Stephen Lawrence murder trial begins at Old Bailey

[story]

You can't challenge silent racism. And there's no need to challenge racism that isn't expressed.

No?

Silent racism affects the behaviour and attitudes of those who hold the views, and those who are on the receiving end of those attitudes.

It may not be stated, but silent racism is certainly acted upon. It informs decision making and choices, and it has an undermining effect on those who are despised.

 

[The39thStep]

So far as anyone is able to discern what another person is thinking or feeling, he probably got there the same way that you or I might: inference based on body language, instinct, previous experience, the context, other behaviours of the individual and so forth. He himself was very reluctant to assume there was any racism, and by giving his work colleagues the benefit of the doubt for many months, allowed a tricky situation to become entrenched and increasingly difficult to resolve. When the issue finally got addressed, one of the points against him was that he had not been bothered by it up til now, so what had changed.

Anyway, the veracity of his interpretation is kinda beside the point here. You have neatly illustrated the problem in such a situation. Since we cannot really know what another person is thinking, it's easy to miss the silent hidden racism and thus leave it unchallenged.

I don't really think that it is desirable to try and challenge what we think someone might be thinking. The reality is that unlike the 60s when i was growing up most people in this country will have met a black person.

 

[Citizen66]

only because you don't know how to fucking google. i'm not linking to a far-right website, but if you google "drop dead doreen lawrence" (including quotation marks) you'll find it.

Forbidden access.

 

[_angel_]

Who?

ermmmmmmm..... it's kind of what the thread's about.

 

[paolo]

in part that your conclusions about the killers and the mail were a mite facile.

I described my own initial thoughts about the mail and the killers as facile.

I've no idea what point you're now trying to make.

 

[Ted Striker]

Getting this:

Anyway, fuck it. I get the gist.

Tbh the most alarming thing in it was the line that everyone should sympathise Doreen and Neville for the murder of their son, but moreso Neville for being married to Doreen for so many years. It flicked from overt, common or garden relatively urbane racist bile, to end of the pier bawdy nonsense (then reverting to the familiar territory of defending the accused).

 

[temper_tantrum]

Ian Blair on the Today programme talking about the possibility of further prosecutions said something along the lines of 'things change over time and the people who are providing protection [for the suspects] now may not be around to do so in the future' - implying that they're waiting for Acourt senior to drop off his perch, or somesuch?

Spymaster: re: Rod Liddle, he wrote an article in the Spectator which the attorney general is investigating for contempt of court, and the trial judge ordered the jury not to read. It was in the print issue, but has been withdrawn from their website (sorry for HuffPo link, first story I could find: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...f-court-stephen-lawrence-trial_n_1099296.html). It basically said that Norris and Dobson were innocent and were being persecuted by the police as a result of having been unproven suspects in the Lawrence case. It was contempt because it talked about one of them having been convicted of a racist offence (information which was covered by the media injunction to avoid prejudicing the jury). There was a copy knocking around on Twitter yesterday, I've had a quick look but can't find it, the original tweet may have been deleted. Someone with more Google skills/time than me might be able to find you a link. I think the case is still open, so Liddle might yet come to court.

 

[Citizen66]

ermmmmmmm..... it's kind of what the thread's about.

So he got murdered in Brixton?

I wasn't making a statement that nowhere in London is racist btw, just by and large it isn't really useful to use a cosmopolitan metropolis as the yard stick for UK attitudes as a whole.

 

[Ms T]

Ian Blair on the Today programme talking about the possibility of further prosecutions said something along the lines of 'things change over time and the people who are providing protection [for the suspects] now may not be around to do so in the future' - implying that they're waiting for Acourt senior to drop off his perch, or somesuch?

Spymaster: re: Rod Liddle, he wrote an article in the Spectator which the DPP is investigating for contempt of court, and the trial judge ordered the jury not to read. It was in the print issue, but has been withdrawn from their website. It basically said that Norris and Dobson were innocent and were being persecuted by the police as a result of having been unproven suspects in the Lawrence case. It was contempt because it talked about one of them having been convicted of a racist offence (information which was covered by the media injunction to avoid prejudicing the jury). There was a copy knocking around on Twitter yesterday, I've had a quick look but can't find it, the original tweet may have been deleted. Someone with more Google skills/time than me might be able to find you a link. I think the case is still open, so Liddle might yet come to court.

