saintbletch

Weirdly, I'm listening to the Thompson Holiday's ad cover of Pixies' Where is my Mind? It's a slow, piano-based interpretation of one of my Pixies' favourites. VERY different and I can't stop humming it.

Not sure if this post is in code or just exhibiting the limitation of reading/typing on a small screen/keyboard. So excuse me if I haven't quite understood the point you appear to be struggling to make. Perhaps I can ask you to re-read the first post in this thread. Then can I ask you to re-read my thoughts on the Lawrence killing/verdict. Then can I ask you to post your thoughts afresh. I've either got something very wrong, or you have. Sent from my Ivory Tower using English

Yep agree too. The problem is that an apology without contrition is worthless but a politician demonstrating contrition is considered weak.

@15 secs - Wow. The last time I saw a smile leave a face that quickly was during Gordon Brown's election charm offensive.

You've met them all? Impressive.

It'll be interesting if/when more mainstream politicians, or those from her own party, join in. I see she's also apologised. Well, she's issued one of those 3rd-person political apologies where she apologises "for any offence caused". As if there is no direct connection between her, her words and the offence caused.

I think that is an excellent distinction trousers and a good way to look at racism - solely from a personal perspective. But, I also know that laws find it difficult to deal with subtleties of personal interpretation. Unfortunately, they have to operate with a heavy and clumsy broad brush. There are for example public order offences that deal with spreading racial discontent. And whilst I think it's fair to say that you'd have to have a big problem with Diane Abbott to think about pursuing a prosecution under the Public Order Act, she is a serving MP. And an MP representing a community that is apparently 61% white. For any politician to start a tweet with the words "White people...", they would have to ensure that the rest of the tweet didn't try to paint a stereotype that some within that group might (personally) find offensive. I think she failed to do that. I see she has now said that the tweet was taken out of context. I'm stuggling to think of a context where those words would be the right ones to use. Clegg has called her tweet "stupid and crass" (and he'd know). He has suggested she should apologise and explain herself. Calls for resignation will surely follow.

Diane Abbott, a serving MP, is being criticised and accused of being racist for this tweet. @bimadew White people love playing "divide & rule" We should not play their game #tacticasoldascolonialism It was sent in response to this tweet to her @HackneyAbbott Maybe. I find it frustrating that half the time, these leaders are out of touch with black people they purport to represent. Valid point, racist or somewhere in the middle?

Yes he was bridge too far, Martin Bashir on Newsnight said that his father was a 'gangland' figure. Bashir, who interviewed one of the suspected 5 (can't remember which one), also suggested that it was possible that his father had contacts in the force and that he used those contacts in the first two weeks to help his son.

Interestingly it appears that since the conviction the Police have received more information about the case. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16413433 So is this a member of the public that has grown a pair of balls, or has one of the killers decided that he doesn't want to share a cell with 'people of colour' for the next 15 years?

Agreed bridge too far. I suppose 15 and 14 years isn't a great deal by today's standards, as I believe racially aggravated stabbing carries a minimum 25 year sentence. But given their age at the time of the attack and the inability of the crown to determine who of the two (or others) dealt the fatal blow, it certainly represents some form of justice.

Don't particularly disagree with any of that Turkish. My concern is how it might look. As I believe I wrote. I don't understand sentencing guidelines from 1983. But IF, all those years ago, minors would be given a 'clip round the ear' sentence for being part of gang attack, and if the racial element of the crime cannot be considered, then I worry that the sentence may appear lenient. Not incorrect in law. Just lenient. If you then look at the unrepentant adults that have been found guilty yesterday, it may make the law look ass-like and may remove the warm glow that many of us feel about justice having been served. Hope not.

The sentencing will be interesting as I've just read that the judge has to sentence the murderers as things were at the time of the crime. ie they will be treated as minors and the judge is without the 'benefit' or harsher laws to combat racially motivated crimes. I hope this doesn't end up looking like grown men have got away with murder.

Fair enough. And for the record my use of 'ignorance' was simply meant to suggest a lack of knowledge of the detail of the case on your part. I wasn't suggesting your were 'ignorant'.

I completely agree with the principle that the greater crime is the death of a teenager and that his skin colour is secondary. But you'd have to have had your head somewhere where the sun doesn't shine for the last 20 years to not understand that this case was about race and racism. The killing was racially motivated, the perpetrators were racists, the police service's policies and procedures were institutionally racist. Stephen Lawrence's death has come to symbolise minorities' struggle against racism and the verdict today will come to symbolise a victory against racism in years to come. You're going to have to get over your sensitivity I fear Turkish because this case will be reported in a race context whenever it is mentioned. So it's no surprise that it is being handled that way on here. Why so sensitive to the racist categorisation of the case and verdict?

