The deaths of Richard Everitt and Stephen Lawrence: compare and contrast

The deaths of Richard Everitt and Stephen Lawrence: compare and contrast

Posted on 4 January, 2012 by Dr Sean Gabb 26 Comments

Note: I am writing a detailed piece on the convictions in the Lawrence case. There is some rather interesting comments in the Macpherson report about the forensic examination of garments etc see RH

The deaths of Richard Everitt and Stephen Lawrence:
compare and contrast
Robert Henderson

The Death of Richard Everitt (see below) is an article I wrote in 1994. Compare and contrast the elite response to his death and that of Stephen Lawrence.

Richard was knifed to death by an Asian gang approximately 300 yards from my front door. The gang was large, perhaps as many as 15 members. The gang was known as the Drummond Street Posse and had gone out that night specifically looking for a “white boy” to attack because they felt they had been “wronged” by a white boy (

The gang were arrested the same night for a separate incident and blood was found on 19-year-old Badrul Miah. This turned out to be a match for that of Richard. Miah, later boasted that he had “stabbed up some white boy”.

After nine months the police had arrested 11 people in connection with the murder. The 11 dropped to six and after a committal hearing the number fell to 3. Eventually only two came to trial, Badrul Miah and Showkat Akbar. Akbar was found guilty of violent disorder and sentenced to three years, of which he served 18 months. Miah was sentenced to life but let out on licence after 11 years despite the trial judge describing it as an unprovoked racist attack (see Mirror link above).

The parents of Richard suffered beyond the loss of their child: “After the trial Mandy and Norman tried to move on but were the victims of threats and racial abuse. They had to leave the home where they raised their children and move out of London to Essex.” (

Those are the bare facts of the Everitt murder. Compare the elite response to his murder with their response to that of Stephen Lawrence:

1. Only one person was convicted of the murder even though all were guilty of joint enterprise.
2. There has been no media campaign to bring the others to justice.
3. There has been no public inquiry into Richard’s murder.
4. The one person was convicted of Richard’s murder was released after 11 years without any media or political uproar.
5. There has been no concerted media campaign stretching over nearly two decades to bring the others in the gang to justice.
6. Unlike the Lawrence case where the Daily Mail accused the five suspects of murder in 1997 ( , no representative of the national press or broadcasters called any other member of the gang which murdered Richard a murderer.
7. The gang members who attacked Richard were older than those accused of attacking Stephen Lawrence.
8. Unlike the Lawrence murder, British politicians from the word go not only refused to adopt the tone of moral outrage which they routinely do when the death of Stephen Lawrence is discussed, but actively tried to play down the racist aspect. Considerable pressure was put on Richard’s parents at the time to go along with the usual Maoist pc line that they were not racist and so on. The local MP, Frank Dobson, was most notable for his silence.

It is often said these days that the grip political correctness has on British society is much worse than it was. It is true that the absurdities get ever greater as the politically correct compete to be the purest ideologue, but as the Everitt case shows in really important matters such as the administration of justice it was already solidly entrenched two decades ago.

Note: I am writing a detailed piece on the convictions in the Lawrence case. There is some rather interesting comments in the Macpherson report about the forensic examination of garments etc see RH

anationalist | 4 January, 2012 at 2:05 pm |
Its time for all right-thinking folk to unite against this genocidal marxist horror.

Faustiesblog | 4 January, 2012 at 3:07 pm |
Your excellent analysis of the two cases in tandem confirms what we have all known – that the Lawrence case, which suits the political agenda’s narrative, gains favourable publicity. It has propaganda value.

There is no true justice in this country; just political manipulation – or manipulation of the chattel by the powerful. Justice should be blind but clearly, it is not.

‘Representative democracy‘ is the vehicle which transported us to this unhappy place.

Radex | 4 January, 2012 at 3:14 pm |
It seems to me that Dobson and Norris were convicted on the flimsiest forensic evidence, on which substantial doubt had been cast by the Defence. The Judge instructed the jury not to convict if there was reasonable doubt, but the jury appears to have ignored this instruction. It would be interesting to know more about the jury composition.

Sean Gabb | 4 January, 2012 at 4:22 pm |
You aren’t the only one asking that question.

Ade | 4 January, 2012 at 6:04 pm |
There is an Agenda to change the Demographic makeup of Britain forever.

There are many many more events like these, there are no checks on who comes in to Britain, in fact, the more violent and criminally inclined the Better, immigration is not about the economy, the West is being destroyed by design.

