Yousef Makki's father shouts for justice in court, as teens are cleared over his son's killing

The father of a grammar school pupil stabbed in March shouted “where is the justice for my son” and collapsed in court, as two teenagers on trial were cleared of his son’s murder.

A 17-year-old boy has been found not guilty of the murder of grammar school pupil Yousef Makki, 17, who was stabbed in the heart with a flick-knife in Cheshire.

He was also cleared of an alternative charge of manslaughter.

As the jury’s verdicts were delivered, Yousef’s father, Ghaleb, stood in Manchester Crown Court’s public gallery and swore at the defendants, as other family members wept.

Grammar school student Yousef was stabbed in the heart with a flick knife on a tree-lined street in leafy Hale Barns, an upmarket village, in March.

The bright A* student was found slumped against a tree on Gorse Bank Road in the suburb near Altrincham.

The jury heard that the death was an "accident waiting to happen" after two the 17-year-old boys on trial indulged in "idiotic fantasies".

The young victim had won a scholarship to prestigious £12,000-a-year Manchester Grammar School, the UK’s largest independent day school for boys.

The defendant, Boy A, and another boy, 17, Boy B, both from wealthy Cheshire families, were cleared of all charges following a four-week trial at Manchester Crown Court.

Despite the privileged backgrounds of the defendants, they spoke and acted like "middle-class gangsters", the court heard.

Neither of the two defendants can be named because they are under 18.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/07/12/boy-cleared-murdering-manchester-grammar-school-pupil/

Telegraph wrote:The defendant, Boy A, and another boy, 17, Boy B, both from wealthy Cheshire families, were cleared of all charges following a four-week trial at Manchester Crown Court.

Despite the privileged backgrounds of the defendants, they spoke and acted like "middle-class gangsters", the court heard.

Wealth and privilege can do wonders with justice. Jeff Epstein? OJ Simpson? Dick Cheney?

Those little bastards' fathers probably belong to the same Masonic lodges and church as the judge and half those jurors ???

It appears that all three boys went around pretending to be gangsters or something, got involved with drugs, and that they all had knives. Boy A apparently acted in self defence when Yousef pulled a knife on him.

That may well be the case, and the two boys have been convicted of carrying knives, but I feel that they're being treated as "naughty boys" who were just mucking about. It's a very serious thing to carry knives around, so I hope the sentence they get reflects that.

Raggamuffin wrote:It appears that all three boys went around pretending to be gangsters or something, got involved with drugs, and that they all had knives. Boy A apparently acted in self defence when Yousef pulled a knife on him.

That may well be the case, and the two boys have been convicted of carrying knives, but I feel that they're being treated as "naughty boys" who were just mucking about. It's a very serious thing to carry knives around, so I hope the sentence they get reflects that.

Of course, and Jeffery Epstein acted in self-defense when he raped those hundreds of under-aged children. Can't trust a juvenile delinquent with a dangerous vagina.

This was just passing the torch of privilege to the boys. The same thing got gang-rapist Brett Kavanaugh a Supreme Court seat.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:It appears that all three boys went around pretending to be gangsters or something, got involved with drugs, and that they all had knives. Boy A apparently acted in self defence when Yousef pulled a knife on him.

That may well be the case, and the two boys have been convicted of carrying knives, but I feel that they're being treated as "naughty boys" who were just mucking about. It's a very serious thing to carry knives around, so I hope the sentence they get reflects that.

Of course, and Jeffery Epstein acted in self-defense when he raped those hundreds of under-aged children.  Can't trust a juvenile delinquent with a dangerous vagina.  

This was just passing the torch of privilege to the boys.  The same thing got gang-rapist Brett Kavanaugh a Supreme Court seat.

Could you please stick to the topic? This isn't about either of those people.

Raggamuffin wrote:

It appears that all three boys went around pretending to be gangsters or something, got involved with drugs, and that they all had knives. Boy A apparently acted in self defence when Yousef pulled a knife on him.

That may well be the case, and the two boys have been convicted of carrying knives, but I feel that they're being treated as "naughty boys" who were just mucking about. It's a very serious thing to carry knives around, so I hope the sentence they get reflects that.

_____________________________

Could you please stick to the topic? This isn't about either of those people.

You are the one who changed the subject to "gangsters".  If you are going to comment along that line, you should give leave to others to go along with you.  Who made you God?

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It appears that all three boys went around pretending to be gangsters or something, got involved with drugs, and that they all had knives. Boy A apparently acted in self defence when Yousef pulled a knife on him.

That may well be the case, and the two boys have been convicted of carrying knives, but I feel that they're being treated as "naughty boys" who were just mucking about. It's a very serious thing to carry knives around, so I hope the sentence they get reflects that.

_____________________________

Could you please stick to the topic? This isn't about either of those people.

You are the one who changed the subject to "gangsters".  If you are going to comment along that line, you should give leave to others to go along with you.  Who made you God?

That is what the newspaper reports said, and it's the whole point of the background to this case. If you want to talk about other stuff, start a new thread. You keep on doing this - ruining threads by changing the subject.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You are the one who changed the subject to "gangsters".  If you are going to comment along that line, you should give leave to others to go along with you.  Who made you God?

That is what the newspaper reports said, and it's the whole point of the background to this case. If you want to talk about other stuff, start a new thread. You keep on doing this - ruining threads by changing the subject.

If you're going to go there, do so. But please don't try to censor others from going in the same direction. Especially when you raised the subject. Are you immune from others commenting on your remarks? I think not.

If the newspapers provoked you to comment in that direction, and you provoked others to comment in the same direction, it's all in the same chain. Stop complaining.

Forget it - another thread ruined by you. It's becoming a common occurence. You're a lousy debater.

Raggamuffin wrote:Forget it - another thread ruined by you. It's becoming a common occurence. You're a lousy debater.

Ruined by YOU, you mean. Frankly, your diddling all this time to distinguish your actions from mine has ruined this thread.

You were to the first to bring up "gangsters", but if anyone wants to comment...you feel you are soooo special, and some nebulous immunity kicks in.

If you want to save the thread, stop dissembling and have something of substance to day.