Safer Devon Partnership

A colleague recently gave me a copy of the Safer Devon Partnership booklet that he had down-loaded from the Devon County Council (DCC) website.  Out of interest I went to the DCC website to find out more; this is what they say about themselves:

The Safer Devon Partnership aims to work together to enable the people of Devon to feel and be safe in their homes and communities.  Partners include all four of the Community Safety Partnerships in the County, the Police, Fire and Rescue Service, NHS Devon, Probation Service and the Youth Offending Service.  Together we are stronger.

The vision for the Safer Devon Partnership is to ensure Devon’s communities are places where people:

• Feel, and are safe from crime and anti-social behaviour
• Feel, and are safe from abuse, discrimination and harassment
• Are at low risk of accident, both in their own homes and in the wider community
• Have a sense of belonging to their local neighbourhood and/or “community of interest”
• Have access to a range of support services in relation to community safety
• Identify key community safety issues/concerns and contribute to shaping the solutions to these

Our priorities are to address:

• The most harmful offending behaviour
• Drug and Alcohol Misuse
• Anti-Social Behaviour
• Domestic Abuse
• Prejudice and Hate Crime
• Youth Crime

The introduction on their website appears all very commendable, which nobody will find objectionable; apart from Prejudice and Hate Crime that appears to be an attack on freedom of expression.  Why we need such an organization in a cohesive and homogenous society that we still have in Devon is open to debate.   

Further inspection of the website revealed that the main purpose of the Safer Devon Partnership was to be found in a down-loadable attachment on the website entitled the Devon BME Directory - with BME meaning Black and Minority Ethnic.  It became clear that the organization’s function was solely to serve the needs and demands of immigrants, and had no interest in serving the needs of the indigenous population.

Section 1 of the Safer Devon Partnership directory includes the following:

Voluntary and Community Sector Organizations and Projects

Amber Initiatives         Set up to assist Migrant Workers from the Eastern European Accession countries, namely Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia.

Anatolian Cultural Association   Launched to bring together people of Turkish and Kurdish backgrounds

Polso- Angielska Organizacja   Set up to assist the Polish Community

Black South West Network   The primary focus of the organisation is to facilitate access to information and to empower BME and marginal community organisations as leaders of social action.

CISCO Devon (Crediton International Social and Cultural Organisation)

Cultural Champions   A Cultural Champion is a Devon resident from another culture or religion who comes into the classroom, workplace or community to give pupils an authentic personal view of their culture.

Devon and Cornwall Refugee Support (DCRS)   Asylum seekers and refugees encounter a wide range of problems both during and after the processing of their asylum claim. At DCRS specialist advisors provide assistance with issues surrounding housing, financial support, legal services, health, education, cultural and sporting activities.

Devon United Women  Works to empower women, especially those from minority ethnic backgrounds.

Equality South West (ESW)   We are dedicated to promoting equality and diversity throughout the South West of England.  We are working with partners to tackle discrimination on the grounds of: age, disability, gender re‑assignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex or sexual orientation.

Exeter Citizens Advice Bureau Migrant Worker Advice Project     Help Migrant Workers: Information developed under our Migrant Workers advice project is available in a number of languages.  

Exeter Hindu Temple Cultural & Community Centre

Fata He   FATA HE is a West African word which means ‘Inclusion’ and was established in 2001 to redress social and economic inequalities relating to Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) individuals, families and groups within the city of Plymouth.  Since becoming incorporated as a Limited Company (Social Enterprise) in 2003, Fata He has become an umbrella organisation for other BME individuals and groups, and works closely with other local, sub-regional and regional organisations.

Global Centre              Works with people of all ages and backgrounds and from all parts of Devon to enable them to bring about positive change, justice and sustainability. 

 Hikmat Centre      Hikmat Devon is a Community Interest Company, our work supports families and individuals from minority ethnic backgrounds. We are part funded by Devon County Council.

Imagine           Offers BME communities a chance to socialise.  Supported by Torbay Council

Islamic Centre of the South West        The Exeter Mosque and Islamic Centre of the South West. 

MOSAIC                       Mosaic is a national project, led by the Campaign for National Parks, that aims to build sustainable links between BME communities and ten of the National Parks in England and Youth Hostels Association.

Multilingua Devon       We are Devon's countywide agency for face-to-face interpreting and translation services.  We are supported by Devon County Council.

