17 year old private school student cleared of friend's murder

[Treacle Toes]

Boy A & Boy B aren't 'white' - this is primarily about the power & leverage of money & its connections, not ethnicity. And to some extent about a legal system that allows the middle classes to be self-punishing, haunted by their own (christian) consciences, moved towards rehabilitation through their own economic potential, while insisting that poorer people(s) need their conscience & punishment externalising.

According to Yousef's sister, Boy A is White. So as neat as this 'it's a class issue and not about ethnicity' picture you have painted is I think you are ignoring how social class and ethnicity can and do intersect. I see his sister also agrees with Powell.

She echoed the suggestion by Lucy Powell, the MP for Manchester Central, that jurors favoured white, middle-class defendants and that the result may have been different if the suspects were black teenagers from Moss Side.

“If it was the other way round – my brother is half-Arab and from a council estate ... [the verdicts might have been different],” Akoum said. “I think it went wrong right from the beginning. We kept quiet because we thought we were going to get justice at the end. Now we’ve got to speak up.”

 

[Smokeandsteam]

There is no evidence to say Makki had a knife. Only Boy As word and a changed statement of boy B who admitted lying in his earlier statement. And then refused to give evidence.

You can’t prove a negative and you certainly can’t do it when the boy who was said to have a knife is not there to defend himself because he’s dead.

Indeed, there are serious flaws with the accounts of Boy A and B. But there is no evidence whatsoever to corroborate any other version of events either. This is the problem for the jury. You can't find Boy A guilty of murder/manslaughter because you don't like his account.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

According to Yousef's sister, Boy A is White. So as neat as this 'it's a class issue and not about ethnicity' picture you have painted is I think you are ignoring how social class and ethnicity can and do intersect. I see his sister also agrees with Powell./QUOTE]

One, Patteran didn't suggest it was 'neat' but suggested class was the primary dynamic at work in this case. Two, Lucy Powell? Seriously?

 

[Treacle Toes]

One, Patteran didn't suggest it was 'neat' but suggested class was the primary dynamic at work in this case. Two, Lucy Powell? Seriously?

One, I didn't say Patteran suggested it was neat...I said the picture they painted was. Two, If you wanna bitch about Lucy Powell, spit it out. Three, anything to say about Yousef's sister and her take on what has happened?

 

[Smokeandsteam]

One, I didn't say Patteran suggested it was neat...I said the picture they painted was. Two, If you wanna bitch about Lucy Powell, spit it out. Three, anything to say about Yousef's sister and her take on what has happened?

Okay, you said the 'picture they painted' was neat. I am saying it isn't. Their post suggested class was the primary dynamic. Lucy Powell is a Blairite with nothing to say about social class and how it operates or even intersects. As for the sister's comments I've posted at least twice on this thread about how the class background of Boy A and B is a crucial dynamic of the handling and reporting of this case. But this doesn't alter the fact that I do not see how a jury could have arrived at a different decision.

 

[Proper Tidy]

There is no evidence to say Makki had a knife. Only Boy As word and a changed statement of boy B who admitted lying in his earlier statement. And then refused to give evidence.

You can’t prove a negative and you certainly can’t do it when the boy who was said to have a knife is not there to defend himself because he’s dead.

Tbf you don't have to prove a negative. It's the prosecution's job to demonstrate to jury beyond a reasonable doubt, defence has to demonstrate there is reasonable doubt.

None of this case sits well with me and agree that social class has played a part - see defence barrister's comments (intended to play on the good boys good homes shit) and the accused getting bail btw

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Okay, you said the 'picture they painted' was neat. I am saying it isn't. Their post suggested class was the primary dynamic. Lucy Powell is a Blairite with nothing to say about social class and how it operates or even intersects. As for the sister's comments I've posted at least twice on this thread about how the class background of Boy A and B is a crucial dynamic of the handling and reporting of this case. But this doesn't alter the fact that I do not see how a jury could have arrived at a different decision.

Agree that on what has been presented to us the jury had to acquit. However there have been countless cases where people claim self defence and that is disproved by a thorough investigation, something I strongly suspect did not take place in this instance, due to the class/race issues highlighted.

