Examentrainers

			The Stephen Lawrence case Headline justice					family, because the police and
						30		prosecutors have failed to pursue the
								case with enough vigour.
					4			Critics of the Mail’s move claim that
								the paper has acted as “judge and
1			THE Daily Mail often finds itself at					jury”, attempting to supplant the
			odds with the great and the good			35		courts by providing its own verdict.
			- but rarely for speaking out in the					Lord Donaldson, a former Court of
			defence of minorities. When the paper					Appeal judge, even said the Mail was
	5		ran a banner headline on February					in contempt of court.
			14th branding five Londoners “murderers”		5			The Mail’s defenders point out that
			of Stephen Lawrence, a black			40		the press’s freedom to challenge court
			teenager, it infuriated many lawyers,					rulings has helped correct grave injustices
			judges and journalists. Three of the					in the past, as when media
	10		men had been acquitted by a jury, and					scrutiny prompted reconsideration of
			a judge had dismissed the charges					the verdicts against the Guildford Four
			against the other two.			45		and the Birmingham Six¹. The paper
2			In response to the Mail’s dramatic					dismisses the charge of contempt,
			gesture, an unlikely group of allies,					since there is no trial currently under
	15		from Peter Preston, former editor of					way in the case. Anyway, the Mail
			the Guardian, to Michael Howard, the					insists that it accused the five in an
			home secretary, rallied to the Mail’s			50		attempt to force them to reveal their
			defence.					version of events, since they all refused
3			The Mail’s intervention was extraordinary,					to testify during the inquest. “If we are
	20		but so has been the investigation					wrong, let them sue us,” declared its
			into Lawrence’s fatal stabbing,					front page.
			which has dragged on since his death		6	55		This is an empty challenge, since all
			in 1993. Both public and private prosecutions					five are unemployed and cannot afford
			of the five men named by the					to bring a libel case. Rival newspapers
								have dismissed the Mail’s coverage as
								a cynical gimmick, pointing out that it
						60		had at first been critical of the movement
								to bring Lawrence’s killers to
								justice.
					7			Whatever the Mail’s motives, the
								fact that a paper traditionally hostile to
						65		blacks’ complaints about the legal
								system has spoken up in favour of a
								black victim and his family is welcome.
								What is unfortunate is that the
								Mail did not choose its target better.
						70		Calling those who have already been
								acquitted “murderers” sets a dangerous
								precedent. There is a difference
								between smearing people as guilty
								and campaigning for those who may
						75		have been wrongly convicted. If the
								Mail really cared about justice, it
								should have directed its fire at the
	25		Mail have collapsed due to lack of					police and prosecutors who seem to
			evidence, reportedly because local					have failed the Lawrence family so
			residents have been too afraid to			80		badly. But then, would that have made
			testify and, according to the Lawrence					such a splash?
'The Economist', February 22, 1997

¹ The Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six: people who were convicted for planting bombs but later proved to be innocent