The Olive Tree Association   The association set up English classes at Exeter Mosque for BME communities in Devon.  We are supported by Devon County Council.

One World Clubs   The social clubs operate in secondary and primary schools in Exeter, Exmouth, Newton Abbot and Paignton. Facilities provided free by Devon County Council.

Planet Rainbow   Aims to provide support for mixed heritage and BME families. Funded by both Exeter City Council and Devon County Council.

Plymouth and Devon Racial Equality Council   PDREC is dedicated to the promotion of racial equality for all.  Supported by Devon County Council.

Polish Saturday School in Exeter        The school follows a curriculum provided by the Polish Education Society.  Facilities at Montgomery Primary School, Exeter are provided free of charge.

Refugee Action Plymouth   The voices of refugees living in Plymouth are at the centre of a new awareness raising initiative aimed at improving community relations in the city.  Refugee Action receives funding from the Home Office.

Refugees First              Provides support and advice for asylum seekers and refugees.  Supported by Plymouth City Council.

Refugee Housing Support Service - START and PATH             Students and Refugees Together (START) and  Plymouth Access To Housing (PATH) are independent homelessness charities which were set up to help deal with the growing concerns about levels of homelessness in the city.  Supported by Plymouth City Council.

Refugee Support Group Devon                        Promotes the well being of all asylum seekers and refugees in Devon and to assist them in making informed choices about adapting to life in the UK. Supported by Devon County Council.

 Rejuve-Nation   Has been set up to support the BME communities in Exeter.  Financed by the Big Lottery Fund.

The Rural Racism Project        Provides anti-racist and hate-crime training.  Lottery Funded.

Sahara BME Mentoring Programme    Assists BME immigrants to access local services and facilities.  Devon County Council funded.

This list of organizations does not cover all of the various voluntary associations included within the Safer Devon Partnership booklet.  

What is of most concern is that all of these organisations are either:

·        Directly funded by the tax-payer.  All County, City and District Councils throughout England employ staff directly from tax-payer funds to support immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers and other non-Britons in their quest to gain citizenship, housing, healthcare, and other welfare benefits including legal aid.  There are certainly over 100 fully paid staff members employed by the various councils throughout Devon; and these employees contribute nothing that benefits the local indigenous population.   Furthermore, many of these organizations receive funds directly from the various councils to promote their activities; which is done without the consent of the local tax-payers.

·        Indirectly tax-payer funded.  Many of these immigrant organizations are indirectly funded by the tax-payer, as they are given the free use of rooms and other facilities in government or council controlled premises.  It is the local councils and other state organizations that pay for translation services should the need arise – the immigrant gets all this free at the tax-payers expense.

·        Quasi-government funded.  Quasi-government funding can be defined as Lottery Funding, or charitable status.  Many of these immigration organizations exploit the indigenous population by applying to the Lottery Fund for sponsorship.  The management of the Lottery Fund is full of politically‑correct liberal bigots who are only too willing to assist worthless immigrant organizations, yet at the same time virtually ignore worthwhile schemes that enhance the heritage and culture of the indigenous population.  Charitable status is another ploy used to gain financial advantage that is often denied to indigenous organizations.

In Section 2 of the Safer Devon Partnership booklet it goes on to list:

Statutory Services, Specialist Services and Themes

Community Safety Partnerships          These partnerships take responsibility for a range of community safety issues, including Hate and Prejudice Crime and Domestic Violence.

Devon & Cornwall Constabulary Diverse Communities Team             Our main area of focus is Hate Crime.  Hate Crime is ANY OFFENCE committed against a person or person’s property that is motivated by the offender’s hatred of people because they seem to be different. 

Devon SACRE (Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education)    An advisory group that consists of representatives from the CofE, Methodist, RC, Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh and Islamic traditions.

Devon BME Domestic Violence Action Group              Tasked with implementing an action plan to address issues around BME communities accessing Domestic Violence support services.

NRPF (No recourse to public funds)     Devon’s emergency fund to help people trapped in violent relationships with no recourse to public funds; such as asylum seekers, people on temporary work permits or foreign students.

English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL)        Provides English classes for immigrants and migrant workers with fees being subsidized by the governments; those on benefit get free lessons.

Ethnic Minority Achievement Service              Employs specialist advisory teachers and higher level teaching assistants to work with BME children in schools across Devon.

Plymouth and Devon Racial Equality Council                         Gypsies and travellers specialist services available in Devon. 