That's not quite what he said, tbf. His point was that it was impossible for them to get a fair trial because of the extensive previous coverage in the Daily Mail or elsewhere. The article has been removed but is quoted here.

http://speakforengland.blogspot.com/2011/11/vindictive-charade-rod-liddle-and.html

 

[temper_tantrum]

That's not quite what he said, tbf. His point was that it was impossible for them to get a fair trial because of the extensive previous coverage in the Daily Mail or elsewhere. The article has been removed but is quoted here.

http://speakforengland.blogspot.com/2011/11/vindictive-charade-rod-liddle-and.html

Ta - I was recalling from memory
Edit: I was referring to this bit:

'A few years ago two of the men not now facing a retrial were sentenced to eighteen months in prison for having thrown an empty paper cup in the direction of a black policeman.' (Ah - one of the others - not one of those on trial. Yes.)​

And he DID suggest they were being persecuted as a result of having been unproven suspects in the Lawrence case:

'But of course they were not sentenced to eighteen months for having thrown an empty paper cup in the direction of a police officer, they were sentenced to eighteen months for the crime of having not been found guilty of the murder of Stephen Lawrence'​

Anyway, it was a vile little article from a vile little man.

 

[TopCat]

Liddle referred mainly to the other suspects who were not in court this time and their previous convictions. I can't see it's contempt of court.

 

[LLETSA]

No?

Silent racism affects the behaviour and attitudes of those who hold the views, and those who are on the receiving end of those attitudes.

It may not be stated, but silent racism is certainly acted upon. It informs decision making and choices, and it has an undermining effect on those who are despised.

So what do you suggest? That individuals are singled out for apparently having racist motives which although never expressed might be affecting their behaviour towards others? Who decides?

 

[Spymaster]

Spymaster: re: Rod Liddle, he wrote an article in the Spectator which the attorney general is investigating for contempt of court, and the trial judge ordered the jury not to read. It was in the print issue, but has been withdrawn from their website (sorry for HuffPo link, first story I could find: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...f-court-stephen-lawrence-trial_n_1099296.html). It basically said that Norris and Dobson were innocent and were being persecuted by the police as a result of having been unproven suspects in the Lawrence case. It was contempt because it talked about one of them having been convicted of a racist offence (information which was covered by the media injunction to avoid prejudicing the jury). There was a copy knocking around on Twitter yesterday, I've had a quick look but can't find it, the original tweet may have been deleted. Someone with more Google skills/time than me might be able to find you a link. I think the case is still open, so Liddle might yet come to court.

Yes I've seen the Liddle article. Bits of it were cut and pasted into threads on Stormfront to bolster various viewpoints. Don't really fancy trawling through there again to find the Baron article though.

 

[Badgers]

What time is sentencing?

 

[butchersapron]

11-30

 

[temper_tantrum]

Yes I've seen the Liddle article. Bits of it were cut and pasted into threads on Stormfront to bolster various viewpoints. Don't really fancy trawling through there again to find the Baron article though.

Sorry, I was catching up on the thread from yesterday, so my post was probably rather out-of-date given where the thread has gone since

 

[ExtraRefined]

and still confident racist scum in Eltham

​

@jonsnowC4Jon Snow​

Our crew filming point where Stephen Lawyrence died had racial abuse shouted at them from a passing white van:locals say it is commonplace​

4 minutes ago via web​

That whole stretch of SE London along the old A2, Eltham, Welling, Bexleyheath, and even more so out into North Kent is still seriously racist.

 

[butchersapron]

Ta - I was recalling from memory
Edit: I was referring to this bit:

'A few years ago two of the men not now facing a retrial were sentenced to eighteen months in prison for having thrown an empty paper cup in the direction of a black policeman.' (Ah - one of the others - not one of those on trial. Yes.)​

And he DID suggest they were being persecuted as a result of having been unproven suspects in the Lawrence case:

'But of course they were not sentenced to eighteen months for having thrown an empty paper cup in the direction of a police officer, they were sentenced to eighteen months for the crime of having not been found guilty of the murder of Stephen Lawrence'​

Anyway, it was a vile little article from a vile little man.

