Post by Teddy Bear on Jul 7, 2014 19:22:25 GMT
This story shows the ignorance displayed by left wing 'thought' as well as the harm done to society when it is allowed to prevail. Naturally being the prevalent mindset at the BBC they are always willing to neglect their charter to push it on the rest of us.
The writer of a drama, aired on BBC, feels it is better to find nobody guilty of a crime such as murder if the perpetrator is part of a group where it's impossible to determine just who inflicted the final deathblow. We see examples of this idiocy more and more when the real victims in society are ignored or dismissed to give 'human rights' to the criminals. For the left wingers, they believe they are more sensitive and caring for taking into account the 'feelings' of these criminals, but don't see just how hurtful and insulting it is to those who had their human rights abused by these criminals.
You can read the BBC account of the drama here, but as you will see, it fails to give anything resembling a balanced account. Following the drama being aired, the bias displayed created quite an uproar, as the Mail shows below.
The writer of a drama, aired on BBC, feels it is better to find nobody guilty of a crime such as murder if the perpetrator is part of a group where it's impossible to determine just who inflicted the final deathblow. We see examples of this idiocy more and more when the real victims in society are ignored or dismissed to give 'human rights' to the criminals. For the left wingers, they believe they are more sensitive and caring for taking into account the 'feelings' of these criminals, but don't see just how hurtful and insulting it is to those who had their human rights abused by these criminals.
You can read the BBC account of the drama here, but as you will see, it fails to give anything resembling a balanced account. Following the drama being aired, the bias displayed created quite an uproar, as the Mail shows below.
Row after BBC devotes 90 minutes of prime-time to Jimmy McGovern rant against vital legal tool that helped jail Stephen Lawrence killers and tackles gang-related crime
By Harriet Arkell
It is the vital piece of legislation without which two of Stephen Lawrence's killers would have escaped justice.
The joint enterprise law, also known as common purpose, enables several people to be prosecuted for the same crime, regardless of who delivered the fatal blow, and is hailed by lawyers as an essential tool to use in the fight against gang crime.
Yet the BBC spent licence fee money on commissioning a 90-minute drama railing against what lawyers describe as a 'powerful' and useful piece of legislation designed to stop criminals getting away with it by blaming each other.
Notorious criminals prosecuted under the joint enterpise law include David Norris, left, and Gary Dobson, right, both of whom were convicted of the 1993 murder of Stephen Lawrence using the common purpose law
Common, screened last night on BBC One, was written by Jimmy McGovern and starred Nico Mirallegro, Michael Gambon and Susan Lynch. It told the story of a young boy who drove his friends off to get pizza, only to become involved in a murder when they stabbed another youth to death.
The boy, Johnjo, played by Mirallegro, was then charged with murder under joint enterprise.
Throughout the drama, McGovern's view - that all should go free rather than one semi-innocent participant be jailed along with the murderer - was hammered home, and the drama was followed by footage of three women 'blaming' the joint enterprise law for their relatives being jailed.
The film was followed by brief clips of women talking about relatives they believed had been 'wrongly convicted of murder' under the joint enterprise law.
Joint enterprise law, which dates back to 1846, was designed to stop criminals evading justice by blaming each other.
High profile cases where the law was used included that of David Norris and Gary Dobson, who were convicted under joint enterprise for the 1993 murder of Stephen Lawrence. Lawrence was stabbed to death by a gang of youths in a racially-motivated murder at a bus stop in Eltham when he was 18.
It was also used in the 2012 case of the murder of Malakai McKenzie, a 19-year-old who was shot dead in a car outside a Nottingham pub in a gang attack.
Stephen Lawrence was 18 when he was murdered by a gang of white youths at a bus stop in south-east London - the joint enterprise law was used to convict them
Today Andrew Allison, of pressure group the Freedom Association, which campaigns for greater impartiality from the BBC and against the licence fee, accused the corporation of failing 'to serve the public interest' by commissioning such a 'one-sided film'.
He told MailOnline: 'Jimmy McGovern deliberately set out to make a one-sided film, and the scenes at the end left the viewer in no doubt of his intentions.
'The BBC's Royal Charter states the the corporation exists to serve the public interest. It is not in the public interest to broadcast a drama with such obvious political motivations that do not educate, but instead try to rubbish a law that has helped put many violent criminals behind bars.
'If there is a debate to be had about joint enterprise, this is not the way to have it.'
And senior lawyer Jeremy Summers, head of business crime at Slater & Gordon, insisted that the joint enterprise law was a good thing, and that its advantages outweighed its disadvantages.
He also said the law was becoming even more important as gang crime in Britain is on the increase.
'It's a controversial law, but the benefit of it is that it provides a deterrent and that is particularly the case with gang-related crime,' Mr Summers said.