Devon Consortium Traveller Education Service          Provides educational support to travellers children.

Hate Crime Prevention Task Group     Promotes inter-cultural respect and community cohesion.

NHS Devon and Torbay Care Trust BME Mental Health and Well-being Team            Employs a team of 8 Community Development Workers to deliver race equality in mental health services across Devon.

Legal Services             For specialist advice and support with legal issues, particularly in relation to immigration status and employment. Companies of solicitors included on the approved Devon list are: Devon Law Centre; Employment Tribunal Advocacy Services; Stephen Scown Solicitors.

 

All of the organizations listed above are directly funded by the tax-payer, with Council employees working for, or with, these Statutory Service providers.  The solicitors clearly exploit these organizations to further their own business interest at tax-payers expense; through a legal aid scheme that does not discriminate between tax-paying indigenous folk and benefit scrounging immigrants. 

Section 3, and the final part of the Safer Devon Partnership booklet details:     

Forums, Task Groups and Cross-cutting Themes

Devon Faith and Belief Forum (DFBF)             It seeks to enhance involvement of communities with greater participation in civic life and belief groups with other organizations.

Exeter Interfaith Group            The group sees a primary role as educating one another about respective beliefs and customs but also in spreading the message of the value of interfaith dialogue as a resource for community cohesion by organizing and participating in events with a wider public focus.

Exeter Racist Incidents Action Group (ERIAG)             It works to monitor and tackle racist crime in the Exeter Area.

Exeter Respect Festival           The city’s annual celebration of diversity using performing and creative arts and other activities to promote multi-cultural understanding and say no to racism and all forms of prejudice.

Equality Strategy and Scrutiny Group (ESSG)             It is currently focused on improving the delivery of local area agreement work programmes and ensuring equality is at the heart.

Fawcett Devon             It works hard to promote gender equality.

The Intercom Trust      Intercom provides services for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people across the South West.

Migrant Workers Task Group (MWTG)                          Established with financial support from Devon County Council to assist Migrant Workers to access local services.

North Devon and Torridge Diversity Group      Set up to advise on matters relating to equality and diversity.

South West Religion & Belief Equality Network           A registered charity and England’s first regional equality and diversity body.

All of these Forums, Groups and Themes, if not directly funded by the tax-payer, receive active support from the government and local councils.  These organizations may only be receiving nominal funding from the public purse; but what is not clear is the amount of time and effort that public employees expend on these activities.

To find out people’s views on this topic I showed friends and acquaintances a copy of the Safer Devon Partnership booklet, and sought their views by posing the questions:

Is this list of organizations truly representative of Devon people?

Most people I spoke to feel it in no way represents Devon folk.  In fact it was felt that it promotes ethnic minority culture and interests to the detriment of indigenous values. 

Furthermore, it was felt that these organizations did not promote integration, but merely encouraged immigrants to retain their own culture and values with the indigenous population expected to modify their culture and behaviour to suit the immigrant communities.  The Safer Devon Partnership was viewed as promoting segregation instead of integration.

Does Safer Devon Partnership achieve anything useful?

It was felt that the Safer Devon Partnership had a negative effect on society as it encouraged immigrants to retain their own cultural identity, and to play the race-card if they have any grievance.  

If the indigenous population are not represented; then could the Safer Devon Partnership be deemed a racist organization?

It was noted that apart from gypsies and single mothers there were no other organizations within the Safer Devon Partnership that represented the values, culture, interests and aspirations of the indigenous Anglo-Celtic peoples.  The consensus was that the Safer Devon Partnership was indeed a covert racist organization set up to empower the immigrant communities at the expense of indigenous traditions, morals and cultural values. 

 This then begged the question: 

Should these organizations be receiving tax-payer funding?

The general feeling was that too much of tax-payers money is squandered on programmes that benefit immigrants who make little or no contribution to society; yet the indigenous population were expected to pay for these programmes even though they didn’t benefit from them.

Clearly, the next question had to be: 

Should local tax-payers be paying for these employees, and can they be dispensed with?

The general response was that all tax-payer funded employees associated with these activities should be immediately dismissed, and the Safer Devon Partnership and all associated groups should be disbanded.  Why should immigrants get special tax-payer funded treatment when indigenous folk are expected to pay for any specialist service they may require.  Immigrants should be treated just like the rest of us, and should be made to pay their own way.

