


But I don't buy it... and the evidence doesn't back it up either...!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Jules wrote:

Yes you could start a petition.


The whole country grieved for that soldier. It was a brutal murder which distressed us all.
But one small comfort for his mum was that the evil killers were immediately jailed. 
The killers happily handed themselves in.

Lawrence's killers ran off like cowards and evaded justice for years. Which compounded the distress of his bereaved family. They paid for a private prosecution which failed..... money down the drain!

The islamist terrorist scum didn't 'happily hand themselves in' at all...!!!


They tried running towards police, to attack the police with their machetes... and were both shot!!!


Their involvement and guilt is completely undeniable... as is the religiously motivated aspect of it... as it is also undeniable as being another barbaric islamist terrorist atrocity...


However... the SL attack is totally different... no real clear evidence on who the attackers were, no evidence on motive, no evidence that it was 'racially motivated', no evidence that it was random or not, no evidence that the attacker/s had intent to kill or if it was intent to just inflict injury etc...


None of this is known... no evidence for any of it...!!!


We all know the 'official story' that the media & authorities have been peddling all these years...


But I don't buy it... and the evidence doesn't back it up either...!

No clear evidence, when two people have been convicted of this crime?

Really and Rags does not think you are racially motivated when you come out with that crap?

The evidence and witnesses do back up the fact a racist gang murdered an innocent person called Stephen Lawrence.

Nobody gives a flying fuck that you do not buy the damning evidence

No evidence on motive?



You then make the dumb claim, they may have only intended to injure?

WTF?

I mean stabbing someone in the chest, where vital organs are, is a way to only intend to injure someone?

You really are the biggest racist ignorant fuckwit I have come to know on forums

As please explain how stabbing someone in the chest, is only intending to wound someone?

Twat

I mean, this shows how paranoid people are

Tommy can see that two extemists Muslims, butcher a British soldier in broad daylight, but does not believe extremist Muslims. Who often commit suicide bombings. Can hijack and fly planes into building, also in broad daylight and caught on camera.

You cannot make it up how dumb and stupid Tommy really is.

Lee Rigby, should have a day, as should others, but that is never a means to deny Stephen Lawrence a day. Those who argue using such reasoning. Have not learnt a damn thing from the case and the inherant institutional racism, that was found within the Police at the time.

It is not reliable evidence when...


1995 Lawrence’s jacket is placed in an unsealed package in the same overbag as the package containing Dobson’s jacket. Another package with Lawrence’s cardigan also becomes unsealed and is put in the same overbag as the package with Norris’ jeans

1996 Exhibits were likely to have been handled without gloves when they were produced in evidence at the private prosecution

Tommy Monk wrote:It is not reliable evidence when...


1995 Lawrence’s jacket is placed in an unsealed package in the same overbag as the package containing Dobson’s jacket. Another package with Lawrence’s cardigan also becomes unsealed and is put in the same overbag as the package with Norris’ jeans

1996 Exhibits were likely to have been handled without gloves when they were produced in evidence at the private prosecution

What utter babble, when  the evidence that convicted them was not a known scientific form of evience at the time of the murder.

It shows you can only try to instigate a level of doubt and only on the Police and yet as seen this was disproven in court. Its why I prove emphatically Tommy, that you are a racist low life, as again, you defend a racist gang. That not only murdered Stephen, but attacked others. Hence why Rags is an idiot defending you.

You see, that is your only hope here Tommy, doubt. The very same thing that saw the killers get away with other criminal violence they were placed on trial with?

Or did you discount that factor Tommy, how this gang was involved with other violent crimes?

So your claim is based on the claim of the defence which was easily dimissed as bollocks

And Rags thinks you are not racist

Like I say, why is it that this claim you make was not believed?

Cross contamination may have happened here...


1995 Lawrence’s jacket is placed in an unsealed package in the same overbag as the package containing Dobson’s jacket. Another package with Lawrence’s cardigan also becomes unsealed and is put in the same overbag as the package with Norris’ jeans

1996 Exhibits were likely to have been handled without gloves when they were produced in evidence at the private prosecution



Only to be 'found' much later...


Are you seriously trying to argue that cross contamination couldn't possibly happen before any invention of a method of detecting it...!!!???


Or... WTF does this even mean...