'The doctrine in short allows someone to be prosecuted for any offence, though usually it is murder, if they participated in an activity if they knowingly assisted or encouraged the crime and agreed to act together.
'With murder it may be sufficient that they set out to cause serious injury but not to kill.'
He added: 'It has been used more frequently in recent years with the increase in gang-related crime.
'A study released earlier this year showed that in the last eight years, there were 4,500 prosecutions for murder involving two or more defendants, and just under 2,000 prosecutions for murder involving four or more defendants, and those would have used the joint enterprise provisions.
'It's a powerful tool that can enable the prosecution to get at people where there is no direct evidence that they pulled the trigger or plunged the knife in.
'It was famously used in the Stephen Lawrence case and that of Malakai McKenzie, and that is where it has been deployed to best effect.
'If it can deter young men or women from joining gangs and using knives, then arguably it outweighs the concerns that the law is too draconian in its reach.'
A spokesman for the Crown Prosecution Service said: 'The Stephen Lawrence case is perhaps the best known example of the usefulness of joint enterprise to prosecutors. Despite all of the evidence available, we still do not know for certain who exactly stabbed Stephen Lawrence, but the law enabled us to successfully prosecute two men for murder.
'However, our guidance makes clear that prosecutors should give careful consideration to which charges are appropriate and whether a prosecution is in the public interest. The suspect's age and their level of culpability are important factors in these decisions.
'We never prosecute a person just for being present at the scene of a crime. Prosecutors look for evidence that a person could have foreseen what might happen – such as knowledge that a member of their party was armed, for example - and that they took an active role in the offence, either directly or by assisting or encouraging it.'
A House of Commons select committee is currently examining the principle of joint enterprise, which will be discussed on Newsnight tomorrow night.
A BBC spokesman said: 'The BBC has a tradition of providing a platform for writers to make dramas about causes they’re passionate about.
'The BBC is exploring all the views surrounding the debate including a documentary tonight at 10.35pm and a Newsnight debate on Tuesday night.'
MailOnline contacted a spokesman for Mr McGovern for a comment.
- Common, which aired on BBC One last night, focused on joint enterprise law
- The drama hammered home a vehement message that the law was wrong
- The 1846 law stops criminals evading justice by each blaming the other
- McGovern's drama showed one-sided view, but senior lawyer says it's vital
- Slater & Gordon's Jeremy Summers says it's often used in gang crime
- He says 'powerful' law is a useful deterrent to stop young men joining gangs
- The Freedom Association said BBC had failed to serve the public interest
- Pressure group's Andrew Allison said corporation should not 'rubbish the law that has helped put many violent criminals behind bars'
- Used to convict David Norris and Gary Dobson in Stephen Lawrence murder
- Law was also used in the 2012 murder of Malakai McKenzie in Nottingham
- CPS spokesman says: 'We never prosecute a person just for being present'
By Harriet Arkell
It is the vital piece of legislation without which two of Stephen Lawrence's killers would have escaped justice.
The joint enterprise law, also known as common purpose, enables several people to be prosecuted for the same crime, regardless of who delivered the fatal blow, and is hailed by lawyers as an essential tool to use in the fight against gang crime.
Yet the BBC spent licence fee money on commissioning a 90-minute drama railing against what lawyers describe as a 'powerful' and useful piece of legislation designed to stop criminals getting away with it by blaming each other.
Notorious criminals prosecuted under the joint enterpise law include David Norris, left, and Gary Dobson, right, both of whom were convicted of the 1993 murder of Stephen Lawrence using the common purpose law
Common, screened last night on BBC One, was written by Jimmy McGovern and starred Nico Mirallegro, Michael Gambon and Susan Lynch. It told the story of a young boy who drove his friends off to get pizza, only to become involved in a murder when they stabbed another youth to death.
The boy, Johnjo, played by Mirallegro, was then charged with murder under joint enterprise.
Throughout the drama, McGovern's view - that all should go free rather than one semi-innocent participant be jailed along with the murderer - was hammered home, and the drama was followed by footage of three women 'blaming' the joint enterprise law for their relatives being jailed.
The film was followed by brief clips of women talking about relatives they believed had been 'wrongly convicted of murder' under the joint enterprise law.
Joint enterprise law, which dates back to 1846, was designed to stop criminals evading justice by blaming each other.
High profile cases where the law was used included that of David Norris and Gary Dobson, who were convicted under joint enterprise for the 1993 murder of Stephen Lawrence. Lawrence was stabbed to death by a gang of youths in a racially-motivated murder at a bus stop in Eltham when he was 18.
It was also used in the 2012 case of the murder of Malakai McKenzie, a 19-year-old who was shot dead in a car outside a Nottingham pub in a gang attack.
