Choose Your News To Fit Your Agenda - It's The new Black

[Trapper John]

Lets do that quick comparison, it'll have to be quick coz I'm off shortly.

Stephen Lawrence Black - attacked by known white racists

Sean Cox white - attacked by swarthy known fasicst Roma Ultras - and as we all know, all fascists are racist too.

Stephne Lawreance - innocent bystander

Sean Cox - innocent bystander

Stephen Lawrence - attacked in an area known for gangs and drug dealing.

Sean Cox - attacked in the vicinity of a football match and opposing supporters.

Stephen Lawrence - forget the drug and gang bit, there off on a crusade and they ain't gonna stop until we label it racially motivated so get cracking we need to find some evidence to indicate that.

Sean Cox - Phew! thank fuck there was a football match on that night and the fascists kicked off all over the place, thats our get out.

Stephen Lawrence - found any evidence yet? Yep he was black the others were white. Did we hear any racists remarks? Yep. Good can we get something on them? I reckon but it might take a couple of decades, thats ok it's been authorised from above.

Sean Cox - found any evidence of racism here? er nope, apart from them being fascists from Italy. Oh, any racists remarks? - dunno. Anything to suggest a racial motivation? dunno, never bothered to find out. Good, no-ones up our arse about this we'll chalk it up to football.

You get the drift I'm sure.

Do you know anything about the Stephen Lawrence case at all, or do you see a black kid and come to your own presumptions?
You couldn’t be further from the facts if you tried.

I don't know what part of the country you live in, up north somewhere is a recollection I have but I stand to be corrected.

If that is the case, I wouldn't presume to think you knew nothing about an event which occurred in your locale, nor think I knew more because I'd read newspapers and 'evidence' from partisan sources.

I wouldn't expect you or anyone else to believe it but coming from south London and frequenting the areas where the events took place and knowing a good few people who live there, some of whom were these kids contempories going to the same schools, Stephen Lawrence was not the saint he is being held up to be, though I will be quick to add it didn't warrant being stabbed to death.

If the evidence was so obvious and overwhelming that Stephen Lawrence was murdered as a result of his skin colour why did it take 19 years to convict someone of that? - hardly strikes me as an obvious and overwhelming 'open and shut' case.

As I said, whatever Stephen Lawrence did or was up to it didn't warrant him being stabbed to death but neither does it the hundreds we have seen in similar circumstances before that day, since that day and to this present day - none of which have a racially motivated reason as the major factor.

We live in an age, as I've said before on numerous occasions, where if just one other person makes the same allegation as another, it is instantly accepted as the truth, why would it then not apply to the many people who say otherwise?

I can tell you from what I've heard from numerous white, black and mixed race people who lived in that area now and at the time, Stephen Lawrence was not murdered solely because he was black. It never happened in the past, contrary to what certain people want you to believe, it doesn't happen now. This is London not Mississipi.

[Vam]

I'm still trying to get my head around all the "swarthy" Italians labelling Why the need for that particular adjective before the words 'Italian', or even 'hooligan'?

To me, it seems to stop just short of implying all us Italians look like apes.

Typically blinkered Little Englander Let's see how the innocent, pure as the driven snow Liverpool supporters behave when in Rome ...

To differeniate bewtween that and pastey, white northern European. Maybe I should have been more specific and added 'olive skinned' as skin tone is the bench mark we use these days to decide if it's a racist crime or not.

Your rep for making sweeping generalisations precedes you, Traps. So excuse me for querying your questionable choice of words

[Guest]

Lets do that quick comparison, it'll have to be quick coz I'm off shortly.

Stephen Lawrence Black - attacked by known white racists

Sean Cox white - attacked by swarthy known fasicst Roma Ultras - and as we all know, all fascists are racist too.

Stephne Lawreance - innocent bystander

Sean Cox - innocent bystander

Stephen Lawrence - attacked in an area known for gangs and drug dealing.

Sean Cox - attacked in the vicinity of a football match and opposing supporters.