'What utter babble, when the evidence that convicted them was not a known scientific form of evience at the time.'


!!!???

What people most misss about this crime, is how and why this hate happened in the first place.

It started with the parents and how racist they were.

Racism is and only is taught and how the parents of the murderers defended them proves how badly some people are racists.

Didge said...

'...The evidence and witnesses do back up the fact a racist gang murdered an innocent person called Stephen Lawrence...'


REALLY...!!!???


WHAT EVIDENCE...!!!???

Tommy Monk wrote:Cross contamination may have happened here...


1995 Lawrence’s jacket is placed in an unsealed package in the same overbag as the package containing Dobson’s jacket. Another package with Lawrence’s cardigan also becomes unsealed and is put in the same overbag as the package with Norris’ jeans

1996 Exhibits were likely to have been handled without gloves when they were produced in evidence at the private prosecution



Only to be 'found' much later...


Are you seriously trying to argue that cross contamination couldn't possibly happen before any invention of a method of detecting it...!!!???


Or... WTF does this even mean...

'What utter babble, when the evidence that convicted them was not a known scientific form of evience at the time.'


!!!???

And the above proves how ignorant Tommy is

The evidence was not found later, what was found later. Was the ability to identify certain scietific methods to indetify evidence. So based on this and what the defense claim is simple and unfounded

Tommy is suggesting that the Police planted the evidence

It does not matter whether it was sealed, it had biological evidence that placed the murderers at the scene of the crime. Of which many people as witnesses had done so

Tommy's only argument is that now every evidence presented has to be seen and only seen as contaminated

Even when the forensic evidence proves that is bollocks

Rags claims Tommy is not racisty and yet Tommy argues over something that has no evidence. As his view to do so, is to to find a RACIST gang innocent

I mean look at his claim, over contamination

Does he have any evidence for this claim?

No, but its his only claim to try and make people guilty of a racist murder seem to be innocent

This is why Tommy is emphatically racist scum

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


The islamist terrorist scum didn't 'happily hand themselves in' at all...!!!


They tried running towards police, to attack the police with their machetes... and were both shot!!!


Their involvement and guilt is completely undeniable... as is the religiously motivated aspect of it... as it is also undeniable as being another barbaric islamist terrorist atrocity...


However... the SL attack is totally different... no real clear evidence on who the attackers were, no evidence on motive, no evidence that it was 'racially motivated', no evidence that it was random or not, no evidence that the attacker/s had intent to kill or if it was intent to just inflict injury etc...


None of this is known... no evidence for any of it...!!!


We all know the 'official story' that the media & authorities have been peddling all these years...


But I don't buy it... and the evidence doesn't back it up either...!

No clear evidence, when two people have been convicted of this crime?

Really and Rags does not think you are racially motivated when you come out with that crap?

The evidence and witnesses do back up the fact a racist gang murdered an innocent person called Stephen Lawrence.

Nobody gives a flying fuck that you do not buy the damning evidence

No evidence on motive?



You then make the dumb claim, they may have only intended to injure?

WTF?

I mean stabbing someone in the chest, where vital organs are, is a way to only intend to injure someone?

You really are the biggest racist ignorant fuckwit I have come to know on forums

As please explain how stabbing someone in the chest, is only intending to wound someone?

Twat

There was nothing racist about his post. He's merely asking some questions - nothing to do with Stephen being black.

Tommy Monk wrote:It is not reliable evidence when...


1995 Lawrence’s jacket is placed in an unsealed package in the same overbag as the package containing Dobson’s jacket. Another package with Lawrence’s cardigan also becomes unsealed and is put in the same overbag as the package with Norris’ jeans

1996 Exhibits were likely to have been handled without gloves when they were produced in evidence at the private prosecution

I don't see how blood could have transferred to Dobson's jacket that way Tommy. The stain was from wet blood. I do wonder though why Dobson didn't get rid of the jacket - he had plenty of time to do so.

Tommy Monk wrote:
They tried running towards police, to attack the police with their machetes ... and were both shot!!!

Bollocking bollox!

If they'd really done that, they'd be shot dead on the spot. Not merely wounded.
The police don't merely wound someone who is trying to murder them, they blow his brains out on the spot.
I'm sure the wounding was a safety precaution to disable the terrorists, cos the police knew they were crazy.