Our Political elitres are using Abortion, Mass Immigration, Gang rape and murder to get rid of us

Ian B | 4 January, 2012 at 6:38 pm |
I do not believe that there is any desire to destroy the West. Something far more scary is being done. The desire is to perfect the West, and then by extension the world. The project- which has been underway in various forms since the the triumph of post-millennialists in the nineteenth century- is to perfect society. Thus society must be forcibly reformed, and purged of sin.

Under any such dogma, sinners are always the most harshly punished. A few hundred years ago, you would be punished for attacking a man and stealing his purse. For questioning the Trinity, you’d be burnt at the stake. These men are not being punished for the crime of murder, but for the sin of racism. That is why our leaders see no contradiction in treating different murderers differently. They’re not really interested in the murder. They’re interested in the sin it represents.

The Progressive State is a religious state, in form. It simply happens to be a religion without a (specific) God. They are building that old puritan dream of “the shining city on the hill”.

Neville Lawrence | 4 January, 2012 at 7:32 pm |
Saint Stephen died for our sins. Richard Everitt, never heard of him.

James Acourt Esq | 4 January, 2012 at 7:45 pm |
Did anyone notice the media reporting on television the day before sentencing of the men that they would be “sentenced to life tommorow”. How did they know? I smell a conspiracy folks, not really surprising though, as they were convicted and sentenced by media many years ago.

Dwyane Dibley | 4 January, 2012 at 7:49 pm |
If Stephen Lawrence was white we would never have heard of him like we have never heard of the names of the many white boys killed by blacks and asians.

Ian B | 4 January, 2012 at 7:50 pm |
Might also be worth noting that the sort of people applauding this are the same as those who condemn the hanging of Derek Bentley for shouting “let him have it”.

PC Brigade | 4 January, 2012 at 8:14 pm |
The Stephen Lawrence murder changed our country for ever. You can be found perfectly innocent of a crime but brought back to trial if “new evidence” is found. People are now scared to talk about immigration or God forbid saying that black people commit crimes and please don’t question or upset a black man. (don’t worry about whites as they do not suffer from racism, no such thing) All this political correctness and Lawrence worship and hysteria can only breed the type of hatred people are trying to stop (I for one don’t like to be told who I am allowed to like or be careful of or treat as if they are some kind of special or divine being.) Yes Britain has changed since the Lawrence murder, but not for the better contrary to the reports by the Saint Stephen sycophants and hysterical media.

T . E Lawrence | 4 January, 2012 at 8:23 pm |
All you folks had better be careful, freedom of speech doesn’t cover Stephenlawrence (the new name for a crime against black people) Thought crime also comes under Stephenlawrence law and is punishable by death.

Wayne King | 4 January, 2012 at 8:28 pm |
Who is this Stephen Lawrence I keep hearing about recently?

Leroy Small | 4 January, 2012 at 8:31 pm |
Black people must get preferential treatment in law over whites as they are superior to whites.

Sean Gabb | 4 January, 2012 at 8:41 pm |
All these people posting under funny names are the same person. I don’t like this.

Martin Brown | 4 January, 2012 at 8:51 pm |
That may or may not be true but many of the points made do have value and I don’t think Sean Gabb is all that funny a name.

Ian B | 4 January, 2012 at 8:54 pm |
I’d just like to point out to readers that I’m not the same person.

David Davis | 4 January, 2012 at 8:56 pm |
When the ultimate backlash comes, as it will in the end, the scale of the calamity will be enormous. The fate, sad as it was, of poor murdered Stephen Lawrence, and the importance of him in the calamitous event’s construction, will be nugatory.

I can predict, confidently, that there are now, today, many thousands and thousands more quietly angry people out there, than was the case 24 hours ago. Dont, those of you listening from GCHQ (hello there, chaps…!…you all-right today then? Hi, again…) think it’s us: most of us who inhabit this site have been angry since we learned to read, and then sadly discovered that GramscoStaliNazis exist and want to (not as Ian B says) destroy Western civilisation. Yes, Ian, in a sense, they do want to “purify” and “perfect” it, but they have to first sack the existing people and elect a new People. This can only now be done by including an overt, Direct Act of Destruction.

All this Lawrencemania is designed to do is loosen the mortar a bit more, and make the destruction of classical revolutionary-liberalism easier when the final moment comes. I’m not saying it was right for some fellow or fellows to stab an uninvolved and unrelated and very very conscientiously-studious black student to death in a London street, just as it would not be right either if some drunken and no doubt very very chaste and upright Somali girls tried to kick a useless scumbag babymother white English chav bitch to death either. And the conscioentious student was even using public transport – it was a bus stop, it appears….If one lot get banged up on debatable evidence 18 years after the event and after a second attempted trial, and the other lot get let off with slapped wrists, despite the evidence of camerae and phone recordings, then there obviously must be some good and higher purpose in the decisions of the authorities, of which ordinary individuals cannot and need not be made aware.

