|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Britain
The cover-up of a racist murder in Britain
What the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry has revealed and what it
has not
By Tony Hyland
23 July 1998
After 56 days the Public Inquiry into the racist murder of
Stephen Lawrence concluded its first stage on July 20. The inquiry
heard oral evidence from two key eyewitnesses, senior police officers
involved in the murder investigation and the five white youth
originally charged with the murder of the black teenager. The
second part of the inquiry will be confined largely to written
submissions regarding how the police should respond to racial
attacks in the future. Towards the end of the year the inquiry's
chairman, Sir William Macpherson, is due to submit a report advancing
a series of recommendations.
Launching the inquiry last July, Labour's Home Secretary, Jack
Straw, promised it would, "allow the concerns of the Lawrence
family and others to be fully addressed and will identify the
lessons to be learned from this tragic case which will be relevant
to the future handling of racially-motivated crimes." The
inquiry has failed on all counts. Five years after the death of
the 18-year-old student in April 1993, his killers--Neil and Jamie
Acourt, Luke Knight, Gary Dobson and David Norris--still enjoy
immunity from prosecution.
The police and the judicial system are responsible for this.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) originally dropped charges
against the five men on the pretext of insufficient evidence.
Committal proceedings were later brought against three of the
suspects, only due to a private prosecution instigated by Stephen's
parents, Neville and Doreen. The High Court judge thwarted this
on the grounds that the evidence of a key eyewitness was "unreliable".
This decision prevented incriminating forensic and circumstantial
evidence being placed before a jury. A Coroners Court ruling in
1997 found that Stephen's death was an unlawful killing caused
by "a completely unprovoked racist attack by five white youths."
Although this court lacks the powers of criminal prosecution,
its verdict further compromised the police and judicial system.
Stephen's murder occurred against the background of a growing
consensus between the main political parties over tightening immigration
and asylum restrictions. This was accompanied by an anti-immigration
campaign in the media, helping to create the political environment
for a rise in racist assaults. These attacks either went unpunished
or were dealt with leniently. In contrast, anti-racist protesters
were dealt with severely. Nine of those who participated in a
demonstration in 1993 calling for the closure of the fascist British
National Party headquarters were sentenced to a combined total
of 20 years in prison.
The decision by the incoming Labour government to organise
a Public Inquiry into the police handling of the Lawrence case
is an acknowledgement of how discredited the police force and
the legal system have become. The term "Public Inquiry"
has proven to be something of a misnomer, however. The complaints
against the police by the Lawrence family have been investigated
by the Police Complaints Authority (PCA), an internal police body.
Proceedings at the inquiry have been interrupted by legal disputes
over disclosure. Documents of the PCA had material removed before
being made available. While the inquiry heard some evidence hitherto
kept secret, those in authority will not be held to account for
their actions. Immunity was given against any criminal or disciplinary
charges that might arise.
Despite these constraints a damning picture emerged. The claim
that the police investigation lacked hard evidence and received
no co-operation from the general public has been disproved. Instead
of a "wall of silence" between April and May of 1993,
in fact, some 26 different people provided information pointing
to the killers. This included a police informer who supplied material
about those involved in the attack the very next day, and two
anonymous tip-offs naming four of the assailants. The police also
had a statement from a white male who had been the victim of a
stabbing by two of the suspects a month earlier.
The police failed to give any credible explanation of why it
took them two weeks to act on the corroborated evidence of two
critical witnesses. Witness B saw the assault from a passing bus.
He relayed the information to witness K, who later went to the
home of three of the suspects, a short distance from the murder
scene. There, witness K observed the suspects acting nervously.
All of them showed signs that they had recently washed themselves.
The fortnight's delay before the five were arrested meant vital
forensic evidence could have been destroyed. The police even failed
to intercept garbage bags being removed from the home of one suspect,
even though a surveillance team witnessed this. They also failed
to follow up the evidence of a young black man who, three days
after Stephen's murder, was allegedly threatened with a knife
by one of the suspects, who warned, "You're next."
After the CPS decision to drop the charges against the five
suspects in July 1993, an internal review was commissioned. It
concluded that the initial police investigation had "progressed
satisfactorily and all lines of inquiry [were] correctly pursued."
After years of citing this report, the police have been forced
to concede that it lacks any credibility. Its author, Detective
Chief Superintendent Roderick Barker, was dismissed as a witness
by the chairman of the inquiry for being "not credible".
His report was described as "indefensible".
The police excused their failure to carry out routine investigative
procedures on the grounds of a lack of resources or inadequate
training. A procession of police officers presented themselves
as bungling incompetents to avoid the charge of institutionalised
racism. This reached absurd levels. Detective Superintendent Brian
Weeden, who headed the initial investigation, retired in 1994
after 30 years service. He claimed ignorance of the fact that
the five white youth could have been arrested on "reasonable
suspicion", an elementary point of criminal law.
