Essay On Stephen Lawrence

Stephen Lawrence was born on 13th September 1974 and lived in Eltham, South East London. He had both his parents, Neville and Doreen Lawrence, a brother Stuart and a sister Georgina. He was a typical teenager; he went to school, had a busy social life, was committed to his family and was in part-time employment. He had plans to become an architect and always wanted to have a positive impact in the community he lived in (www.stephenlawrence.org.uk). Stephen was of black British ethnicity, and at 10:35pm on the 22nd April 1993, a gang of white youths saw this as enough reason to attack the 18 year old (www.bbc.co.uk).

Stephen had spent the afternoon with his friend Duwayne Brooks. They were heading back home together later than they usually

would. They got to the bus stop on Well Hall Road at 10:30pm. Stephen walked further up the road to check if the bus was coming whilst Duwayne stayed near the bus stop. Duwayne saw a gang of five or six youth on the other side of the road, opposite to where Stephen was. He shouted over to Stephen to find out if he could see a bus coming. The white youths on the other side of the road started to shout racial remarks towards Stephen, before running across the road and attacking him. Duwayne and Stephen began running after the gang left, however Stephen had been stabbed twice and only made it about 100 metres before collapsing and eventually dying on the side of the road (www.gov.uk, Sir William Macpherson, 1999).

Stephen Lawrence was murdered simply because of the colour of his skin. The Stephen Lawrence case became one of the biggest cases in UK history linked to racism. It changed many people’s view on racism, including the metropolitan police services who were accused of institutional racism (www.telegraph.co.uk, Thomas B, 2013).

Two weeks after the murder of Stephen, the Lawrence family complained that the police were not doing as much as they should be to catch Stephens’s killers. Five years on in September 1998, the Macpherson report accuses the Metropolitan police of institutional racism. As a result the police promised the Lawrence family that they would do all they could to eliminate corruption within the police service, which lead to extreme changes in policing (www.telegraph.co.uk, Evans M, 2012).

There was not much immediate evidence after the crime, however there was some.

Duwayne Brooks was with Stephen at the time of the murder which meant he was a potential eye witness. The metropolitan police received a number of tip-offs which gave them five names, Neil Acourt, Jamie Acourt, Gary Dobson, David Norris and Luke Knight, all of which were believed to have racist views and were known for violence. However the police didn’t make any initial arrests because they believed it was important to gather evidence on the suspects beforehand. Eventually arrests were made and clothing was seized after the Lawrence family accused the police for not acting on the tip-offs during a conference. All five suspects soon walked free due to a lack of evidence and Duwayne Brooks eyewitness evidence not being reliable enough. This was thought to be the end because at the time there was law in place stating that nobody could be tried twice for the same crime (www.bbc.co.uk, Casciani D,

2012).

The McPherson report found that the police had failed to investigate the case fully and properly. They said it was due to metropolitan police officers being corrupt and many being institutionally racist. Changes were made in relation to equality and justice regulations. The Race Relations Amendment Act 2000 meant that the police service, local councils and government departments have to show what they are doing in an effort to treat people fairly. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 got rid of the double jeopardy rule, meaning that someone can be tried again for the same crime if new evidence arises. The Stephen Lawrence case was reopened and everyone started from scratch, ‘assuming nothing and reviewing everything’ (www.bbc.co.uk).

Forensic science is any science used for the purpose of the law. It’s based on chemistry and biology and it provides scientific evidence for use in the courts of law. Forensic scientists examine and test evidence found at crime scenes in order to provide scientific evidence to assist in the investigation and court proceedings (www.staffs.ac.uk). Forensic scientists played a key role throughout the case. When the case was opened in 1993 they examined the clothing that was seized. However they did not find any evidence, either because they missed it or they did not have effective techniques available to them at the time (www.bbc.co.uk).

There have been many developments in forensics since the case in 1993. A cold case review was launched by the Laboratory of the Government Chemist (LGC) in 2006. The LGC is a science based company that provide biochemical, chemical and DNA based analysis. They often assist police forces with investigations in and outside the UK (www.lgcgroup.com).
The LGC examined the seized clothing that had been previously examined by forensic scientists in 1993, and this time evidence began to emerge. Techniques were used that didn’t exist in 1993. The main development in forensics that affected the Stephen Lawrence case was the size of Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) that could be tested. DNA is defined as …… carries an individual’s genetic information and is what makes people forensically different. It’s found in chromosomes which are located in the nucleus of most cells. DNA is key in forensic science (www.bbcbitesize.co.uk).