Stephen Lawrence - forget the drug and gang bit, there off on a crusade and they ain't gonna stop until we label it racially motivated so get cracking we need to find some evidence to indicate that.

Sean Cox - Phew! thank fuck there was a football match on that night and the fascists kicked off all over the place, thats our get out.

Stephen Lawrence - found any evidence yet? Yep he was black the others were white. Did we hear any racists remarks? Yep. Good can we get something on them? I reckon but it might take a couple of decades, thats ok it's been authorised from above.

Sean Cox - found any evidence of racism here? er nope, apart from them being fascists from Italy. Oh, any racists remarks? - dunno. Anything to suggest a racial motivation? dunno, never bothered to find out. Good, no-ones up our arse about this we'll chalk it up to football.

You get the drift I'm sure.

Do you know anything about the Stephen Lawrence case at all, or do you see a black kid and come to your own presumptions?
You couldn’t be further from the facts if you tried.

I don't know what part of the country you live in, up north somewhere is a recollection I have but I stand to be corrected.

If that is the case, I wouldn't presume to think you knew nothing about an event which occurred in your locale, nor think I knew more because I'd read newspapers and 'evidence' from partisan sources.

I wouldn't expect you or anyone else to believe it but coming from south London and frequenting the areas where the events took place and knowing a good few people who live there, some of whom were these kids contempories going to the same schools, Stephen Lawrence was not the saint he is being held up to be, though I will be quick to add it didn't warrant being stabbed to death.

If the evidence was so obvious and overwhelming that Stephen Lawrence was murdered as a result of his skin colour why did it take 19 years to convict someone of that? - hardly strikes me as an obvious and overwhelming 'open and shut' case.

As I said, whatever Stephen Lawrence did or was up to it didn't warrant him being stabbed to death but neither does it the hundreds we have seen in similar curcumstances before that day, since that day and to this present day - none of which have a racially motivated reason as the major factor.

We live in an age, as I've said before on numerous occasions, where if just one other person makes the same allegation as another, it is instantly accepted as the truth, why would it then not apply to the many people who say otherwise?

I can tell you from what I've heard from numerous white, black and mixed race people who lived in that area now and at the time, Stephen Lawrence was not murdered solely because he was black. It never happened in the past, contrary to what certain people want you to believe, it doesn't happen now. This is London not Mississipi.

Known BNP members who hated blacks kill a black person and yet you reckon it wasn't a racist murder. Why have the accused got previous for attacking blacks (GBH etc) if they are not racists? Even character witnesses at the civil trial admitted the men hated blacks and that two wanted to kill blacks.

[Trapper John]

Do you know anything about the Stephen Lawrence case at all, or do you see a black kid and come to your own presumptions?
You couldn’t be further from the facts if you tried.

I don't know what part of the country you live in, up north somewhere is a recollection I have but I stand to be corrected.

If that is the case, I wouldn't presume to think you knew nothing about an event which occurred in your locale, nor think I knew more because I'd read newspapers and 'evidence' from partisan sources.

I wouldn't expect you or anyone else to believe it but coming from south London and frequenting the areas where the events took place and knowing a good few people who live there, some of whom were these kids contempories going to the same schools, Stephen Lawrence was not the saint he is being held up to be, though I will be quick to add it didn't warrant being stabbed to death.

If the evidence was so obvious and overwhelming that Stephen Lawrence was murdered as a result of his skin colour why did it take 19 years to convict someone of that? - hardly strikes me as an obvious and overwhelming 'open and shut' case.

As I said, whatever Stephen Lawrence did or was up to it didn't warrant him being stabbed to death but neither does it the hundreds we have seen in similar curcumstances before that day, since that day and to this present day - none of which have a racially motivated reason as the major factor.

We live in an age, as I've said before on numerous occasions, where if just one other person makes the same allegation as another, it is instantly accepted as the truth, why would it then not apply to the many people who say otherwise?

