Yussuf Makki murder case (MGS scholarship boy in posh bit of Manchester)

Anyone else following this? Both Ds found not guilty of all charges. Seems astonishing on the evidence reported. 

yes, me too. The perverting the course of justice charge - didnt one actually admit to this??

astonishing indeed. Not even manslaughter!

meanwhile, down South, the murder trial of the man stabbed on a train delivered a guilty verdict, despite the perp appearing to be disturbed ( but i havent really been following that one).

seems inevitable there will be remarks about one rule for the rich and another for the poor.

Are the good ladies and gentlemen village idiots oop north...?

How is throwing the knife away and lying to the cops not perverting the course of justice?

However, BBC report does say "Both teenagers had previously admitted possessing a knife and Boy A pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice by lying to police. Both defendants are due to be sentenced for those charges on 25 July."

Hopefully the scumbags will get a dose of porridge for those offences.

Do you people know the "facts" of this?

The stabbed boy from the terribly nice house and posh school had arranged to rob drug dealers at knifepoint. It went wrong when they fought back and he ended up stabbed. The two accused are the boys he planned to do the robbery with and who he had a fight with about after it went wrong. Clearly it was the drug dealers that found him later and stabbed him. 


haha wibble except the victim was from a poor single parent family, scholarship boy.

but yes obv the nasty drug dealers did it!!!

Wibble Is that supposed to be ironic? Boy A admitted to stabbing him. The failed robbery took place an hour before the stabbing. That anyone other than boy a did it wasn’t even a line of defence?

anyway the victim was from burnage, not much in the way of nice houses there. 

Bunch of privileged wiggers playing with knives and it all goes wrong.  Who'd have thought?  Gross negligence/reckless manslaughter at the very least.

Quite. Which is why it’s astonishing that they’ve been cleared of all charges, including manslaughter. 

actually having read a report today I accept I got the wrong end of the stick. 

zero, I am very troubled by the manslaughter not guilty charge. Does this mean the jury did not think that Boy One actually did the stabbing? ( as per wibble’s sarcastic post).

i know nothing about criminal law.

also the robbery theory was debunked, one of the drug dealers said they made it up.

No I think it means that they don’t think he acted recklessly in terms of how the boy got stabbed (nb I am no wig jockey either)

We don't know what the jury thought or why they made the decision they did.  It is the manslaughter not guilty I am also very troubled by

If you carry knives around, including a flick knife (which is a nasty piece of kit, even if you know what you're doing, which he clearly didn't), then wave it very close to someone, that to me says recklessness.  Someone could clearly get badly hurt, as indeed they did.  Entirely foreseeable, entirely stupid and reckless, hence manslaughter at the very least.  I hope the CPS appeals.

Yes my post is speculation but given he stabbed the victim with a knife he owned and was carrying during an argument, and the jury found that his actions didn’t amount to manslaughter, then not sure what else can have been going through their heads. 

I would posit a guess both Ds came across as brighter, well dressed well to do young men with their whole lives in front of them. May have played a part who knows. 

No appeal possible against acquittals Badders (unlike against sentence)

Really?  Fuck me, that's disgraceful.  You can tell how long it's been since I had to look at criminal law (23 years, FAOD).

They’d need significant new evidence to try them again, not sure where that could or would come from in this case. 

well it will be interedting to see if the judge throws the book at them in sentencing, isnt there now a mandatory custodial sentence for carrying a knife? ( although i cant remember if both admitted to having knives, was it only boy one?)

After the Mark Duggan death, KEvin Hutchinson-Foster was sentenced to 11 years in prison for supplying the gun, so yes, the Judge could hit Boys A and B with a stiff jail term

It's a disgrace that people can be tried twice for the same crime. The awful Bliar allowed that, a "populist" move if ever there was one.

i’ve just looked this up and given their age it looks like 4 months min to maybe 4 yrs max ( not sure about the max - how the facts fit the guidelines).

i am hoping the judge goes for the max under the circs and there was no remand, so.

both youths admittedvhaving knives. BUT some issue about the knives recovered/used, i think one was small enough to be allowed and still not sure whose knife it was which boy one used to kill. 

Describing the stabbing, he told the court: "I don't really know what I did, kind of lifted my arm up. I didn't realise anything had happened at first."

Boy A said he went into a "panic" when Yousef called out that he had been stabbed.

He said he wouldn't have reached for his knife had Yousef not taken his out.

Clear case of self defence 

Amazed the case ever got to trial 

Two kids with knives

Let the loss lie where it falls 

I reckon the damage to their lives has already been done.  Assuming both plan on going to university, doubt whether they'll be admitted with a criminal record.  As for being allowed into a professional career (lawyer, accountant, surgeon), very difficult to enter with a conviction against your name.

Do you think anyone would be saying anything like that if the Ds has been two second generation immigrant  lads schooled at a comprehensive in, say, Clapham?

Akoum said the family’s distress was made worse by the fact that they were made to sit in an upstairs public gallery during the trial, where they were unable to hear evidence and were surrounded by members of the public during often harrowing testimony.

Unusually for a murder trial, relatives of the defendants – both from middle-class Cheshire families – were given priority seating in the courtroom instead of the victim’s family. “We felt like the criminals the whole time. It felt like they [the defendants’ families] were the ones who were the victims,” said Akoum.