From its inception the inquiry ruled the issue of racism off-limits.
The PCA investigation, whilst conceding that there had been "serious
weaknesses, omissions and lost opportunities", exonerated
the police of this charge. The chairman of the inquiry prevented
police witnesses facing serious cross-examination along these
lines. The head of the Metropolitan Police, Paul Condon, even
publicly attacked the Lawrence family for harming race relations
by pursuing the question of police racism.
Police corruption is another issue the inquiry has managed
to keep from public scrutiny. Clifford Norris, the father of one
of those originally charged with Stephen's murder, is a convicted
criminal now serving a nine-and-a-half-year prison sentence for
drugs and firearms offences. When his son David was on trial in
July 1993 for the attempted murder of Stacy Benefield, Clifford
Norris attempted to bribe the victim in return for not giving
evidence. This failed, but the jury reached a verdict of not guilty.
It later emerged that the jury foreman was related to a key figure
in the London drugs underworld, who was on police bail at the
time for handling a stolen cheque for £23,000.
Clifford Norris has a proven connection with at least one police
officer involved in the Lawrence case. The officer, David Coles,
conducted secret meetings in bars with Clifford Norris where he
was seen with a pocket calculator and parcels were exchanged.
Coles claimed he was procuring the drug smuggler as an informant,
but this had not been cleared with his superiors and he was demoted.
Yet Coles was appointed as the police escort for Stephen's friend,
Duwayne Brooks, a key witness to the murder.
Clifford Norris was never called to give testimony to the inquiry,
along with many others including witnesses B and K. The subpoena
forcing the five suspects to testify on June 29 and 30 was heralded
as the high point of the inquiry's first phase. It turned out
to be its nadir. Before the five were due to give evidence, a
High Court judge ruled that no question could be asked directly
relating to their guilt in Stephen's murder. Their subsequent
appearance before a body lacking the powers of a criminal court
could not, under any circumstances, compensate for their never
facing trial for murder.
Questioning of the five therefore centred on their possession
and use of lethal weapons and their outspoken racist beliefs.
They openly displayed their contempt for the fate of Stephen Lawrence.
Luke Knight used the refrain, "Not that I can remember"
a total of 38 times. The answers they did give were generally
provocative. A total of six knives were recovered from the home
of Jamie and Neil Acourt, including a Gurkha knife with a long
curved blade and a locksmith's knife. Questioned about a sword
and scabbard found under the sofa at his home, Jamie Acourt said
they were "ornaments". When asked whether this was the
customary place to keep ornaments he replied, "Yes".
The two brothers were notorious at their former high school
for threatening black and Asian pupils with coshes, knives and
baseball bats. Footage from the surveillance camera planted in
their flat in 1994, after Stephen's murder, records repeated conversations
between the five boasting of racial assaults. Its shows Neil Acourt
demonstrating to the others how to inflict an over-arm blow with
a carving knife similar to the fatal blow that killed Stephen.
One clip showed a conversation between Acourt and Luke Knight
in which the former said that every black person should be chopped
up and left with nothing but a stump. When confronted with this
evidence Acourt explained that this was his idea of humour.
Gary Dobson and David Norris are also shown on the video footage
bragging about their racist exploits. A knife with a 10-inch blade,
similar to the one used to kill Stephen, was found under the bed
of Dobson's girlfriend. When questioned about this, Dobson said
it was used for gardening purposes. Outside the inquiry building,
the five, protected by police, shouted insults and spat at protesters.
Yet the media reserved most of their wrath for the anti-racist
protesters. Public access to the inquiry was restricted over the
two days the suspects were questioned. The attempt by members
of the black separatist Nation of Islam to march into the proceedings
on June 29 was met by police wielding truncheons and firing CS
spray. Sections of the media seized on this incident to malign
other protesters outside as a racist mob. The Evening Standard's
lead was typical, with its headline: "Police tear gas Lawrence
mob--Inquiry halted as black extremists storm the chamber shouting
racist abuse". This provided the pretext for an even larger
deployment of police officers the following day, with dogs, riot
shields and truncheons.
In the final days of public testimony there was an attempt
to blame the Lawrence family's private prosecution for obstructing
the police and the CPS in their attempts to secure the conviction
of those responsible for Stephen's death.
The inquiry has singularly failed to restore public credibility
in the police. An ICM poll of 1,000 people in London showed that
91 percent knew of the case. As many as 48 percent said they had
lost confidence in the police due to their handling of it. One
in seven expressed no trust in the police at all, with the figure
doubling among black people surveyed. While the inquiry has yet
to deliver its recommendations, nothing progressive will emerge
from such a legal travesty.
See Also:
The murder of James Byrd,
Jr
Racial violence and the social forces in America that fuel it
[13 June 1998]
Police cover-up of racist killing
unravels in Britain
[5 June 1998]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |