I'll work with you and we'll sort it out.
Well that's it. It's really society and the Met on trial here. Not some brainless thugs. Does black-on-black get a 20 year investigation? Or 'honour' killings? Hardly. It was a circus played out in the media.
So it was the Met in the dock then?
BTW where were your grandparents born?
I feel very ashamed by the behaviour of some Brit's.You don't need to feel shame. We are all Brits now ya know.
Why was it high profile? Is it because the racist Met didn't do their job properly? So it was the Met in the dock then? Why that make me a racist? You really are clueless. BTW where were your grandparents born?

Justify that comment - how do you know this? As stated, if the intent was there, ie one of the gang had a knife and that gang chased a man and killed him, then they are surely culpable of the same crime?But only one of them had a knife so only one of them can be guilty of murder - and Norris isn't one of them as the Police thought he wasn't the one or they couldn't offer him immunity against prosecution. It'll all unravel.

You keep asking posters on here to answer questions and castigate them if they don't - so, why do you insist on asking where spacecats grandparents were born? Has this any relevance to the thread? If it has, please clarify the situation.Moderator - deleted

The evidence found that they were guilty - end ofThe 'Technology' proved nothing - it was merely another piece of evidence..
True, but in this case it eventually turned out rightAnd the 'technology' is only as good as the person using/analysing it...
You clearly do not understand. If I were in the witness box and clearly lied, I would be commiting a crime - perjury.But as you have stated here that (according to you) perjury took place, a simple question again...
Do you think that anyone who is a witness/gives an alibi to a defendant who is subsequently found guilty has automatically committed perjury?
A simple Yes or No will do - surely not too hard even for you...![]()