I can tell you from what I've heard from numerous white, black and mixed race people who lived in that area now and at the time, Stephen Lawrence was not murdered solely because he was black. It never happened in the past, contrary to what certain people want you to believe, it doesn't happen now. This is London not Mississipi.

Known BNP members who hated blacks kill a black person and yet you reckon it wasn't a racist murder. Why have the accused got previous for attacking blacks (GBH etc) if they are not racists? Even character witnesses at the civil trial admitted the men hated blacks and that two wanted to kill blacks.

Come on then, I'm accused of sweeping statements - lets have these cast iron 'proofs' in black and white please.

[Guest]

Do you know anything about the Stephen Lawrence case at all, or do you see a black kid and come to your own presumptions?
You couldn’t be further from the facts if you tried.

I don't know what part of the country you live in, up north somewhere is a recollection I have but I stand to be corrected.

If that is the case, I wouldn't presume to think you knew nothing about an event which occurred in your locale, nor think I knew more because I'd read newspapers and 'evidence' from partisan sources.

I wouldn't expect you or anyone else to believe it but coming from south London and frequenting the areas where the events took place and knowing a good few people who live there, some of whom were these kids contempories going to the same schools, Stephen Lawrence was not the saint he is being held up to be, though I will be quick to add it didn't warrant being stabbed to death.

If the evidence was so obvious and overwhelming that Stephen Lawrence was murdered as a result of his skin colour why did it take 19 years to convict someone of that? - hardly strikes me as an obvious and overwhelming 'open and shut' case.

As I said, whatever Stephen Lawrence did or was up to it didn't warrant him being stabbed to death but neither does it the hundreds we have seen in similar curcumstances before that day, since that day and to this present day - none of which have a racially motivated reason as the major factor.

We live in an age, as I've said before on numerous occasions, where if just one other person makes the same allegation as another, it is instantly accepted as the truth, why would it then not apply to the many people who say otherwise?

I can tell you from what I've heard from numerous white, black and mixed race people who lived in that area now and at the time, Stephen Lawrence was not murdered solely because he was black. It never happened in the past, contrary to what certain people want you to believe, it doesn't happen now. This is London not Mississipi.

Known BNP members who hated blacks kill a black person and yet you reckon it wasn't a racist murder. Why have the accused got previous for attacking blacks (GBH etc) if they are not racists? Even character witnesses at the civil trial admitted the men hated blacks and that two wanted to kill blacks.

Come on then, I'm accused of sweeping statements - lets have these cast iron 'proofs' in black and white please.

What was the civil case result? There's your proof.

[Trapper John]

Lets do that quick comparison, it'll have to be quick coz I'm off shortly.

Stephen Lawrence Black - attacked by known white racists

Sean Cox white - attacked by swarthy known fasicst Roma Ultras - and as we all know, all fascists are racist too.

Stephne Lawreance - innocent bystander

Sean Cox - innocent bystander

Stephen Lawrence - attacked in an area known for gangs and drug dealing.

Sean Cox - attacked in the vicinity of a football match and opposing supporters.

Stephen Lawrence - forget the drug and gang bit, there off on a crusade and they ain't gonna stop until we label it racially motivated so get cracking we need to find some evidence to indicate that.

Sean Cox - Phew! thank fuck there was a football match on that night and the fascists kicked off all over the place, thats our get out.

Stephen Lawrence - found any evidence yet? Yep he was black the others were white. Did we hear any racists remarks? Yep. Good can we get something on them? I reckon but it might take a couple of decades, thats ok it's been authorised from above.

Sean Cox - found any evidence of racism here? er nope, apart from them being fascists from Italy. Oh, any racists remarks? - dunno. Anything to suggest a racial motivation? dunno, never bothered to find out. Good, no-ones up our arse about this we'll chalk it up to football.

You get the drift I'm sure.

Do you know anything about the Stephen Lawrence case at all, or do you see a black kid and come to your own presumptions?
You couldn’t be further from the facts if you tried.

