-
Posts
-
@mrs_teapot wrote:
Actually, I haven’t seen thin questioning the guilt of these people?
I think his concern was the police investigation and if the evidence and adherence to law would stand up to scrutiny in an appeal if indeed that happens.
I haven’t seen anyone here question if these people were guilty? they were found guilty… thats end of it in my book but its true there may be an appeal.
@thin ice wrote:
the appeal will make bigger head lines
blood that appeared after 18 years
sounds very suspect to me
who would trust the police
to sit on that pile of clothes then pop them out after 18 years with dif results.
You need to go to specsavers, then.
Not at all…..where does it say those guys are innocent…… it questions the investigation, and how effective the police were… whether you like it or not it will be what the appeal will be based on. Lets hope the police have been thorough and the conviction stands.
panda12 wrote:Mrs_Teapot wrote:Actually, I haven’t seen thin questioning the guilt of these people?I think his concern was the police investigation and if the evidence and adherence to law would stand up to scrutiny in an appeal if indeed that happens.
I haven’t seen anyone here question if these people were guilty? they were found guilty… thats end of it in my book but its true there may be an appeal.
thin ice wrote:the appeal will make bigger head linesblood that appeared after 18 years
sounds very suspect to me
who would trust the police
to sit on that pile of clothes then pop them out after 18 years with dif results.
You need to go to specsavers, then.
Panda – I don’t think anyone here is doubting the decision of the jury and it is good to finally see someone convicted for this case
All that has been expressed is that there may well be an appeal in the future and perhaps the reasons why – though personally having watched a couple of TV programs about the case this evening which could not be aired before the end of the case I think the right verdict was reached and an appeal may be very difficult
@mrs_teapot wrote:
Not at all…..where does it say those guys are innocent…… it questions the investigation, and how effective the police were… whether you like it or not it will be what the appeal will be based on. Lets hope the police have been thorough and the conviction stands.
So thin’s first post in no way suggests they are innocent by implying the police have deliberately “planted” this new, and incriminating evidence?
And his later reference to the Colin Stagg case in no way implies the police have “fitted” Norris and Dobson up for this murder in the same way Stagg was fitted up?
You really are far too nice, Mrs Teapot. Your good nature does blossom.
@j_in_france wrote:
@panda12 wrote:
@mrs_teapot wrote:
Actually, I haven’t seen thin questioning the guilt of these people?
I think his concern was the police investigation and if the evidence and adherence to law would stand up to scrutiny in an appeal if indeed that happens.
I haven’t seen anyone here question if these people were guilty? they were found guilty… thats end of it in my book but its true there may be an appeal.
@thin ice wrote:
the appeal will make bigger head lines
blood that appeared after 18 years
sounds very suspect to me
who would trust the police
to sit on that pile of clothes then pop them out after 18 years with dif results.
You need to go to specsavers, then.
Panda – I don’t think anyone here is doubting the decision of the jury and it is good to finally see someone convicted for this case
So:
@thin ice wrote:
the appeal will make bigger head lines
blood that appeared after 18 years
sounds very suspect to me
who would trust the police
to sit on that pile of clothes then pop them out after 18 years with dif results.
isn’t thin implying he thinks they are innocent due to police corruption, then?
@panda12 wrote:
@mrs_teapot wrote:
Not at all…..where does it say those guys are innocent…… it questions the investigation, and how effective the police were… whether you like it or not it will be what the appeal will be based on. Lets hope the police have been thorough and the conviction stands.
So thin’s first post in no way suggests they are innocent by implying the police have deliberately “planted” this new, and incriminating evidence?
And his later reference to the Colin Stagg case in no way implies the police have “fitted” Norris and Dobson up for this murder in the same way Stagg was fitted up?
You really are far too nice, Mrs Teapot. Your good nature does blossom.
Well my interpretation is no.one has questioned the guilt of these people, I wont speak for others here but truly I think we are all of one mind… the guilty result was the right one… but I think there will be an appeal and as I said previously I hope the police have done their job properly for the conviction to stand.
@panda12 wrote:
@j_in_france wrote:
@panda12 wrote:
@mrs_teapot wrote:
Actually, I haven’t seen thin questioning the guilt of these people?
I think his concern was the police investigation and if the evidence and adherence to law would stand up to scrutiny in an appeal if indeed that happens.
I haven’t seen anyone here question if these people were guilty? they were found guilty… thats end of it in my book but its true there may be an appeal.
@thin ice wrote:
the appeal will make bigger head lines
blood that appeared after 18 years
sounds very suspect to me
who would trust the police
to sit on that pile of clothes then pop them out after 18 years with dif results.
You need to go to specsavers, then.
Panda – I don’t think anyone here is doubting the decision of the jury and it is good to finally see someone convicted for this case
So:
@thin ice wrote:
the appeal will make bigger head lines
blood that appeared after 18 years
sounds very suspect to me
who would trust the police
to sit on that pile of clothes then pop them out after 18 years with dif results.
isn’t thin implying he thinks they are innocent due to police corruption, then?
no – he is just asking whether evidence after that long period of time is still admissible – and apparently it is
@j_in_france wrote:
@panda12 wrote:
@j_in_france wrote:
@panda12 wrote:
@mrs_teapot wrote:
Actually, I haven’t seen thin questioning the guilt of these people?
I think his concern was the police investigation and if the evidence and adherence to law would stand up to scrutiny in an appeal if indeed that happens.
I haven’t seen anyone here question if these people were guilty? they were found guilty… thats end of it in my book but its true there may be an appeal.
@thin ice wrote:
the appeal will make bigger head lines
blood that appeared after 18 years
sounds very suspect to me
who would trust the police
to sit on that pile of clothes then pop them out after 18 years with dif results.
You need to go to specsavers, then.
Panda – I don’t think anyone here is doubting the decision of the jury and it is good to finally see someone convicted for this case
So:
@thin ice wrote:
the appeal will make bigger head lines
blood that appeared after 18 years
sounds very suspect to me
who would trust the police
to sit on that pile of clothes then pop them out after 18 years with dif results.
isn’t thin implying he thinks they are innocent due to police corruption, then?
no – he is just asking whether evidence after that long period of time is still admissible – and apparently it is
Yeah, ok. :roll:
at last some sort of justice for stephen lawrence just a pity they could only convict 2 out of the 5…….lets hope there is some justice for anuj bidve and his family
im sure that Gary Dobson is going to squeal before sentencing tomorrow. I do not think he personally used the knife, that showed in first interviews when he was the only person that spoke up. all different now from the bravado shown whilst he assumed as a gang they would be safe. That Norris meanwhile is a different kettle of fish as are those dreadful Acourts and luke knight. lets hear him rat on them tomorrow :)
Blessed be Doreen lawrence. x
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!