One person went so far as to say that these employees are parasites leeching off the already over-burdened indigenous tax-payer, while most immigrants don’t pay tax.

Who gains from the Safer Devon Partnership?

Apart from the immigrants themselves, it was pointed out that in the Safer Devon Partnership booklet three companies of solicitors are mentioned that specialize in: Immigration Accreditation Scheme; Asylum Accreditation Scheme; Nationality & Citizenship; Appealing Removal and Deportation; Human Rights; Legal Aid.  So clearly the real winners are the immigrants, lawyers and associated employees.

  

It is noted that various companies of solicitors are listed in the Directory; a clear indication that they are touting for tax-payer funded business to further the promotion of real, or imagined, race-hate crimes.  It is outrageous that scarce tax-payer funded resources can be squandered on pointless politically-correct initiatives, merely to appease the demands of the already empowered BME communities.  All this pandering to the immigrant’s demands does nothing to assist them to integrate into British society: in fact it has the complete opposite effect of segregating them into their separate communities. 

One way to speed immigrant’s integration into the British way of life would be to remove all government published multi-language literature and free translation services – if immigrants had to pay for these services, then they would soon learn to speak English and fend for themselves.  Organizations like the Safer Devon Partnership do nothing to speed up the process of integrating immigrants into our society, it merely encourages them to become welfare dependant trapped within their own ghettos so retaining their own cultural identity, and to play the race-card if they have any grievance.  

Safer from whom?

The Safer Devon Partnership indicates that immigrants and ethnic minorities are in constant danger from the indigenous population; and it clearly implies that the white Britons are thugs and villains who despise immigrants and will do everything they can to destroy and discredit them.  By implying that immigrants need protection from the indigenous population is a Hate Crime, and as such the Safer Devon Partnership can be deemed a racist organization. 

When is a Murder Deemed a Racially Aggravated Hate Crime? 

According to reports in the media, in approximately 50% of inter-racial murders the victim is white and the aggressor is non-white.  As non-whites only make up 10% of the population it is safe to conclude that a black or other non-white immigrant is almost 9 times more likely to commit an inter-racial murder than an indigenous white person.

However, if a white person kills a black or other non-white it is always recorded as a racially aggravated hate crime.  Yet if a Negro or Asian murders a white it is very rarely, if ever, classed as a racially aggravated hate crime.

The difference in which a Caucasian and Negro victim of murder is treated can be illustrated in the Stephen Lawrence and Charlene Downes cases, as detailed below.

Stephen Lawrence was a known drug pusher and supporter of the racist Black Power organization – hence the clenched fist black supremacist salute shown in the picture.   Stephen is often portrayed as a dedicated “A” level student and a pillar of the community, yet this is not based on any factual evidence.  It is suggested that he was studying to become an architect, but there is no evidence to support this. Clearly, this has been fabricated to enhance his reputation; when in reality he was part of the racist black gangland culture that prevails around the Eltham area of London. Stephen was murdered by a rival gang; there was NO racial motive – it was purely a case of gang warfare for the control of the local area.

Charlene Downes was an innocent vulnerable schoolgirl living with her parents in Blackpool when she was approached by a gang of Moslem men of Pakistani origin who flattered her into accepting them as her friends – in reality she was being groomed for sexual exploitation. She was repeatedly raped and used for prostitution by her groomers; but she felt too ashamed and afraid to tell her parents of the abuse she had been subjected to.  Afraid that Charlene would expose the Moslem gang for their sexual exploitation, the groomers (after group raping her) murdered her in the room above their kebab shop. To dispose of her body the gang cut her into pieces and passed her parts through an industrial meat mincing machine. Her minced body meat was then sold to the general public in the kebabs cooked on their premises.

For both of these crimes extensive police investigations were undertaken with the result that the following suspects were arrested, and subsequently committed to trail.

In 1996 Gary Dobson and David Norris (Shown above) together with Jamie Acourt, Neil Acourt and Luke Knight were committed to trial for the murder of Stephen Lawrence under a private prosecution. Charges against Jamie Acourt and David Norris were dismissed due to insufficient evidence.  The evidence submitted by Duwayne Brooks was found to be inadmissible (dishonest), consequently the case collapsed with Neil Acourt, Luke Knight and Gary Dobson being formally acquitted; and under the double jeopardy rules cannot be charged for the same crime again.  The defendants received no compensation for wrongful arrest.