This guy doesn't care about facts. He fancies himself as Dog's very own Richard Littlejohn (pig-ignorant, little Englander-racist "journalist" for the Sun), so makes it all up as he goes along, hoping some poor saps will read his drivel and accept his skewed take on the world. T.J. is a true racist in every sense of the word, in my opinion, and all of his little anecdotes about his family do not disguise the fact that he is pure BNP/KKK/type fodder.

Always check and double check any "facts" TJ comes up with.

Fortunately your opinion counts for nothing. With me, even less than nothing.

I am a staunch believer in freedom of speech and for people to have their own opinion and to express it, unfortunately these days less and less people do, preferring to go along with whatever majority is shouting loudest at the time. Added to that I would never take anything said on this site, outside of it.

Which when all said done makes you rather fortunate, I'm sure if I tried hard enough I could get you convicted of a 'hate crime' with the above post alone - I mean far more spurious claims are upheld.

[Guest]

Also David Norris and former suspect Neil Acourt were jailed for 18 months for a racist attack on an off-duty police officer in Eltham in 2001 but you reckon that they weren't racist. You also ignore the secret filming of them shouting racist stuff when they were coked up to the nines, I wanna kill blacks was said numerous times on film. It was presented to a panel of judges. But they are not racist you say.

[NastyNickers]

Lets do that quick comparison, it'll have to be quick coz I'm off shortly.

Stephen Lawrence Black - attacked by known white racists

Sean Cox white - attacked by swarthy known fasicst Roma Ultras - and as we all know, all fascists are racist too.

Stephne Lawreance - innocent bystander

Sean Cox - innocent bystander

Stephen Lawrence - attacked in an area known for gangs and drug dealing.

Sean Cox - attacked in the vicinity of a football match and opposing supporters.

Stephen Lawrence - forget the drug and gang bit, there off on a crusade and they ain't gonna stop until we label it racially motivated so get cracking we need to find some evidence to indicate that.

Sean Cox - Phew! thank fuck there was a football match on that night and the fascists kicked off all over the place, thats our get out.

Stephen Lawrence - found any evidence yet? Yep he was black the others were white. Did we hear any racists remarks? Yep. Good can we get something on them? I reckon but it might take a couple of decades, thats ok it's been authorised from above.

Sean Cox - found any evidence of racism here? er nope, apart from them being fascists from Italy. Oh, any racists remarks? - dunno. Anything to suggest a racial motivation? dunno, never bothered to find out. Good, no-ones up our arse about this we'll chalk it up to football.

You get the drift I'm sure.

Do you know anything about the Stephen Lawrence case at all, or do you see a black kid and come to your own presumptions?
You couldn’t be further from the facts if you tried.

I don't know what part of the country you live in, up north somewhere is a recollection I have but I stand to be corrected.

If that is the case, I wouldn't presume to think you knew nothing about an event which occurred in your locale, nor think I knew more because I'd read newspapers and 'evidence' from partisan sources.

I wouldn't expect you or anyone else to believe it but coming from south London and frequenting the areas where the events took place and knowing a good few people who live there, some of whom were these kids contempories going to the same schools, Stephen Lawrence was not the saint he is being held up to be, though I will be quick to add it didn't warrant being stabbed to death.

If the evidence was so obvious and overwhelming that Stephen Lawrence was murdered as a result of his skin colour why did it take 19 years to convict someone of that? - hardly strikes me as an obvious and overwhelming 'open and shut' case.

As I said, whatever Stephen Lawrence did or was up to it didn't warrant him being stabbed to death but neither does it the hundreds we have seen in similar circumstances before that day, since that day and to this present day - none of which have a racially motivated reason as the major factor.

We live in an age, as I've said before on numerous occasions, where if just one other person makes the same allegation as another, it is instantly accepted as the truth, why would it then not apply to the many people who say otherwise?

I can tell you from what I've heard from numerous white, black and mixed race people who lived in that area now and at the time, Stephen Lawrence was not murdered solely because he was black. It never happened in the past, contrary to what certain people want you to believe, it doesn't happen now. This is London not Mississipi.

