BREAKING: Stephen Lawrence murder suspect Jamie Acourt captured in Barcelona

Armed officers apprehended the 41-year-old in Barcelona this afternoon.

He became one of Britain's most wanted fugitives after spending two years on the run in Spain.

An NCA statement said he was detained after he left the Metropolitan Sagrada Familia Gym.

Mr Acourt, from south London, was wanted by the Met Police in connection with the large-scale supply of drugs.

He was also suspected of being part of the group of thugs who attacked Stephen Lawrence in April 1993.

Mr Acourt will appear in court in Madrid early next week for an extradition hearing, the NCA said.

“Acourt thought he could evade capture but as a result of an intelligence-led operation his days on the run have ended. We were able to direct the Spanish authorities to his location in Barcelona.

“Our ability to share information and work at speed with our international partners ensures there is no safe haven for fugitives. We will never stop pursuing these individuals.”
Ian Cruxton, Head of International Operations for the NCA


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/955449/jamie-acourt-uk-most-wanted-fugitive-arrested-national-crime-agency-barcelona-spain

eddie wrote:

Armed officers apprehended the 41-year-old in Barcelona this afternoon.

He became one of Britain's most wanted fugitives after spending two years on the run in Spain.

An NCA statement said he was detained after he left the Metropolitan Sagrada Familia Gym.

Mr Acourt, from south London, was wanted by the Met Police in connection with the large-scale supply of drugs.

He was also suspected of being part of the group of thugs who attacked Stephen Lawrence in April 1993.

Mr Acourt will appear in court in Madrid early next week for an extradition hearing, the NCA said.

“Acourt thought he could evade capture but as a result of an intelligence-led operation his days on the run have ended. We were able to direct the Spanish authorities to his location in Barcelona.

“Our ability to share information and work at speed with our international partners ensures there is no safe haven for fugitives. We will never stop pursuing these individuals.”
Ian Cruxton, Head of International Operations for the NCA


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/955449/jamie-acourt-uk-most-wanted-fugitive-arrested-national-crime-agency-barcelona-spain

Great news Eddie. Slowly but surely some more justice for Stephen.

Absolutely Didge.

eddie wrote:Absolutely Didge.

I am just waiting for Tommy to try and justify his murder as per usual and claim, he was a wrongun, based on him being black.

Seriousluy wait for it, Tommy actually has tried to defend this murder, based off his hearsay views. Where we know this kid was innocent and yet, it takes someone racist, to make an argument and claim a view, that its acceptable to murder innocent people. If that racist believes, someone black is a wrongun, in Tommy's racist world view.

That is why Tommy is emphatically racist

He will never see Stephen as a victim, of which he was. Tommy sees him as someone that deserved being killed

Hence his continual bollocks, as seen recently to try to and defend those guilty

Its Tommy's biggest failing and always proves why he is racist.

The kid was innocent and yet people argue disgustingly, I must say, that some how known racist idiots, to them are innocent and even worse are to them heroes.

In this instance, you do see how bad racism is. The worst lies and bullshit was spread about Stephen lawrence and why? Only to defend those racist that murdered him.

Is this thread about Jamie Acourt or Tommy?

Raggamuffin wrote:Is this thread about Jamie Acourt or Tommy?

I just made it about both

Tommy has claimed that the victim was a wrongun, based on no evidence

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Is this thread about Jamie Acourt or Tommy?

I just made it about both

Tommy has claimed that the victim was a wrongun, based on no evidence

It's against the rules to start threads about other members, so you should stick to the point.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


I just made it about both

Tommy has claimed that the victim was a wrongun, based on no evidence

It's against the rules to start threads about other members, so you should stick to the point.

Did I start the thread about other members?

Opps

It's not necessarily justice for Stephen anyway. Acourt is wanted in connection with another crime, and there's no suggestion that there's any evidence against him for the murder of Stephen.

It's hard to imagine him being 41 now. How old was he at the time of the murder? 16?

Raggamuffin wrote:It's not necessarily justice for Stephen anyway. Acourt is wanted in connection with another crime, and there's no suggestion that there's any evidence against him for the murder of Stephen.

It's hard to imagine him being 41 now. How old was he at the time of the murder? 16?

Come again, what does that matter that he was 16 at the time?

No evidence to suggest he was involved?

You sure?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:It's not necessarily justice for Stephen anyway. Acourt is wanted in connection with another crime, and there's no suggestion that there's any evidence against him for the murder of Stephen.

It's hard to imagine him being 41 now. How old was he at the time of the murder? 16?

Come again, what does that matter that he was 16 at the time?

No evidence to suggest he was involved?

You sure?

What evidence is there then?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Come again, what does that matter that he was 16 at the time?

No evidence to suggest he was involved?

You sure?

What evidence is there then?

You said no evidence

How is he connected?

Take your time

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

What evidence is there then?

You said no evidence

How is he connected?

Take your time

There is no evidence.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


You said no evidence

How is he connected?

Take your time

There is no evidence.

Wrong.There was a lack of evidence, not that there was no evidence

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

There is no evidence.

Wrong.There was a lack of evidence, not that there was no evidence

What is the evidence then? That's what I asked you before and you chickened out of answering the question.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Wrong.There was a lack of evidence, not that there was no evidence

What is the evidence then? That's what I asked you before and you chickened out of answering the question.