Clearly. some “good and great purpose” is at work here, and we ought not to interfere with it, as our betters know better what is good for us and all other people.

Mark Hill | 4 January, 2012 at 8:58 pm |
Nor am I.

James Funnyname Brown | 4 January, 2012 at 9:03 pm |
England as a country is finished, it’s run it’s course. Turn the lights off before you leave, English people.

David Davis | 4 January, 2012 at 9:26 pm |
No, James, we’ll leave the lights on – after all, all the “green energy” being generated by then will be so cheap it’ll cost nowt. And if not, then the GranscoStaliNazis can pay for it theirselves. F*** them.

Ian B | 4 January, 2012 at 9:33 pm |
David, my argument is that they’re not trying to destroy Western Civilisation. They see it as a caterpillar that needs turning into a butterfly. Of course, in the process that will destroy virtually everything that people like us consider worthwhile about Western Civilisation, but it’s not quite the same as an explicit desire to destroy it. They’re utopians, millennialist utopians. That’s why they’re so dangerous. I’m not trying to minimise what they’re up to, just trying to understand it more thoroughly.

I think the problem with saying “you’re trying to destroy civilisation” is that that is not what they believe they are trying to do, so such a criticism simply bounces off them as “cranky”. I’ve never met a Proggie who sat in a corner planning the destruction of the West. What they do is try to achieve the eradication of everything they consider bad within the West. It just so happens that that encapsulates pretty much everything that exists. It’s like trying to create a form of Islam with nothing bad in it. There wouldn’t be much left to call Islam.

David Davis | 4 January, 2012 at 9:36 pm |
Many that I have met, Ian, especially teachers (which is scary), explicitly say, with quite cheerful frankness, that they want to destroy it. They also aver that “The right people will be alright because they know how to live greenly in a cottage, somewhere like Wales or Cornwall, leaving a small footprint on the planet.”

David Davis | 4 January, 2012 at 9:37 pm |
And …. “All this horrid brash consumerism, and the adverts, will be gone!”

Sean Gabb | 5 January, 2012 at 4:41 am |
Well, if this person keeps posting under obviously false names –

we shall not be happy. Posters are not required to identify themselves, but we do prefer them to keep to a single false personality.

Mr Nemo | 5 January, 2012 at 10:03 am |
Mr Sean Gabb you lie about not publishing peoples Email addresses (so people beware about publishing your real email address) and you also publish their ip addresses. Please don’t go after Mr Tony Blair with your stash of illegal guns. I hope Tony isn’t hounded too badly because of this.

The Stephen Lawrence Murder “Trial” – Political Justice at Work

Posted on 4 January, 2012 by Dr Sean Gabb | 4 Comments

Note: Had I been on the jury, I would have refused, regardless of the evidence, to convict the alleged killers of St Stephen Lawrence. So these men could be dragged into court for their show trial, an ancient and essential principle of English law had to be overturned – the principle that a man cannot be tried twice for the same alleged offence. For this reason alone, the whole process was illegitimate. It should have been the duty of any Englishman empanelled on that jury to acquit. That the “evidence” supplied was a sick joke from beginning to end should have been only an additional reason the throw the case out. Sean Gabb

By D.J.Webb

I am distressed to hear of the Crown Prosecution Service and police working together to pin crimes with no evidence on young men. We have political crimes in this country, where the state wishes to find someone guilty, and it doesn’t really matter who as long as the person is someone who could be regarded as unattractive from a left-wing perspective. I myself am opposed to the immigration of non-white people into this country, and so I am exactly the sort of person who they would under other circumstances have been happy to frame for Stephen Lawrence’s murder, although I never met the guy.

Think about the killing of PC Blakelock – his killer roams free, as a politically inspired decision to let the killer out was imposed on the courts. But in the case of Stephen Lawrence – there is no evidence against any of the 5 men supposed to have killed him. There is no video evidence or any other evidence. They were secretly taped in their homes and elsewhere for thousands of hours, and the tapes showed no evidence against them – quite the contrary – they are said to have been bemused (“the real killers must be laughing to see us accused”). After 18 years, the police now claim that a microscopic speck of St. Stephen’s blood was found on one of the men’s clothing. So microscopic it was not detected by forensic scientists 18 years ago! Would stabbing someone lead to more than a speck of blood too small to detect? It doesn’t stack up.