And yet, one of the major issues in the Stephen Lawrence case was the way in which it was handled by the police. The first enquiry found institutional racism and led to an amendment in the double jeopardy law. The second inquiry found substantial police corruption, including linking another officer to the murder of a private investigator who was close to exposing the corruption in the met police.

Your assumptions about Stephen Lawrence and his character are weird. You know the area, you know some of the people, so he couldn’t have been a saint? What nonsense is that? Even kids from rough estates have varying personalities. It isn’t a hivemind.

I presume I know more about it because you can’t seem to see passed the motivation of the murder, and miss out the actual big issue that made this such an important case.

And anyway, as guest said, the murderers were actual racists. And they had been involved in other racist stabbings.

[Trapper John]

And yet, one of the major issues in the Stephen Lawrence case was the way in which it was handled by the police. The first enquiry found institutional racism and led to an amendment in the double jeopardy law. The second inquiry found substantial police corruption, including linking another officer to the murder of a private investigator who was close to exposing the corruption in the met police.

Your assumptions about Stephen Lawrence and his character are weird. You know the area, you know some of the people, so he couldn’t have been a saint? What nonsense is that? Even kids from rough estates have varying personalities. It isn’t a hivemind.

I presume I know more about it because you can’t seem to see passed the motivation of the murder, and miss out the actual big issue that made this such an important case.

And anyway, as guest said, the murderers were actual racists. And they had been involved in other racist stabbings.

So now you have finally reached the the point where the agenda kicks in. There would have been no investigation into police methods had this not been classed as a racially motivated crime.

The fact that people attack or even kill others of different ethnicity does not automatically mean the motives were racist.

As for the paragraph in bold, I don't really understand what you are saying - I am saying that I have heard over the years from different people of all persuasions that the reason for Stephen Lawrence's murder was not racial but rather he did deal drugs, nothing heavy, weed and some tabs and also he owed some not very nice people money.

Now thats from not just one person dragged up after advertising for people to come forward, it's from many contempories of his, one of whom I am very close to who went to the same school at the time. For so many people to say the same thing over a prolonged period means there is at least some question of it's validity. It certainly isn't a reason to kill a person nonetheless but it makes more sense than to just walk or run up to someone and stab them to death just because of the colour of their skin.

[Guest]

And yet, one of the major issues in the Stephen Lawrence case was the way in which it was handled by the police. The first enquiry found institutional racism and led to an amendment in the double jeopardy law. The second inquiry found substantial police corruption, including linking another officer to the murder of a private investigator who was close to exposing the corruption in the met police.

Your assumptions about Stephen Lawrence and his character are weird. You know the area, you know some of the people, so he couldn’t have been a saint? What nonsense is that? Even kids from rough estates have varying personalities. It isn’t a hivemind.

I presume I know more about it because you can’t seem to see passed the motivation of the murder, and miss out the actual big issue that made this such an important case.

And anyway, as guest said, the murderers were actual racists. And they had been involved in other racist stabbings.

So now you have finally reached the the point where the agenda kicks in. There would have been no investigation into police methods had this not been classed as a racially motivated crime.

The fact that people attack or even kill others of different ethnicity does not automatically mean the motives were racist.

As for the paragraph in bold, I don't really understand what you are saying - I am saying that I have heard over the years from different people of all persuasions that the reason for Stephen Lawrence's murder was not racial but rather he did deal drugs, nothing heavy, weed and some tabs and also he owed some not very nice people money.

Now thats from not just one person dragged up after advertising for people to come forward, it's from many contempories of his, one of whom I am very close to who went to the same school at the time. For so many people to say the same thing over a prolonged period means there is at least some question of it's validity. It certainly isn't a reason to kill a person nonetheless but it makes more sense than to just walk or run up to someone and stab them to death just because of the colour of their skin.

more factless nonsense from Nick Griffin. The racist nonces were convicted of a racial murder, why are you defending them? Are they your ilk?

