The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

bradley knight 10 years on. the most unjust sentence ever.

hi, i am bringing this up because it happened near where i used to live and it still shocked me to this day.


''On 22 December 2001, 23-year-old steelworker, Bradley Knight died in Enfield hospital.

He and his colleague, Peter Matthais, had been stabbed and slashed repeatedly in Waltham Cross High Street, as they made their way home after their firm's Christmas dinner.

As Bradley lay dying on the day after the attack, Peter was being treated for injuries to his heart, lungs, liver and hands after trying to grab the Samurai sword with which Daniel Jethoo was attacking his friend. Miraculously, he survived.

Jethoo told the jury at St. Albans Crown Court:

"I just wanted to kill a white man".

As the jury watched close-circuit television footage of the attack, they heard him screaming "I am the top ******", as he hit out at two complete strangers.

The jurors also witnessed pictures of Jethoo kicking Bradley and spitting on him in the street.

However, despite seeing this crime committed before their very eyes and despite his confession that he "just wanted to kill a white man", the jury found Jethoo not guilty of the murder and not guilty of the attempted murder of Peter Matthais.

Instead they found him guilty of manslaughter only.

Jethoo's defence rested on the fact that he had been racially abused earlier in the evening. This had so upset him that he had gone home and returned to the scene armed.


radley and Peter just happened to be walking by when Jethoo appeared on the scene, and, although they had never seen or spoken to him before, he attacked them because they were there and because Jethoo "wanted to kill a white man" or two.''

Daniel Jethoo Who was imprisoned for just 9 years for the "manslaughter" of Bradley before he was released long before the 9 years were up''





sorry, i must bring this up because 10 years later i see this as the most unjust sentence ever in british political history. at present people are going on about the stephen lawrence case but this is far worse. it is one thing to not have any evidence to convict someone but quite another to convict and then let them get away with their crime.

our thoughts should be with the knight family on this tragic anniversary knowing that they have not and never will receive justice.

http://www.mamaa.org/infalbk.htm
(edited 12 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Avatar for efn
efn
10
That is heartless, what kind of judge/courtroom would give such an unjust poor sentence. As for the black man, he should either be deported or hanged.
Do you actually give a **** about these dead people, or are you just using this story to vent your xenophobic propoganda and get into another race war on tsr?

I assume the latter.
The UK Justice system still baffles me and always will.
But of course racism can't happen to white people ¬¬. If you look at the statistics more white people are murdered by racists attacks in this country than ethnic minorities murdered by white people.
Reply 5
Avatar for bestofyou
bestofyou
18
Original post by Foghorn Leghorn
Do you actually give a **** about these dead people, or are you just using this story to vent your xenophobic propoganda and get into another race war on tsr?

I assume the latter.


It was 10years ago, that was the time for making this thread about how these people must have suffered and their families etc.

OP is simply hitting out at the justice system and rightfully so. I see nothing racist here in the OP nor would it spark any racial argument from non-racist people.

Edit:


Apologies, it appears straight after hiting post we have this comment:

Original post by Nightstar-27
But of course racism can't happen to white people ¬¬. If you look at the statistics more white people are murdered by racists attacks in this country than ethnic minorities murdered by white people.


He wasn't let off with it because it wasn't racist, so why bring that up? He just didn't get done for murder as they saw fit to do him for mansluaghter. I'd assume a white attacker on black victims would have got the same under the same circumstaces and with the same judge/jury.

However, I'll have to assume there was more to it than just being racially abused. Because surely leaving your house with a sword looking for a white person to kill is more than enough to qualifiy for murder as you have leave home with intend to kill. I was under the impression that manslaughter was killing but not intentional, such as killing someone in a bar fight.
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 6
Avatar for lulubel
lulubel
OP
Original post by bestofyou
It was 10years ago, that was the time for making this thread about how these people must have suffered and their families etc.

OP is simply hitting out at the justice system and rightfully so. I see nothing racist here in the OP nor would it spark any racial argument from non-racist people.



many thanks for your support and understanding.
Reply 7
Avatar for miserlou
miserlou
9
Original post by efn
That is heartless, what kind of judge/courtroom would give such an unjust poor sentence. As for the black man, he should either be deported or hanged.


What if he was born here?
Reply 8
Avatar for MittenRef
MittenRef
Original post by miserlou
What if he was born here?


Was just going to point this out myself, just because he's black doesn't mean he's not British!

As for the OP, I agree entirely. I cannot see how the justice system found him not guilty of murder and attempted murder. Surely this situation is the dictionary definition of murder?
The jury were offered the option of a murder conviction, instead they chose manslaughter. The jury must have felt that there was a good reason not to return a guilty verdict on the murder charge. It was the decision of 13 ordinary men and women, not the decision of a judge or the UK justice system.
Original post by jacketpotato
The jury were offered the option of a murder conviction, instead they chose manslaughter. The jury must have felt that there was a good reason not to return a guilty verdict on the murder charge. It was the decision of 13 ordinary men and women, not the decision of a judge or the UK justice system.