Stephen Lawrence was 18 when he was murdered by a gang of white youths at a bus stop in south-east London - the joint enterprise law was used to convict them
Today Andrew Allison, of pressure group the Freedom Association, which campaigns for greater impartiality from the BBC and against the licence fee, accused the corporation of failing 'to serve the public interest' by commissioning such a 'one-sided film'.
He told MailOnline: 'Jimmy McGovern deliberately set out to make a one-sided film, and the scenes at the end left the viewer in no doubt of his intentions.
'The BBC's Royal Charter states the the corporation exists to serve the public interest. It is not in the public interest to broadcast a drama with such obvious political motivations that do not educate, but instead try to rubbish a law that has helped put many violent criminals behind bars.
'If there is a debate to be had about joint enterprise, this is not the way to have it.'
And senior lawyer Jeremy Summers, head of business crime at Slater & Gordon, insisted that the joint enterprise law was a good thing, and that its advantages outweighed its disadvantages.
He also said the law was becoming even more important as gang crime in Britain is on the increase.
'It's a controversial law, but the benefit of it is that it provides a deterrent and that is particularly the case with gang-related crime,' Mr Summers said.
'The doctrine in short allows someone to be prosecuted for any offence, though usually it is murder, if they participated in an activity if they knowingly assisted or encouraged the crime and agreed to act together.
'With murder it may be sufficient that they set out to cause serious injury but not to kill.'
He added: 'It has been used more frequently in recent years with the increase in gang-related crime.
'A study released earlier this year showed that in the last eight years, there were 4,500 prosecutions for murder involving two or more defendants, and just under 2,000 prosecutions for murder involving four or more defendants, and those would have used the joint enterprise provisions.
'It's a powerful tool that can enable the prosecution to get at people where there is no direct evidence that they pulled the trigger or plunged the knife in.
'It was famously used in the Stephen Lawrence case and that of Malakai McKenzie, and that is where it has been deployed to best effect.
'If it can deter young men or women from joining gangs and using knives, then arguably it outweighs the concerns that the law is too draconian in its reach.'
A spokesman for the Crown Prosecution Service said: 'The Stephen Lawrence case is perhaps the best known example of the usefulness of joint enterprise to prosecutors. Despite all of the evidence available, we still do not know for certain who exactly stabbed Stephen Lawrence, but the law enabled us to successfully prosecute two men for murder.
'However, our guidance makes clear that prosecutors should give careful consideration to which charges are appropriate and whether a prosecution is in the public interest. The suspect's age and their level of culpability are important factors in these decisions.
'We never prosecute a person just for being present at the scene of a crime. Prosecutors look for evidence that a person could have foreseen what might happen – such as knowledge that a member of their party was armed, for example - and that they took an active role in the offence, either directly or by assisting or encouraging it.'
A House of Commons select committee is currently examining the principle of joint enterprise, which will be discussed on Newsnight tomorrow night.
A BBC spokesman said: 'The BBC has a tradition of providing a platform for writers to make dramas about causes they’re passionate about.
'The BBC is exploring all the views surrounding the debate including a documentary tonight at 10.35pm and a Newsnight debate on Tuesday night.'
MailOnline contacted a spokesman for Mr McGovern for a comment.
THE ANCIENT LAW DESIGNED TO STOP CRIMINALS EVADING JUSTICE
Joint enterprise dates back to 1846, when two drunken delivery drivers decided to race their horse-drawn carts along a busy track on the Staffordshire/Derbyshire borders.
John Swindall and James Osborne, both of whom were driving carts laden down with heavy items of pottery, egged each other on and hurled abuse at pedestrians who told them to stop as they tore along the country road.
Eventually, one of them hit an elderly pedestrian, James Durose, killing him, though there were no witnesses around to say who did it.
In court, both defendants blamed each other so the judge, Lord Chief Baron Pollock, decided that while only one of them must have hit the man, both of them had been drunk and reckless, and either could have done it.
So he found both of them guilty of manslaughter and jailed them both, establishing a precedent that still stands in law today, and in other legal systems from the U.S. to Australia.
Joint enterprise dates back to 1846, when two drunken delivery drivers decided to race their horse-drawn carts along a busy track on the Staffordshire/Derbyshire borders.
John Swindall and James Osborne, both of whom were driving carts laden down with heavy items of pottery, egged each other on and hurled abuse at pedestrians who told them to stop as they tore along the country road.
Eventually, one of them hit an elderly pedestrian, James Durose, killing him, though there were no witnesses around to say who did it.
In court, both defendants blamed each other so the judge, Lord Chief Baron Pollock, decided that while only one of them must have hit the man, both of them had been drunk and reckless, and either could have done it.
So he found both of them guilty of manslaughter and jailed them both, establishing a precedent that still stands in law today, and in other legal systems from the U.S. to Australia.