[NastyNickers]

And yet, one of the major issues in the Stephen Lawrence case was the way in which it was handled by the police. The first enquiry found institutional racism and led to an amendment in the double jeopardy law. The second inquiry found substantial police corruption, including linking another officer to the murder of a private investigator who was close to exposing the corruption in the met police.

Your assumptions about Stephen Lawrence and his character are weird. You know the area, you know some of the people, so he couldn’t have been a saint? What nonsense is that? Even kids from rough estates have varying personalities. It isn’t a hivemind.

I presume I know more about it because you can’t seem to see passed the motivation of the murder, and miss out the actual big issue that made this such an important case.

And anyway, as guest said, the murderers were actual racists. And they had been involved in other racist stabbings.

So now you have finally reached the the point where the agenda kicks in. There would have been no investigation into police methods had this not been classed as a racially motivated crime.

The fact that people attack or even kill others of different ethnicity does not automatically mean the motives were racist.

As for the paragraph in bold, I don't really understand what you are saying - I am saying that I have heard over the years from different people of all persuasions that the reason for Stephen Lawrence's murder was not racial but rather he did deal drugs, nothing heavy, weed and some tabs and also he owed some not very nice people money.

Now thats from not just one person dragged up after advertising for people to come forward, it's from many contempories of his, one of whom I am very close to who went to the same school at the time. For so many people to say the same thing over a prolonged period means there is at least some question of it's validity. It certainly isn't a reason to kill a person nonetheless but it makes more sense than to just walk or run up to someone and stab them to death just because of the colour of their skin.

Agenda? What agenda is that?
There was an inquest because of the shoddy way the murder was dealt with and the media attention.

This is being classed as a racially motivated murder just because of skin colour, but the evidence before, during and after the murder.

The bolded part in my post was in reply to this claim you made:

“I wouldn't expect you or anyone else to believe it but coming from south London and frequenting the areas where the events took place and knowing a good few people who live there, some of whom were these kids contempories going to the same schools, Stephen Lawrence was not the saint he is being held up to be, though I will be quick to add it didn't warrant being stabbed to death.”

But I’m not really arsed about conjecture. I grew up on one of Manchester’s roughest Council estates. I know what the gossip is like, how the rumour mills work.
You may have heard it off a hundred different people, but it doesn’t make it true.

[Trapper John]

And yet, one of the major issues in the Stephen Lawrence case was the way in which it was handled by the police. The first enquiry found institutional racism and led to an amendment in the double jeopardy law. The second inquiry found substantial police corruption, including linking another officer to the murder of a private investigator who was close to exposing the corruption in the met police.

Your assumptions about Stephen Lawrence and his character are weird. You know the area, you know some of the people, so he couldn’t have been a saint? What nonsense is that? Even kids from rough estates have varying personalities. It isn’t a hivemind.

I presume I know more about it because you can’t seem to see passed the motivation of the murder, and miss out the actual big issue that made this such an important case.

And anyway, as guest said, the murderers were actual racists. And they had been involved in other racist stabbings.

So now you have finally reached the the point where the agenda kicks in. There would have been no investigation into police methods had this not been classed as a racially motivated crime.

The fact that people attack or even kill others of different ethnicity does not automatically mean the motives were racist.

As for the paragraph in bold, I don't really understand what you are saying - I am saying that I have heard over the years from different people of all persuasions that the reason for Stephen Lawrence's murder was not racial but rather he did deal drugs, nothing heavy, weed and some tabs and also he owed some not very nice people money.

Now thats from not just one person dragged up after advertising for people to come forward, it's from many contempories of his, one of whom I am very close to who went to the same school at the time. For so many people to say the same thing over a prolonged period means there is at least some question of it's validity. It certainly isn't a reason to kill a person nonetheless but it makes more sense than to just walk or run up to someone and stab them to death just because of the colour of their skin.