Anyway my point is .... the killers did not run away afterwards. They did not flee on foot, or in their car. They stood around waiting, waiting, and chatting  calmly to the brave ordinary people who approached them. Witnesses said they were waiting to hand themselves in.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

No clear evidence, when two people have been convicted of this crime?

Really and Rags does not think you are racially motivated when you come out with that crap?

The evidence and witnesses do back up the fact a racist gang murdered an innocent person called Stephen Lawrence.

Nobody gives a flying fuck that you do not buy the damning evidence

No evidence on motive?



You then make the dumb claim, they may have only intended to injure?

WTF?

I mean stabbing someone in the chest, where vital organs are, is a way to only intend to injure someone?

You really are the biggest racist ignorant fuckwit I have come to know on forums

As please explain how stabbing someone in the chest, is only intending to wound someone?

Twat

There was nothing racist about his post. He's merely asking some questions - nothing to do with Stephen being black.

And the retard continues to defend a racist

wow

Didge, do you think it makes you look clever to call people retards? If you do, you need to take a good look at yourself.

You think Tommy is racist - I get that. What is the point of you saying it over and again? Are you hoping that Tommy will suddenly burst into tears and admit it? Try debating the actual subject instead.

Raggamuffin wrote:Didge, do you think it makes you look clever to call people retards? If you do, you need to take a good look at yourself.

You think Tommy is racist - I get that. What is the point of you saying it over and again? Are you hoping that Tommy will suddenly burst into tears and admit it? Try debating the actual subject instead.

You are a retard, that is very obvious

Tommy is emphatically racist and for the many reasons shown

Its important that people do admit to when they are racist and he does not admit this, so I will continue to say it.

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Didge, do you think it makes you look clever to call people retards? If you do, you need to take a good look at yourself.

You think Tommy is racist - I get that. What is the point of you saying it over and again? Are you hoping that Tommy will suddenly burst into tears and admit it? Try debating the actual subject instead.

You are a retard, that is very obvious

Tommy is emphatically racist and for the many reasons shown

Its important that people do admit to when they are racist and he does not admit this, so I will continue to say it.

Define "retard". Why do you keep on and on saying that Tommy is racist? I read it the first time. If you spam the forum trying to bludgeon Tommy is admitting he's racist, you'll wreck it yet again.

Tommy Monk wrote:Cross contamination may have happened here...


1995 Lawrence’s jacket is placed in an unsealed package in the same overbag as the package containing Dobson’s jacket. Another package with Lawrence’s cardigan also becomes unsealed and is put in the same overbag as the package with Norris’ jeans

1996 Exhibits were likely to have been handled without gloves when they were produced in evidence at the private prosecution



Only to be 'found' much later...


Are you seriously trying to argue that cross contamination couldn't possibly happen before any invention of a method of detecting it...!!!???


Or... WTF does this even mean...

'What utter babble, when the evidence that convicted them was not a known scientific form of evience at the time.'

!!!???

You know, if I were policeman or a person who was told to fuck up a case, it wouldn’t be hard for me to fuck up a case by fucking around with evidence.

Just sayin.

This really is not right calling someone names such as 'retard' 'racist'? Yet again a poster is getting above themselves and judging the poster not the post. Very poor behaviour.

eddie wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Cross contamination may have happened here...


1995 Lawrence’s jacket is placed in an unsealed package in the same overbag as the package containing Dobson’s jacket. Another package with Lawrence’s cardigan also becomes unsealed and is put in the same overbag as the package with Norris’ jeans

1996 Exhibits were likely to have been handled without gloves when they were produced in evidence at the private prosecution



Only to be 'found' much later...


Are you seriously trying to argue that cross contamination couldn't possibly happen before any invention of a method of detecting it...!!!???


Or... WTF does this even mean...

'What utter babble, when the evidence that convicted them was not a known scientific form of evience at the time.'

!!!???

You know, if I were  policeman or a person who was told to fuck up a case, it wouldn’t be hard for me to fuck up a case by fucking around with evidence.

Just sayin.  

What do you mean eddie? Do you think the evidence was tampered with?

Vintage wrote:This really is not right calling someone names such as 'retard' 'racist'? Yet again a poster is getting above themselves and judging the poster not the post. Very poor behaviour.