Mohammed Reveshi and Iyad Albettikhl (shown above) were put on trail at Preston Crown Court in 2007 for the murder of Charlene Downes.  It is now a documented fact that several members of the jury were intimidated by friends of the defendants when “Asian men” followed them to their homes and stood outside their gates saying “we KNOW where you live”.   It has also come to light that, during the trial, a member of the jury was very closely involved with one of the defendants and even visited him in his cell during the trial!  Consequently the jury failed to reach a verdict; but for some reason the Crown Prosecution Service failed to call for a re-trial. These two murderers have been awarded up to £250,000 compensation for wrongful arrest.

Now, one would have thought that this was the end for both of these cases.  Not so; the Labour government under the arch-traitor Tony Blair saw an opportunity to increase Labour’s share of the ethnic vote.  To do this they implemented a judicial inquiry into the Stephen Lawrence case headed by a retired High Court Judge Sir William Macpherson.   The Macpherson Report proved to be the most dishonest piece of politically-correct dogma ever produced.  It was clearly produced at the behest of the Labour government to maliciously slur the police force with fabricated accusations of institutional racism – although in the report he failed to give specific examples.   The most controversial aspects of the report was for the introduction of a new offence – that of a hate crime.  The Macpherson Report defined a hate crime as:

“Any hate incident, which constitutes a criminal offence, perceived by the victim or any other person, as being motivated by prejudice or hate.”

The very fact that the word ‘perceived’ is used to define a hate crime means that for the first time in British judicial history the truth and actual proof of a crime being committed is of no consequence; as an alleged victim’s perception of being subjected to hateful treatment takes precedence over factual evidence.  The Labour government accepted the report in its entirety without questioning any of its findings, regardless of the numerous flaws high-lighted by many prominent people.  The most obvious flaw was the fact that its findings only related to ethnic minorities – it assumed that indigenous white Britons would never be the victims of hate crimes inflicted on them by the newly empowered immigrant communities, and that only white people committed hate crimes.   The Labour government’s rash acceptance of the report and its subsequent changes to the law did not eliminate institutional racism; it vastly promoted it in the form of institutional anti-white racism.         

  

The Macpherson report resulted in the birth of institutional anti-white racist organizations such as the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) whose sole purpose is to promote the interests of the ethnic minorities, and demonize the indigenous population as bigoted racist thugs.  Some parts of the report that has now been embodied within our law including the requirement for organisations to implement a policy of positive discrimination and affirmative action in the recruitment and promotion of their employees.  This has resulted in the over-representation of ethnic minorities in government organizations, with the standard of competence being lowered to accommodate the less qualified and less able immigrant candidates.  In organizations like the BBC it is now hard to spot the white, male, hetero-sexual presenter as women and ethnic minorities overwhelmingly dominate the scene.  Another change in the law as a result of this report was the repeal of the double-jeopardy law that prevented a person being tried more than once for the same offence.  

The politically-correct bigots of the liberal left-wing establishment used the Stephen Lawrence affair as a means of promoting their political agenda of venerating the ethnic minorities at the expense of denigrating the indigenous population’s traditions, morals and culture.  The media has devoted so much publicity to the Stephen Lawrence gangland killing that other genuine racist murders, such as Kriss Donald, Christopher Yates and Ben Kinsela, have never been mentioned.  The liberal establishment even placed a memorial plaque at the location where Stephen Lawrence was supposed to have died.

       

The Stephen Lawrence murder has witnessed a frenzied outpouring by the main stream media to establish their politically-correct credentials by comparing this small-time gangland drug-pusher to that of a paragon of virtue, who’s every deed was portrayed as an act of selfless benevolence.  Such was the establishment’s desire to promote diversity and multi-culturalism that it allowed Stephen Lawrence to be elevated to the status of a national hero - a Saint even! To commemorate his virtual beautification a plaque has been place at the location where he was killed.  The site is monitored by CCTV so that it will not be vandalized by people who are disgusted by this over-reaction to an alleged racist murder, particularly when a multitude of white victims of hate crimes are not officially acknowledged as such.

The top picture shows the Moslem take-away, Funny Boyz, where Charlene Downes was raped, murdered, dissected, minced and sold as kebabs.  It has since changed its name to Mr Beanz in an attempt to conceal its infamous past. No memorial to Charlene exists at the location, and any attempt by friends and family to hold a vigil and place a wreath at the site in her memory has been met with police harassment and accusations of inciting racial hatred.