In 1993 DNA had to be a certain size for forensic scientists to be able to test it.

Now however, DNA like blood stains can microscopic and still be found and tested. These techniques led to the findings of blood, hair and fibres, all of which proved to be vital evidence. (www.metro.co.uk).

Low Copy Number (LCN) is another method that is now used. LCN is a type of DNA profiling. It works by copying DNA molecules enough times so that the DNA can be detected by the analyser. When using the LCN technique the DNA sample is often copied about 34 times. This technique is capable of turning just one molecule of DNA into a number of molecules. There are other DNA profiling kits like SGM+ and the Identifier which work much the same as the LCN (www.theforensicinstitute.com).

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is another development in forensics. PCR is another technique used to amplify and copy small molecules of DNA. Although forensics has developed since 1993, there are still many tests that take place in the laboratory that require DNA to be a sufficient size. PCR has been said to be one of the most important scientific advancement in molecular biology

(www.genome.gov.uk).

The first time any blood was spotted was when forensic scientists used a micro spectrophotometer to figure out the colour of one of the fibres on Gary Dobson’s jacket. The whole jacket was then looked at with a microscope, magnifying it 40 times. A tiny blood stain measuring at 0.5mm x 0.25mm was found on the collar of a bomber jacket owned by Gary Dobson. The stain was only found when the jacket was examined using a microscope. In 1993 forensic scientists often would not even look for such tiny samples because at the time it was not possible to test it (www.BBCNewsbeat.co.uk, Cairns D, 2012).This evidence placed the wearer of the jacket at the scene. The jacket was placed in an evidence bag when it was seized. Forensic scientists found tiny flakes of blood in the evidence bag that matched Stephen Lawrence’s DNA (www.bbc.co.uk).

Fibres were also found in the evidence bag holding the bomber jacket. The fibres were said to have a high probability of matching Stephen’s cardigan. The bomber jacket itself had fibres on it matching Stephens polo shirt and jacket. Gary Dobson’s cardigan also held fibres on it which matched the cuffs on Stephens’s jacket. It was argued that there was a chance of contamination because the evidence bag either hadn’t been sealed properly or the seal had broken (www.bbc.co.uk).

A pair of trousers and a sweat shirt was taken from David Norris. The trousers were examined for blood, fibres and hairs but nothing was found. However the evidence bag which was holding the trousers was also examined and two hairs were found inside. One hair measured at 1mm and the other 2mm. Both hairs were tested for mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA). MtDNA is passed down through the maternal line, meaning women pass it down to their children and men do not. The geneticist who examined the MtDNA told the court that the chance of it not coming from Stephen was one in 1,000 (www.bbc.co.uk).
When the sweat shirt was examined several fibres were found. Six fibres matched Stephens’s trousers and one matched his polo shirt (www.bbc.co.uk). Gary Dobson and David Norris were found guilty of the murder of Stephen Lawrence. They were both given life sentences (www.bbc.co.uk).

The Damilola Taylor case has similarities to the Stephen Lawrence case. Damilola Taylor was a 10 year old boy who was stabbed and left to die in Peckham, South London in November 2000 (www.courtnewsuk.co.uk). The two cases are similar because the killers were only brought to justice when a clod case review was launched. In fact the Stephen Lawrence cold case review was hugely influenced by the success in the Damilola Taylor cold case review amongst others (www.independant.co.uk).

If this case or a similar case occurred today, the minimum sentence would be roughly 30 years, whereas in 1993 the minimum sentence was only 15 or 16 years. It took nearly 19 years to bring Stephens killers to justice. If the case had occurred today, the techniques and equipment forensics now use would mean the perpetrators would be convicted much quicker. After examining the clothing the first time around, evidence would be found and would be enough to convict Gary Dobson and David Norris, as proved in the cold case review (www.courtnewsuk.co.uk).