I think he's gone to the basement again Vintage.

About time, that kind of attitude spoils the threads and is boring.

Jules wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:
They tried running towards police, to attack the police with their machetes ... and were both shot!!!

Bollocking bollox!

If they'd really done that, they'd be shot dead on the spot. Not merely wounded.
The police don't merely wound someone who is trying to murder them, they blow his brains out on the spot.
I'm sure the wounding was a safety precaution to disable the terrorists, cos the police knew they were crazy.


Anyway my point is .... the killers did not run away afterwards. They did not flee on foot, or in their car. They stood around waiting, waiting, and chatting  calmly to the brave ordinary people who approached them. Witnesses said they were waiting to hand themselves in.

They ran at police with machetes and were shot...


Undeniable evidence it was them... not a lot of any evidence in SL case...

Vintage wrote:This really is not right calling someone names such as 'retard' 'racist'? Yet again a poster is getting above themselves and judging the poster not the post. Very poor behaviour.

He does that all the time.  So much so, it goes unnoticed most of the time.

Use of such words is valid if making a point--as if their words had racist implications--but he ends every post with an invective against his interlocutor. You just have to get used to it.

' ommy Monk

Jules wrote:

Bollocking bollox!

If they'd really done that, they'd be shot dead on the spot. Not merely wounded.
The police don't merely wound someone who is trying to murder them, they blow his brains out on the spot.
I'm sure the wounding was a safety precaution to disable the terrorists, cos the police knew they were crazy.


Anyway my point is .... the killers did not run away afterwards. They did not flee on foot, or in their car. They stood around waiting, waiting, and chatting  calmly to the brave ordinary people who approached them. Witnesses said they were waiting to hand themselves in.

They ran at police with machetes and were shot...


Undeniable evidence it was them... not a lot of any evidence in SL case... 

My point was that it must have given a small crumb of comfort to know that the killers had been locked up. This was not the case in with the parents of SL. His killers were on the loose  for months/years and this must have added profoundly  to the distress of bereavement.


Like I said people who run at the police with lethal weapons are killed not wounded.  I remember  the obsessive phase you went through few months back, where you saw photoshopped pics every where. Yet you were quite happy to present a very poor quality fake vid as ''evidence'' that Hillary Clinton was an epileptic. 

You just cherrypick whatever evidence suits your narrative at the time.

Tommy Monk wrote:
They ran at police with machetes and were shot...


Undeniable evidence it was them... not a lot of any evidence in SL case...

My main point was that it must have given a small crumb of comfort to know that the killers had been locked up. This was not the case in with the parents of SL. His killers were on the loose  for months/years and this must have added profoundly  to the distress of bereavement.


Like I said people who run at the police with lethal weapons are killed not wounded.  I remember  the obsessive phase you went through few months back, where you saw photoshopped pics every where. Yet you were quite happy to present a very poor quality fake vid as ''evidence'' that Hillary Clinton was an epileptic.

You just cherrypick whatever evidence suits your narrative at the time.

Original Quill wrote:

Vintage wrote:This really is not right calling someone names such as 'retard' 'racist'? Yet again a poster is getting above themselves and judging the poster not the post. Very poor behaviour.

He does that all the time.  So much so, it goes unnoticed most of the time.

Use of such words is valid if making a point--as if their words had racist implications--but he ends every post with an invective against his interlocutor.  You just have to get used to it.

Yes, I find it hard to ignore on here as I and others did on other forums we've both been on over the years.

For Jules...


http://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10492980/Lee-Rigby-trial-court-shown-moments-after-alleged-murderers-were-shot-by-police.html&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiqv5-69_PaAhUSVsAKHaCMCekQFgghMAc&usg=AOvVaw33u01_djLDslbUIUT-MMo0

Vintage wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

He does that all the time.  So much so, it goes unnoticed most of the time.

Use of such words is valid if making a point--as if their words had racist implications--but he ends every post with an invective against his interlocutor.  You just have to get used to it.

Yes, I find it hard to ignore on here as I and others did on other forums we've both been on over the years.

Ahhh its Miss Double Standards

Still waitiing for you to speak to Rags, about her making views again I did not work

She did this again yesterday

Full of shit are we Vintage?

Looking only to shit stir with me

Jog on you wally