Your ignorance here is a lack of knowledge of the wider context of the case? I thought that was clear. Sorry if it wasn't.

Congratulations! BTW I've always liked Bletch as a boys name. Just a thought.

Not sure if you're being provocatively naive here Turkish. Taking your ignorance at face value though, the reason this is reported in such an obvious race context is down to profound effect the case had on society in general and the police specifically following the MacPherson enquiry's citing of the Police as institutionally racist. Stephen Lawrence's death changed the way the police dealt with ethnic minorities. The case would therefore never again be reported in any other context other than one of race. I agree in principle that the skin colour of the victim shouldn't matter, but as this case came to symbolise the (then) comparative lack of access of the black community to the justice system and the walking free of the gang that were pretty much known to have killed someone, it would be naive in the extreme to expect it to be reported in any other way. It's not insensitive, it's iconic.

That's very good news indeed. I hope it's a safe conviction. If any corners were cut or mistakes made with the DNA evidence which appeared to be pivotal, I could see this in the appeal courts for years.

I heard on the radio this morning that Spurs have warned their fans that stewards will be wearing head-mounted cameras ahead of tonight's game with Chelsea and will be on the lookout for racist or homophobic remarks/chants. I'm guessing we're in the middle of some sort of coordinated FA/PL clampdown.

A superb read revolution saint. Thoroughly enjoyed it. It's not easy to carry off a plot device like a 20 year memory loss credibly throughout a book and keep the reader with you, but Watson accomplishes it well. Also surprised to see that S J Watson is a man. He writes female emotions very convincingly (I imagine!). Not surprised to read that the film rights have been bought by Ridley Scott though.

But we do have aircraft carriers. That nice M. Sarkozy is letting us use his fleet. And I'm sure France will not 'twiddle its thumbs...' Good job we've got a stable relationship with the French. I just hope historians won't be looking back in centuries to come asking questions of how we could get into such a situation.

The Independent review said it's set to be the new Birdsong only better! That's praise indeed. I think I'll give it a spin next.

I've just started this following the recommendations on here. Very good so far.

I've been reading some really good stuff lately. I read an excellent 3 book series by David Ashton based on the real life Edinburgh detective / author James McLevy whose own books were said to be an inspiration to Conan-Doyle. Ashton is an actor and wrote the McLevy books following a series of very popular radio 4 plays. Set in the mid-19th century, the author has attempted to embroil McLevy, who is a real grinch of a man, in cases relating to significant Scottish historical events of the time - (Gladstone's succession of Disraeli, The Tay Bridge disaster and even Scottish involvement in the American Civil War). Not the sort of books that change your life but very well drawn characters, very well told stories, superb dialogue and excellent period language. I was left wanting another book in the series but will have to make do with the Radio 4 plays instead. Following on from a recommendation on here to read C J Sansom's excellent Matthew Shardlake series, I went looking for a similar sort of historical crime fiction and found the John Shakespeare series by Rory Clements. Shakespeare (yes he is William's elder brother!) is an 'Intelligencer', working for Sir Francis Wallsingham. Wallsingham was apparently one of the first people to exploit intelligence for national security and espionage. Anyway, that makes Shakespeare something like a very early MI5 and MI6 agent. The series is set in the late 16th century and is incredibly thoroughly researched. It's very similar in plot and style, if not quite in the same league as the Shardlake series. Shakespeare is called on to investigate issues of national security and always has his hands tied behind back by his own high morals and having to tip-toe amongst the politics and power brokers. If you like historical fiction, I'd really recommend it - after you've read Matthew Shardlake first. If I can make just one recommendation it would be Into the Darkest Corner by debut novelist Elizabeth Haynes. It tells the story of a woman who forms a relationship with a very controlling partner. We're told that this control eventually turns to violence and the book tells of her ordeal and the obsessive compulsive disorder it leaves her with. The book is a brilliantly written psychological thriller with a narrative that is split in two, as each alternating chapter tells of her ordeal 4 years earlier and then her current situation. What you come to realise is that the ordeal isn't over. The way the author portrays OCD, mental illness and domestic violence is absolutely compelling. Very, very good.