Many people have jumped onto the Stephen Lawrence bandwagon to further their own interests.  The vast amount of racial discrimination laws and human rights legislation enabled the Wicked Witch Cherie Blair to set up the Matrix Chambers specializing in the extraction of tax-payers money for the pursuit of questionable racial discrimination cases.  The Human Rights industry, promoted by greedy lawyers and corrupt judges, extracts £billions from the tax-payer and private companies each year and is seriously damaging Britain’s economic recovery as employers are bombarded with spurious racial discrimination charges. 

How have the parents of these two murder victims fared?  Below are the details of each set of parents, and it is very apparent that they have not been treated equally.   

The parents of Stephen Lawrence, Neville and Doreen Lawrence, have been given as much hero worship by the liberal-left establishment and politically-correct media as their murdered son. The liberal establishment had always placed the Lawrence’s at the centre of all their actions to further their goal of institutional anti-white racism. They have always been portrayed as hard-working, with wholesome family values and the pillars of society; but the victims of white racial harassment since their arrival from Jamaica in the 1950s.  The liberal establishment used the Lawrence’s to found an organization called the Stephen Lawrence Trust – a left-wing lottery funded charity to promote black people to the exclusion of indigenous white folk.  For lending their names to this trust both Neville and Doreen were awarded the OBE. The Lawrence’s were awarded some £250,000 of tax-payer's money in compensation for the emotional stress they suffered due to the loss of their son. As a result of her supposed selfless devotion to the black community, Doreen has been appointed a Baroness and will sit in the House of Lords.  It is difficult to understand why this should be as in reality she merely allowed her name to be used by the Stephen Lawrence Trust, but did nothing else of any worth.

The parents of Charlene Downes, Robert and Karen Downes, have been given no such hero worship by the liberal-left establishment, but have instead been portrayed as white trash. Karen Downes has had no support from the liberal establishment – in fact quite the opposite.  When the two men accused of Charlene’s murder were acquitted. Karen was naturally distressed and tweeted that they should have been sentenced to death.  The extremist left-wing organization Unite Against Fascism accused Karen of inciting people to murder, and orchestrated a campaign of hate towards her.  The venom directed towards the Downes’s was hateful to the extreme, calling them benefit scum and lazy work-shy trash.  Naturally, the police made no effort to apprehend these hateful liberal bigots. When Karen endeavoured to hold a protest outside of the kebab shop where Charlene met her death, she was threatened by the police for committing a hate crime and has subsequently been banned from approaching the shop and handing out literature explaining the circumstances surrounding Charlene’s murder. The Downes' have not been awarded any compensation for the loss of their daughter.  No charity has been setup in memory to Charlene or other girls groomed by Moslems to satisfy their sexual perversions.  Karen has not yet been appointed a Baroness.

With the repeal of the double jeopardy law, the police managed to get enough DNA evidence to re-open the trail; and with the Crown Prosecution Service managing to select a compliant jury, David Norris and Gary Dobson were put on trial for racial aggravated murder.  The basis for re-opening the trial was based on flimsy DNA evidence; furthermore, there was no evidence to suggest it was racially motivated.  Below is a review of the DNA evidence written while the jury were out deliberating on their verdict. 