I am afraid that it is not beyond our police to have planted the evidence after 18 years. If the speck was not detected back then, then it wasn’t there then. The killer would have more than a speck too small to detect on his clothing.

The fact that the men frequently discussed racialist themes in their houses and had knives is no sort of evidence against them. It is suggested that videos of their conversations on these themes prove they killed St. Stephen, but the whole of English justice collapses if such “evidence” is regarded as of any bearing. Proof of direct involvement is the only thing that counts.

This business of changing the law to allow retrospective reprosecution (double jeopardy) strikes me as something only a dictator would do. Not only must justice be done, but it must be done in line with established procedures without abuse of power, which is what such retrospective laws amount to.

It is sickening to read that 120 policemen were devoted to this case, which has cost £50m, when others have been killed and haven’t attracted a fraction of the media attention or police resources, due to the colour of their skins.

I have no idea whether the 5 men did it or not. But I do know that the decision handed down recently was a politically motivated one where the men stood little chance of justice – given media coverage it is hard to see how any of the five could possible get a fair trial. The whole of English justice rests on the principle that it is better for ten guilty men to go free than to imprison one innocent one. Sadly, we now have administrative justice, with the court case providing the barest of figleafs to the essentially bureaucratically ordered nature of the verdict.

stan ayers | 4 January, 2012 at 2:51 pm |
Hi Sean another excellent article concerning double jeapardy.I cannot believe this was abolished from the framework od british justice after 700 years.The repeal makes a mockery of the Justice System and the cohorts who implimented it.You can be retried for serios crimes if futher evidence is available later on.Come on how open to corruption and false evidence is this.Let us look
again at the combatants in the 2003 Criminal Justice Act,David Blunkett,Tony Blair,And Lord Goldsmith the Attorney General.
Tony Blair with his massive porkie the threat of weapons of Mass Destruction the murder of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan,the probable murder of his polical opponents and now convicted of War Crimes agaist Humanity with fellow protagonist George Bush.
The Atorney General who announced it was unlawful to invade Iraq then changed his mind.Last of all David Blunkett the Home Secretary,and his lustful impregnation of a married woman,using his office to fast track the visa of of the lovers nanny and non registry of directors expenses as Health Secretary.Blir commented that Blunketts integrity was intact until another affair with somebody elses wife.Surely Lucy Blunketts guide dog would hve done a better job and shown better judgement when Blunkett was exposed to blackmail.Did Blair in tend to use him as a sniper in Iraq.Perhaps that was the evil idea to deprive us of our lifelong freedom by employing a blind man who could possibly imagine the draught he was signing into law or be exposed as the most villified Home Secretary in history.Slippery Jack must have been involved in this plot too.
I believe recently it stated that the samples of the defendents were stored on top of the victims clothing or underneath increasing the likelihood of contamination and justice will prevail at the court of appeal.

David Blunkettjetisoned from his position of Home Secretary for impregnating somebody elses wife and claiming paternity of the baby,using the home office to speed up the visa of the nanny of his mistress,omitting to disclose his business interests as Heath minister and involved in an afair with somebody elses wife.
Tony Blair and the weapons of maass destruction lie and the murder of his opponents to regime change,currently indicted for War Crimes with fellow warmonger George Bush

Peter | 4 January, 2012 at 4:54 pm |
Glad to see that I am not the only person who finds this verdict deeply disturbing.

It was only made possible by a +retrospective+ law that allows the state to prosecute someone it doesn’t like, for the same offence, as many times as it likes until it can convict them.

That is potentially a very large building block in building the type of totalitarian society where no one ever feels quite safe from the state.

It is often said that hard cases make bad law, and this case amply proves the point.

Andrew Withers | 4 January, 2012 at 6:29 pm |
Jack Straw who abolished double jeopardy also ensured that the common law offence of Misconduct in Public Office was not made into a statutory offence so that corrupt public officials could only be charged with lesser offences and Misconduct which carried a potential life sentence was downgraded to a ‘aggravating’ issue. Looking after their own as ever






One response to “The deaths of Richard Everitt and Stephen Lawrence: compare and contrast


    There is an Agenda to change the Demographic makeup of Britain forever.

    The parents of Richard suffered beyond the loss of their child: “After the trial Mandy and Norman tried to move on but were the victims of threats and racial abuse. They had to leave the home where they raised their children and move out of London to Essex.” (

    Note: I am writing a detailed piece on the convictions in the Lawrence case. There is some rather interesting comments in the Macpherson report about the forensic examination of garments etc see RH

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s