Exactly this.

The jury heard the evidence. Proper evidence, not watered down accounts from newspapers. After hearing this, they decided not to return a guilty verdict on the murder charge.
Reply 11
Avatar for lulubel
lulubel
OP
Original post by jacketpotato
The jury were offered the option of a murder conviction, instead they chose manslaughter. The jury must have felt that there was a good reason not to return a guilty verdict on the murder charge. It was the decision of 13 ordinary men and women, not the decision of a judge or the UK justice system.



sorry, what would that be? bradley knight was a completely innocent person.


the manslaughter charge is simply unacceptable.

not only is this a clear cut murder it is also a racist murder.
Reply 12
Avatar for lulubel
lulubel
OP
Original post by InnerTemple
Exactly this.

The jury heard the evidence. Proper evidence, not watered down accounts from newspapers. After hearing this, they decided not to return a guilty verdict on the murder charge.




ok, so tell me why killing an innocent person because of their skin colour is manslaughter?

the jury were obviously people like you who think name calling is reason to murder innocent people who share the same skin colour as those who called you names.

this is the most unjust case in british political history bar none.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by lulubel
ok, so tell me why milling an innocent person because of their skin colour is manslaughter?

the jury were obviously people like you who think name calling is reason to murder innocent people who share the same skin colour as those who called you names.

this is the most unjust case in british political history bar none.


I don't know - I was not on the jury. The only information I have are a number of news reports.

But we can be sure that the jury would have had all the facts and they came to the decision they felt was just in all the circumstances.
Reply 14
Avatar for lulubel
lulubel
OP
Original post by InnerTemple
I don't know - I was not on the jury. The only information I have are a number of news reports.

But we can be sure that the jury would have had all the facts and they came to the decision they felt was the right one.







its a clear miscarriage of justice.


the racist murderer got manslaughter simply because the judge and jury perceived that bradley knight deserved to be murdered because of his skin colour. apparently, because bradley knight was white, then that gave the murderer a reason to murder him.


apparently, if a white person calls a black person a name then ALL white people are fair game for murder. regardless of their involvement in the original incident.



http://www.mamaa.org/infalbk.htm
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by lulubel
its a clear miscarriage of justice.


the racist murderer got manslaughter simply because the judge and jury perceived that bradley knight deserved to be murdered because of his skin colour. apparently, because bradley knight was white, then that gave the murderer a reason to murder him.


apparently, if a white person calls a black person a name then ALL white people are fair game for murder. regardless of their involvement in the original incident.



http://www.mamaa.org/infalbk.htm


The judge didn't have a say in the matter.

Are you seriously suggesting that the 12 members of the jury, having been randomly selected, were all anti white activists?

Anyway, your first post appears to have been lifted from a website called "I am an Englishman." A website which links to Stormfront, David Ickes forum and even cites the Daily Express as if it is a credible source. Dear oh dear.
Reply 16
Avatar for Stasiaxx
Stasiaxx
10
Original post by lulubel
x


Is there any point to this thread? A man was unjustly murdered. What do you think you are going to achieve by posting this. I know if a member of my family had be murdered and i thought that the sentence would disproportionate i would pursue it myself. In my eternal grief i wouldn't want someone posting this on some forum to create an argument it is completely disrespectful and unnecessary on your part.
Reply 17
Avatar for lulubel
lulubel
OP
Original post by InnerTemple
The judge didn't have a say in the matter.

Are you seriously suggesting that the 12 members of the jury, having been randomly selected, were all anti white activists?

Anyway, your first post appears to have been lifted from a website called "I am an Englishman." A website which links to Stormfront, David Ickes forum and even cites the Daily Express as if it is a credible source. Dear oh dear.





i gave you a link to the MAMA charity which is supported by the home office which tels of the incident.


http://www.mamaa.org/infalbk.htm

http://www.mamaa.org/




please, just because other sites report on the story it does not mean it is not true.
Reply 18
Avatar for lulubel
lulubel
OP
Original post by Stasiaxx
Is there any point to this thread? A man was unjustly murdered. What do you think you are going to achieve by posting this. I know if a member of my family had be murdered and i thought that the sentence would disproportionate i would pursue it myself. In my eternal grief i wouldn't want someone posting this on some forum to create an argument it is completely disrespectful and unnecessary on your part.




how dare you. this is the most unjust sentence in british political history and it is the 10th anniversary of the murder. so it is very appropriate that i bring it up at this time.
Original post by lulubel
i gave you a link to the MAMA charity which is supported by the home office which tels of the incident.


http://www.mamaa.org/infalbk.htm

http://www.mamaa.org/




please, just because other sites report on the story it does not mean it is not true.


I'm not challenging the validity of the story.

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you