The Stephen Lawrence stabbing murder case verdict was expected to be not-guilty due to unreliable DNA evidence seems certain. It soon became evident that the new case has been built on unreliable DNA evidence, as there is a very good chance that cross-contamination has occurred It has emerged that a bag containing Stephen Lawrence’s blood-stained jacket had been put in a bag containing a suspect’s clothing prior the crucial evidence being put into storage for a number of years.  In addition, clothes which had been recovered from the home of one of the two men accused of killing him, individually bagged to avoid forensic cross-contamination, had been placed into the same plastic sack when the investigation ground to a virtual halt back in the 90′s. Evidence was placed into storage in 1995, following the unsolved 1993 investigation.  One of the most crucial bits of evidence, the black ‘LA Raiders’ jacket, which Stephen Lawrence was wearing when he was attacked, may not have been handled and stored in the ideal way, and contaminated other evidence, such as the clothing from the defendants. The stabbing in Eltham, South-East London shocked the nation at the time of the offence. One of the plastic sacks had also been discovered with a missing seal, which was supposed to keep contents free from contamination.  The main prosecution argument suggests that blood, hair and microscopic fibres on the clothes taken from homes of the two suspects, Gary Dobson and David Norris appear to have been put into the same bag, further complicating the situation, and seriously undermining any plausibility of DNA evidence being reliable in the case.  Although DNA evidence is now very reliable if well handled; flawed, and some say primitive, police systems in the 1990s arguably may make it impossible to rule out whether forensic evidence had been inadvertently transferred between clothing items belonging to victim and suspects during the handling and storage process. Christopher Bower, who was in charge of storage of exhibits at a Metropolitan Police lab has confirmed that there was no system to separate victim and suspect items after they had been forensically examined, which appears to be a massive blow for the prosecutions case.  The brown paper bags containing individual items were placed at random in clear plastic over-bags, mixing up individual clothing evidence. When being questioned by Timothy Roberts QC, who is representing Dobson, Mr Bower confirmed that no specific segregation instructions for dealing with the bags, and also nothing to prevent the contents being mingled, and no system of keeping them separate for further examination, such as the cold case review which later followed. Remarkably gloves were not always used when presenting evidence which was produced at a private prosecution brought by Stephen’s parents in 1996.  The items had to be moved and stored again before a cold case review in 2007 and 2008, which discovered the forensic evidence now at the heart of the prosecution case. Kent Police had taken possession of key exhibits in 1997 while they were looking into complaints about the conduct of Met officers during the first murder investigation.  They had been returned in 1998, which was prior to the official Lawrence Inquiry.

In spite of the overwhelming evidence that the DNA evidence was unreliable, which in any other trail the Judge would have declared as inadmissible, the jury returned a guilty verdict on both defendants.  Clearly, this was a show trial set up by the liberal establishment to appease the ethnic minority claim that they are the victims of racial persecution by the majority indigenous British population.   The vicious witch-hunt against both Gary Dobson and David Norris instigated by the Labour Government of Tony Blair, the liberal/left-wing press and the BBC meant that the jury had been subjected to biased reporting for over twenty years; so is it any wonder that with the level of negative reporting about the defendants, the jury were brain-washed into finding them guilty.   

Why do the racial discrimination laws only seem to apply in the case of white-on-black offences but never in cases of black-on-white crime?  A short résumé of official statistics reveals the following:  

·              Blacks are 5 times more likely to commit violence against the person.

·              Blacks are 4 times ‘more likely’ to commit sexual offences.

·              Blacks are fifteen times ‘more likely’ to commit robbery.

·              Blacks are over six times ‘more likely’ to commit fraud and forgery.

·              Blacks are over twice as likely to commit criminal damage.

·              Black are five times ‘more likely’ to commit drugs offences.

A preliminary analysis of official crime data shows:

v   Violence against the person is 5 times more prevalent in the black community, than in the white community.

v   Drugs offences are 16 times more prevalent in the black community, and 3 times more prevalent in the Asian community, than in the white community.

v   Robbery is over 9 times more prevalent in the black community, than in the white community.

v   Committing homicide is 6 times more prevalent in the black community, and twice as prevalent in the Asian community, than it is in the white community.

v   The homicidal killing of white people is 90 times more prevalent in the black community, than the homicidal killing of black people in the white community.

v   The homicidal killing of white people is 30 times more prevalent in the Asian community, than the homicidal killing of Asian people in the white community.

v   The number of white victims of inter-racial homicide is approximately 40 times greater than expected, when compared to the number of such victims in the minority (BME) community.

v   The white community suffers more victims of inter-racial and racially motivated homicide than all of the minority (BME) communities put together – despite the BME communities being less than 10 per cent of the total population.

v   The number of white victims of racially motivated homicide is approximately 50 times greater than expected, when compared to the number of such victims in the minority (BME) community.

In spite of these statistics very few (if any) ethnic minorities are actually charged with racially aggravated crime, yet an indigenous white person would be charged accordingly for the most trivial of incidents.  Why do the indigenous British people put up with this injustice, when it is clear from government statistics that they are not the main instigators of hate crime?  White Britons have been brainwashed since the 1950s into believing that they are intrinsically racist and must make amends for the perceived past sins of empire.  This self-flagellation has got to stop; indigenous Britons must again take pride in their forefathers past achievements and stand up against the constant institutionalized demonization that is directed against them by the liberal elite establishment.

To answer the question at the head of this article: When is a Murder Deemed a Racially Aggravated Hate Crime? 

Only when it is committed by a white person.