You said no evidence

How was he connected?

Take your time

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

What is the evidence then? That's what I asked you before and you chickened out of answering the question.

You said no evidence

How was he connected?

Take your time

What is the evidence that he was connected? Take your time.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


You said no evidence

How was he connected?

Take your time

What is the evidence that he was connected? Take your time.

The evidence is in the link

You claimed, no evidence

Take your time hun

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

What is the evidence that he was connected? Take your time.

The evidence is in the link

You claimed, no evidence

Take your time hun

There's no evidence in the link.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


The evidence is in the link

You claimed, no evidence

Take your time hun

There's no evidence in the link.

Really?

Why is he connected to the case then?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

There's no evidence in the link.

Really?

Why is he connected to the case then?

You tell me.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Really?

Why is he connected to the case then?

You tell me.

You need me to tell you?

You said there was no evidence?

Why was he suspected Rags?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You tell me.

You need me to tell you?

You said there was no evidence?

Why was he suspected Rags?

Because he was mates with others who were suspects.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


You need me to tell you?

You said there was no evidence?

Why was he suspected Rags?

Because he was mates with others who were suspects.

Is that evidence, or no evidence?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Because he was mates with others who were suspects.

Is that evidence, or no evidence?

It's not evidence is it?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Is that evidence, or no evidence?

It's not evidence is it?

You are saying that Himmler had no connection to the Holocaust?

Was he there?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's not evidence is it?

You are saying that Himmler had no connection to the Holocaust?

Was he there?

Who says that Jamie Acourt was there the night Stephen was murdered?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


You are saying that Himmler had no connection to the Holocaust?

Was he there?

Who says that Jamie Acourt was there the night Stephen was murdered?

Did i say there was?

Or did I say he was connected?

You claimed there was no evidence

There was

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Who says that Jamie Acourt was there the night Stephen was murdered?

Did i say there was?

Or did I say he was connected?

You claimed there was no evidence

There was

What evidence was that then?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Did i say there was?

Or did I say he was connected?

You claimed there was no evidence

There was

What evidence was that then?

Errrr, he was connnected to racist people involed in the case?

is that no evidence or some evidence rags?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

What evidence was that then?

Errrr, he was connnected to racist people involed in the case?

is that no evidence or some evidence rags?

It's not evidence.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Errrr, he was connnected to racist people involed in the case?

is that no evidence or some evidence rags?

It's not evidence.

So we are back to the point on Himmler

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's not evidence.

So we are back to the point on Himmler

"Guilt by association" is not evidence of guilt.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

So we are back to the point on Himmler

"Guilt by association" is not evidence of guilt.

So you are claiming Himmler was innocent?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

"Guilt by association" is not evidence of guilt.

So you are claiming Himmler was innocent?

I didn't mention Himmler, you did. I'm talking about Jamie Acourt.

Also... only one of the witnesses said that there was some racist language used by the attackers... which is the whole basis of the attack being considered as 'racially motivated'... but all the other witnesses said that there was no such language used by the attackers... and the only one who did say so, Duwayne Brooks, had his story thrown out of court by the judge for being unreliable...!!!


So... where is the evidence that the attack was 'racist' or random...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:
Also... only one of the witnesses said that there was some racist language used by the attackers... which is the whole basis of the attack being considered as 'racially motivated'... but all the other witnesses said that there was no such language used by the attackers... and the only one who did say so, Duwayne Brooks, had his story thrown out of court by the judge for being unreliable...!!!


So... where is the evidence that the attack was 'racist' or random...!?

I wonder why Dobson and Norris didn't grass the others up if they were involved.

Dobson & Norris were convicted on highly dubious DNA evidence... which was 'found' on clothing after it had been exposed to high risk of cross contamination from being handled and stored together with the blood stained clothes worn by SL...


Clothes were even stored in unsealed bags and then all put together into another big bag...

Tommy Monk wrote:Dobson & Norris were convicted on highly dubious DNA evidence... which was 'found' on clothing after it had been exposed to high risk of cross contamination from being handled and stored together with the blood stained clothes worn by SL...


Clothes were even stored in unsealed bags and then all put together into another big bag...

Dubious, really?

You sound like other BNP racists Tommy

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6085615/stephen-lawrence-murder-bnp-activists-defend-killers-eltham/

The National Crime Agency is considering starting a new criminal inquiry into the Stephen Lawrence case, potentially placing four former detectives under criminal investigation for the offence of misconduct in public office.

It is understood that the inquiry would focus on why officers in charge of the first Metropolitan police investigation into Lawrence’s murder 25 years ago did not make arrests for two weeks, despite police repeatedly being given the names of suspects.

Lawrence, 18, was stabbed to death by a racist gang of at least five white youths on 22 April 1993. It took 19 years for two of the gang to be convicted of his murder.

Those who may face the new inquiry, 25 years after the Met’s much-criticised decisions in the first fortnight after the murder, are the senior management team in the first Lawrence murder investigation. They have retired from policing and have always denied any wrongdoing.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/15/nca-considering-new-criminal-inquiry-into-stephen-lawrence-case

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

It's nearly always SPAIN that these reprobates flee to, rather than Portugal, France, Germany etc.
Spain seems to have a special reputation for this. Boltholes where fugitives and desperados hide.