 

[Patteran]

According to Yousef's sister, Boy A is White. So as neat as this 'it's a class issue and not about ethnicity' picture you have painted is I think you are ignoring how social class and ethnicity can and do intersect. I see his sister also agrees with Powell.

She echoed the suggestion by Lucy Powell, the MP for Manchester Central, that jurors favoured white, middle-class defendants and that the result may have been different if the suspects were black teenagers from Moss Side.

“If it was the other way round – my brother is half-Arab and from a council estate ... [the verdicts might have been different],” Akoum said. “I think it went wrong right from the beginning. We kept quiet because we thought we were going to get justice at the end. Now we’ve got to speak up.”

Hi. I didn't mean to paint it as neat - I deliberately said 'primarily' rather than 'exclusively' because I agree it's complex, intersectional. But it seems to me that in this case money & its leverage have dominated ethnicity. As I said, as far as I'm aware one lad is jewish - the other is asian. I can send you a dm with the Manchester Evening News' now-deleted image that names names if you like. An expensive barrister & private school credentials (which in themselves bestow elements of whiteness) has erased the accused's ethnicity - in the Makki's case, their inability to pay for St John Street's finest meant that their double-jeopardy council house plus migrant background have not been erased & has worked against them. I'm not a big fan of hypotheticals, but it's not impossible that the expensive barrister could have done the same job for a client of any ethnicity with that private school cv. The simplification came from Lucy Powell - her remark is easy to refute (accused not both white), which detracts from the injustice she was supposed to be highlighting on behalf of her constituents.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Agree that on what has been presented to us the jury had to acquit. However there have been countless cases where people claim self defence and that is disproved by a thorough investigation, something I strongly suspect did not take place in this instance, due to the class/race issues highlighted.

There has also been cases where people have been banged up, despite little evidence, as a result of this type of background ‘investigation’ and evidence from the cops so let’s be careful here.

As to the investigation and possible flaws in this case this is entirely possible, and given the class background of Boy A and B, I can see why you’d suspect that. So what are the flaws? Bar the CPS refusing to admit a character reference from a grammar school I’ve not seen any reported?

 

[planetgeli]

Possible flaws? Judge biased in summing up?

And you can't tell from the reporting but it's entirely possible (And sounds likely from what Makki family are saying) that the CPS were incompetent with their barrister in court. I've been on a jury and see exactly that happen. But that's not how court cases get reported so you're not going to hear that from anywhere but the Makki family.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Nice middle class kids/idiotic gangster fantasies and so on. Where did that come from? Again I don't know the full details, but it very much sounds as if that was the mindset of all those involved in prosecuting this case, which would explain why we have the result we have.

 

[Athos]

Nice middle class kids/idiotic gangster fantasies and so on. Where did that come from? Again I don't know the full details, but it very much sounds as if that was the mindset of all those involved in prosecuting this case, which would explain why we have the result we have.

The case was investigated and prosecuted. It comes down to the fact that the jury bought the claim of self-defence. It's quite possible that class and/or race were factors, but, on this occasion, that would appear to be on the part of the jury, rather than police and CPS (though I'm not denying both have significant failings in respect of these things, more generally).

 

[Treacle Toes]

Hi. I didn't mean to paint it as neat - I deliberately said 'primarily' rather than 'exclusively' because I agree it's complex, intersectional. But it seems to me that in this case money & its leverage have dominated ethnicity. As I said, as far as I'm aware one lad is jewish - the other is asian.

What you posted was that neither Boy A nor B are White. You were wrong. Good to see you agree it's complex.

I can send you a dm with the Manchester Evening News' now-deleted image that names names if you like.

No need I have seen them on Twitter.

An expensive barrister & private school credentials (which in themselves bestow elements of whiteness) has erased the accused's ethnicity -

Boy A is white. My understanding is Boy A is the one who stabbed and killed Makki.

in the Makki's case, their inability to pay for St John Street's finest meant that their double-jeopardy council house plus migrant background have not been erased & has worked against them.

Yes, their class and ethnicity intersecting in a context (the justice system)that is known for it's institutionalised classist and racist inequalities.