Agenda? What agenda is that?
There was an inquest because of the shoddy way the murder was dealt with and the media attention.

This is being classed as a racially motivated murder just because of skin colour, but the evidence before, during and after the murder.

The bolded part in my post was in reply to this claim you made:

“I wouldn't expect you or anyone else to believe it but coming from south London and frequenting the areas where the events took place and knowing a good few people who live there, some of whom were these kids contempories going to the same schools, Stephen Lawrence was not the saint he is being held up to be, though I will be quick to add it didn't warrant being stabbed to death.”

But I’m not really arsed about conjecture. I grew up on one of Manchester’s roughest Council estates. I know what the gossip is like, how the rumour mills work.
You may have heard it off a hundred different people, but it doesn’t make it true.

If only that were the case, a good deal of people languish in prison right now because we are told it does make it true.

[NastyNickers]

But I’m not really arsed about conjecture. I grew up on one of Manchester’s roughest Council estates. I know what the gossip is like, how the rumour mills work.
You may have heard it off a hundred different people, but it doesn’t make it true.

If only that were the case, a good deal of people languish in prison right now because we are told it does make it true.

I’m pretty sure estate gossip alone doesn’t lead to a conviction.

[Markey mark]

Lisa boy whom sadly died of cancer was goods friends of Steven lawerance went to school together and toke drugs together and dealed drugs , oddly enough police will turn a blind eye on someone behaviour under public pressure , With Steven Lawerence he wasn’t so innocent as everyone makes out about him , no he didn’t deserve to be killed either , don’t really care if you all say I talking shit , seen the photos

[Lady Murasaki]

And yet, one of the major issues in the Stephen Lawrence case was the way in which it was handled by the police. The first enquiry found institutional racism and led to an amendment in the double jeopardy law. The second inquiry found substantial police corruption, including linking another officer to the murder of a private investigator who was close to exposing the corruption in the met police.

Your assumptions about Stephen Lawrence and his character are weird. You know the area, you know some of the people, so he couldn’t have been a saint? What nonsense is that? Even kids from rough estates have varying personalities. It isn’t a hivemind.

I presume I know more about it because you can’t seem to see passed the motivation of the murder, and miss out the actual big issue that made this such an important case.

And anyway, as guest said, the murderers were actual racists. And they had been involved in other racist stabbings.

So now you have finally reached the the point where the agenda kicks in. There would have been no investigation into police methods had this not been classed as a racially motivated crime.

The fact that people attack or even kill others of different ethnicity does not automatically mean the motives were racist.

As for the paragraph in bold, I don't really understand what you are saying - I am saying that I have heard over the years from different people of all persuasions that the reason for Stephen Lawrence's murder was not racial but rather he did deal drugs, nothing heavy, weed and some tabs and also he owed some not very nice people money.

Now thats from not just one person dragged up after advertising for people to come forward, it's from many contempories of his, one of whom I am very close to who went to the same school at the time. For so many people to say the same thing over a prolonged period means there is at least some question of it's validity. It certainly isn't a reason to kill a person nonetheless but it makes more sense than to just walk or run up to someone and stab them to death just because of the colour of their skin.

Agenda? What agenda is that?
There was an inquest because of the shoddy way the murder was dealt with and the media attention.

This is being classed as a racially motivated murder just because of skin colour, but the evidence before, during and after the murder.

The bolded part in my post was in reply to this claim you made:

“I wouldn't expect you or anyone else to believe it but coming from south London and frequenting the areas where the events took place and knowing a good few people who live there, some of whom were these kids contempories going to the same schools, Stephen Lawrence was not the saint he is being held up to be, though I will be quick to add it didn't warrant being stabbed to death.”

But I’m not really arsed about conjecture. I grew up on one of Manchester’s roughest Council estates. I know what the gossip is like, how the rumour mills work.
You may have heard it off a hundred different people, but it doesn’t make it true.

The agenda of addressing race hate.
Something this poster doesn’t like seeing addressed.