The family of a murdered mother-of-three have been praised for their “dignity” during the trial of her killer.
Is this so unusual? Does it require the comment?
Djemaa, 23 and a student at the College of North West London, had denied murder but admitting killing Jacqueline with a fire extinguisher and then kneeling on her neck.
He told the Old Bailey trial he had lost his temper after an argument, during which he said Jacqueline abused his religion.
Ah. I begin to see why it requires that comment….
6 comments:
...Jacqueline abused his religion.
Yes, those Quakers can be awfully touchy, can't they?
This charmer presumes too much. For our police to have placed themselves in the position of awarding or deducting points for witness performance, speaks volumes for citizen apathy.
An apathy stretched by the anonymity of the 'net to facilitate condemnation of jury decisions, traducement of individual defendants/judges and castigation of lawyers/witnesses/journalists; all of whom contributed to questioning police motives.
I would be the first to suggest police stick to what they do best if I knew what that was.
As a key point in his defence, surely the defendant would have had to specify what his religion was? I looked in vain for that item of information in the article. The religion that dare not speak its name ... ?
The religion of pea-shooters ?
Why is this not a racial murder along the lines of Stephen Lawrence?
Oooh, I see.
It's only a white girl that died.
"Yes, those Quakers can be awfully touchy, can't they?"
:D
"I would be the first to suggest police stick to what they do best if I knew what that was."
A clue in the last post comments, perhaps?
" I looked in vain for that item of information in the article. The religion that dare not speak its name ... ?"
I think the name gives us a clue...
"Why is this not a racial murder along the lines of Stephen Lawrence?"
Answered your own question there?
Post a Comment