I'm not a big fan of hypotheticals, but it's not impossible that the expensive barrister could have done the same job for a client of any ethnicity with that private school cv.

It's possible, but that doesn't prove anything.

The simplification came from Lucy Powell - her remark is easy to refute (accused not both white), which detracts from the injustice she was supposed to be highlighting on behalf of her constituents.

Yes she over simplified by characterising both defendants as White. She wasn't entirely wrong though and if these lads were 'Black from Mosside' we all know the outcome would have been different. There will be some though who'll use her initial over simplification/error to gloss over the parts of this case that they are uncomfortable with.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

The case was investigated and prosecuted. It comes down to the fact that the jury bought the claim of self-defence. It's quite possible that class and/or race were factors, but, on this occasion, that would appear to be on the part of the jury, rather than police and CPS (though I'm not denying both have significant failings in respect of these things, more generally).

Sure. But when OB roll up and the suspects are posh kids from the local posh school, they are only human and a bias will be applied. The rest of the process follows on from there.

 

[Athos]

Sure. But when OB roll up and the suspects are posh kids from the local posh school, they are only human and a bias will be applied. The rest of the process follows on from there.

Of course. But it's hard to see how that made any difference in this case, which boiled down to the jury believing his account of self-defence. What else do you think the police could/should have done that might have made a difference? I say this not because I don't think the police have biases, but because it lets juries - which reflect wider society - off the hook for the same thing.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Of course. But it's hard to see how that made any difference in this case, which boiled down to the jury believing his account of self-defence. What else do you think the police could/should have done that might have made a difference?

Three kids go to rob a drug dealer with knives. The robbery goes wrong and one of the robbers gets knifed to death by another of the robbers. You are called in investigate, your starting point could be that you have three scumbags on a joint venture to rob a drug dealer and it goes wrong, a fight ensues among the scum bags and one is killed by the other, so you head off down a joint-venture murder avenue. Or, you could say to yourself, they are good boys, with silly fantasies, let's take their story at face value, and indeed allow the story to be changed to corroborate that of the killer.

 

[Athos]

Three kids go to rob a drug dealer with knives. The robbery goes wrong and one of the robbers gets knifed to death by another of the robbers. You are called in investigate, your starting point could be that you have three scumbags on a joint venture to rob a drug dealer and it goes wrong, a fight ensues among the scum bags and one is killed by the other, so you head off down a joint-venture murder avenue. Or, you could say to yourself, they are good boys, with silly fantasies, let's take their story at face value, and indeed allow the story to be changed to corroborate that of the killer.

Errr... they did investigate it as a murder; it ended up in court at a murder trial! (Joint venture a no starter, due to the distance - time, nature of act, what was agreed etc. - of the stabbing from the common purpose.)

Specifically, what practical steps could/should the police have taken differently?

 

[Spymaster]

Or, you could say to yourself, they are good boys, with silly fantasies, let's take their story at face value, and indeed allow the story to be changed to corroborate that of the killer.

Was that what happened though? At the end of the day there was a prosecution so the police and CPS did try to nick them. The prosecution case would have been put to the jury, as would the defence. In this case the jury went with the defence.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Errr... they did investigate it as a murder; it ended up in court at a murder trial! (Joint venture a no starter, due to the distance - time, nature of act, what was agreed etc. - of the stabbing from the common purpose.)

Was that what happened though? At the end of the day there was a prosecution so the police and CPS did try to nick them. The prosecution case would have been put to the jury, as would the defence. In this case the jury went with the defence.

Of course. But from what we can tell, from the start the attitude shown by the police, then the CPS and subsequently the judge was markedly different to when faced with stereotypical scumbags. Just reading about how the victim's family was treated in the court vs. the killer's family is quite a giveaway.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Specifically, what practical steps could/should the police have taken differently?

I'm no CSI, but would imagine that in the immediate aftermath the forensics would be able to support a truth or dismiss an untruth. But if you approach the situation with a certain mindset, then finding a different truth to the one you expect will be much harder.