And he's wrong - Norris was convicted for that.

 

[Spymaster]

That whole stretch of SE London along the old A2, Eltham, Welling, Bexleyheath, and even more so out into North Kent is still seriously racist.

Careful, Topcat will shout at you!

 

[temper_tantrum]

And he's wrong - Norris was convicted for that.

Yes, I was just reading this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jan/03/stephen-lawrence-police-nine-suspects
Which suggests that both Norris and one of the non-convicted were convicted together - was just going to post to ask whether anyone knows more - ??? (I think I read yesterday that they abused a black guy in the street, who turned out to be an off-duty cop).
(Interesting detail about the Acourts' lives in there, btw, though probably well-known to those who are better-informed about the case than me).

 

[butchersapron]

Yes, I was just reading this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jan/03/stephen-lawrence-police-nine-suspects
Which suggests that both Norris and one of the non-convicted were convicted together - was just going to post to ask whether anyone knows more - ??? (I think I read yesterday that they abused a black guy in the street, who turned out to be an off-duty cop).
(Interesting detail about the Acourts' lives in there, btw, though probably well-known to those who are better-informed about the case than me).

The other one was one of the Acourts

 

[TopCat]

Careful, Topcat will shout at you!

So an area that has an ethnic minority population of over 30% is seriously racist? Add to the 30% the decent people who don't have any racist attitudes? How many people make an area seriously racist?

 

[Ms T]

Ta - I was recalling from memory
Edit: I was referring to this bit:

'A few years ago two of the men not now facing a retrial were sentenced to eighteen months in prison for having thrown an empty paper cup in the direction of a black policeman.' (Ah - one of the others - not one of those on trial. Yes.)​

And he DID suggest they were being persecuted as a result of having been unproven suspects in the Lawrence case:

'But of course they were not sentenced to eighteen months for having thrown an empty paper cup in the direction of a police officer, they were sentenced to eighteen months for the crime of having not been found guilty of the murder of Stephen Lawrence'​

Anyway, it was a vile little article from a vile little man.

The white working classes are one of Liddle's bugbears. He does have a point about some of it.

 

[TopCat]

And he's wrong - Norris was convicted for that.

I remember now. It was less the paper cup and more the racist abuse he shouted at the black copper no? He went on rule 43 If I remember correctly? Or was that when the great gangster was caught nicking barrels from a pub?

 

[coley]

That's not quite what he said, tbf. His point was that it was impossible for them to get a fair trial because of the extensive previous coverage in the Daily Mail or elsewhere. The article has been removed but is quoted here.

http://speakforengland.blogspot.com/2011/11/vindictive-charade-rod-liddle-and.html

And you can guarantee that will be the main thrust of the appeal, that and the doubts about 'contaminated' evidence

 

[butchersapron]

The white working classes are one of Liddle's bugbears. He does have a point about some of it.

Michael Collin in his book The Likes of Us: A Biography of the White Working Class used the orginal Lawrence trial to show (very convincingly) how these people were used as stick to beat the wider class with. Liddle couldn't manage that sustained critical examination if he was given the rest of his life to come up with it. Post-pub two paragraph rants is all he cna manage.

 

[temper_tantrum]

Oh interesting, I got that book for Xmas, will schedule it next on my reading list.

 

[butchersapron]

I remember now. It was less the paper cup and more the racist abuse he shouted at the black copper no? He went on rule 43 If I remember correctly? Or was that when the great gangster was caught nicking barrels from a pub?

Yep, it was the abuse and driving the car directly at the copper. Don't know if they went on 43 but i know they've had serious grief inside so if they did, it doesn't bode well for their long term prospects...

 

[stethoscope]

Forbidden access.

The page still works for me, so I can PM the link if you really want (not posting it here). He used to contribute to 'The New Right' group. But as butchers says, he's an oddball.

 

[Ms T]

And you can guarantee that will be the main thrust of the appeal, that and the doubts about 'contaminated' evidence

We shall see but traditionally juries are given quite a lot of credit for being able to disregard previous publicity. One of my colleagues (a journalist) was allowed to be on the jury for a pretty high-profile murder (the brother of that Eastenders actress who was stabbed in North London), which surprised me. And the media did pretty much respect the blackout in this case.