 

[Athos]

I'm no CSI, but would imagine that in the immediate aftermath the forensics would be able to support a truth or dismiss an untruth. But if you approach the situation with a certain mindset, then finding a different truth to the one you expect will be much harder.

Forensics wouldn't be able to tell the boy's mindset.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Forensics wouldn't be able to tell the boy's mindset.

Who said it could

 

[Athos]

Of course. But from what we can tell, from the start the attitude shown by the police, then the CPS and subsequently the judge was markedly different to when faced with stereotypical scumbags. Just reading about how the victim's family was treated in the court vs. the killer's family is quite a giveaway.

I've not seen any convincing evidence of that fact, but I'm quite willing to believe it's likely. However, my point was that it doesn't appear to have been determinative in this case - it turned on the jury believing the boy's account, and nothing I've seen about the treatment of the victim's family etc. would impact on that.

 

[Athos]

Who said it could

That's what the case turned on.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Read it again:

Teenager cleared of murder of schoolboy Yousef Makki


On 2 March, Makki was with the two defendants when they allegedly tried to rob a dealer of £45 worth of cannabis on a farm track. However, their attempted robbery failed and Boy A was attacked and had his bicycle thrown over a hedge.

Boy A then later pushed Makki, who called him a “pussy” and punched him in the face, the court heard. The defendant told the jury Makki pulled out a knife and he responded by also taking out a knife, then accidentally stabbed his friend.

Boy A then got rid of the knives




He admits going to rob a drug dealer with a knife, then having a knife-fight with his accomplice who ends up dead. And yet not even a manslaughter could be made to stick? Give over.

 

[Athos]

Read it again:

Teenager cleared of murder of schoolboy Yousef Makki


On 2 March, Makki was with the two defendants when they allegedly tried to rob a dealer of £45 worth of cannabis on a farm track. However, their attempted robbery failed and Boy A was attacked and had his bicycle thrown over a hedge.

Boy A then later pushed Makki, who called him a “pussy” and punched him in the face, the court heard. The defendant told the jury Makki pulled out a knife and he responded by also taking out a knife, then accidentally stabbed his friend.

Boy A then got rid of the knives




He admits going to rob a drug dealer with a knife, then having a knife-fight with his accomplice who ends up dead. And yet not even a manslaughter could be made to stick? Give over.

Yet the jury, who heard the evidence, disagree. And you've not offered anything to support your assertion that outcome would've been different if the police had acted differently.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Yet the jury, who heard the evidence, disagree. And you've not offered anything to support your assertion that outcome would've been different if the police had acted differently.

 

[Athos]

Facepalm all you like. You're speculating from a place of complete ignorance. Your position is that the outcome would've been different if the police had done something different, but you're unable to say what they could/should have done differently, or how that would have made a difference to the outcome. I'm not one to defend the police (and I'm not saying they aren't biased, or even that they weren't in this case - rather that's not what made the difference), but if we want to understand what's happened here, we ought to deal in facts. If you want to look at bias (and I think we should), we need to start with the jury, and why it believed what it did.

 

[Spymaster]

He’s got a point though, hasn’t he.

The police/cps DID prosecute for murder.

What more do you want?

 

[planetgeli]

I’m not talking about the police acting differently. I’m talking about the CPS acting differently, maybe employing a competent barrister.

I was on the jury of a trial where it was obvious, to me, that the white defendant, son of a magistrate, had drunkenly robbed a VCR from a Muslim Bangladeshi born Brit. The CPS barrister was embarrassingly bad, the defendants barrister top notch. Add in this case to that a reported summing up from a Judge that was, from the reports, quite one-sided. My white defendant got off because at the end of two weeks on a Friday afternoon, not enough of the jury could be bothered to argue with the majority who went along with the very one-sided, institutionally racist court proceedings (at least that’s how they’d played out). I spoke to the copper leading the investigation outside court on the way home and he shrugged it off as “this happens all the time”.

I’d suggest justice was bought here too. And that institutionalised racism and class bias in court can easily persuade a jury against what actually did happen.

And I just don’t see how self-defence works as a defence when there is no corroboration of the victim having a knife, just the defendants word and that of his mate in a changed statement who chose not to give evidence.