Steven Baxter

Patrolling the murkier waters of the mainstream media

It was not the Daily Mail wot won the Stephen Lawrence case

The newspaper's triumphalism undermines the tireless efforts of those who fought to keep the case at the top of the political agenda for 18 years.

By Steven Baxter Published 04 January 2012 13:23

Doreen Lawrence explained it. Yesterday was not a day for celebration at the guilty verdicts for David Norris and Gary Dobson for killing her son. There is some sense of justice in the conviction of these two racist murderers, but Stephen Lawrence remains dead, and others who took part in his killing still walk the streets.

Against that tone of sombre reflection came the rather jarring triumphalism of the Daily Mail, delighted in yesterday's verdicts and calling it "The Mail's Victory". The Mail did more than many other newspapers to fight for the Lawrences and to uncover the truth, but there seemed a slight edge to their coverage, as if it was vindication of the famous MURDERERS splash after all these years. I am not so sure it was.

Back in 1997, the Mail labelled the five suspects as murderers -- "if we are wrong, let them sue us", the front page said. It's been analysed to death down the years, but for me, I still don't see it as a journalistic triumph, as courageous, as brave, or all those other things people say it was. For me, it's the same kind of attitude that has seen people's lives wrecked since -- the certainty of guilt leading to false accusations. But I think most journalists disagree with me.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the MURDERERS front page, the Mail has every right to be pleased with its efforts to help in giving the case maximum publicity. But there was something about the coverage that seemed slightly at odds with the reality of the day. The more I saw the Lawrences, still broken people after all these years, the more strange the video statement from Mail editor Paul Dacre seemed in comparison. There was a whiff of myth-making, of history being written. It was the Daily Mail wot won it. Without that front page, there wouldn't have been justice for the Lawrences.

That's how the story goes, but is it right? I don't know and I don't think anyone knows. It's certainly an inviting narrative to buy into for those of us who believe in the power of journalism or the tabloid newspaper as a force for fairness rather than unfairness. But as much as I would like it to be true, I think it's only part of the story. It's simple to look back and see the front page, then attribute everything that came afterwards to it, but maybe it was just a factor, rather than the defining factor.

There were many, many other people who did everything in their power to keep the Lawrence case at the top of the political agenda. It is perhaps somewhat disrespectful to them to imagine that one newspaper front page was worth more than all of their tireless efforts over 18 years.

So let's return to the Lawrences themselves, ordinary people who have been forced through horrific circumstances to put their grief into the public domain, to share those private thoughts of losing a son. The key to understanding the impact of that crime is in their words and deeds. Yes, two men are in jail, but as Doreen and Neville Lawrence said yesterday, that does not mean the end -- other perpetrators of that disgusting crime still walk free.

There's no right or wrong way to deal with grief, but despite all the setbacks, the stench of corruption and the seemingly hopeless task, the Lawrences never gave up. Never. They only cared about achieving justice, which could and would never bring back their son, but which could bring some kind of peace. No, it is not a time for celebration: Stephen Lawrence is still in a grave rather than being the man he should have been. But perhaps there is hope, after all.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Daily Mail

More from Steven Baxter

15 comments

Wed, 2012-01-04 18:12 — JimmyRushmore (not verified)

"If the Mail hadn’t been publicising what was happening around Stephen and getting it out there, a lot of people wouldn’t have known about the injustice around him as a young man." Doreen Lawrence

Credit where credit is due. You don't have to like or agree with the Mail to see this. And calling it neo Nazi is just childish

Wed, 2012-01-04 19:15 — Spud Middleton (not verified)

"It's simple to look back and see the front page, then attribute everything that came afterwards to it, but maybe it was just a factor, rather than the defining factor."

I'm not entirely sure you're being fair here. Now, on the whole I consider the Mail to be a scurrilous, blinkered and bigoted pile of shite...and I'm happy to say so, based on its tawdry record of pandering to the basest instincts of its Little Englander readership. But in doing this, I'm criticising the Mail on its demonstrably blinkered and small-minded editorial policy. Now, I can only do this in good conscience if I'm being objective and honest...and being objective and honest I have to applaud the Mail not just for its sentiments in this case, but also because the Mail does have a genuine influence on just those calcified middle-aged middle-class reactionaries who sure as hell can't be 'reached' by, say, the BBC or Guardian. And if that lot can be moved or mobilised, politicians sit up and take notice...and the case would indeed be kept alive.

Now whether it reckoned that little Englanders everywhere would be scandalised at the thought of 5 low-life thugs getting away with murder and flaunting themselves in front of an inept criminal justice system, or whether there was genuine abhorrence at the act and sympathy for the family, I don't know. But that front page certainly had an effect; a massive effect...and the Mail deserves credit.

Wed, 2012-01-04 19:15 — jaded1

My prediction is that these two will be out on appeal within 18 months with a large compensation cheque in their pockets-due to unfair press coverage.Let's see the Daily Mail headline then.
PS Didn't some newspapers vilify the nutty professor in Bristol over Joanna Yeates's murder? He was innocent so it doesn't work everytime.

Wed, 2012-01-04 19:31 — Tesco Shelf Stacker (not verified)

A agree with Jaded. Leaving aside the case itself - is there not anyone here who even feels slightly uneasy with the way this whole conviction has been orchestrated? Does it not worry anyone here that the idea that no individual should be tried twice for the same crime was dismantled just so that the political elites and the chattering classes can blow their moral trumpets. This very important principle in law that protected all of us from being hounded by a government looking for revenge has now been discarded - and the state can now enforce justice in a manner that would have made any dictatorship proud!

Thu, 2012-01-05 15:23 — Dunstan (not verified)

Jaded raises the case which immediately sprang to my mind: Christopher Jefferies. While the experienced reader can tell the difference between the innuendo around CJ and the direct accusation of the Lawrence 5, the DM's circulation is based on the assumption that the lay reader can't.

A sanctimonious tone requires that, not only are you right in this specific case, but your accuracy and behaviour and demeanour at other times warrants it.

Wed, 2012-01-04 23:26 — Spud Middleton (not verified)

"Does it not worry anyone here that the idea that no individual should be tried twice for the same crime was dismantled just so that the political elites and the chattering classes can blow their moral trumpets. This very important principle in law that protected all of us from being hounded by a government looking for revenge has now been discarded - and the state can now enforce justice in a manner that would have made any dictatorship proud!"

Indeed, well said. The dogs in the street know fuckin well it was the Acourts...and you're right, the chattering classes wanted a scapegoat...they got the wrong ones... and they mangled justice to do it.

I'd agree wholeheartedly with what you said but I do feel that double jeopardy needed reviewing in the light of DNA evidence which changed the landscape entirely. Unfortunately, it was changed in a way which will one day see someone hounded to death by a vindictive government...probably me...maybe you.

Thu, 2012-01-05 10:17 — gerry (not verified)

Jimmy Rushmore - open your eyes! The Mail is a vile hate-peddling neo-nazi criminal enterprise masquerading as a mainstream right wing newspaper, openly threatening and bullying its "enemies"..as the Leveson inquiry has heard time and time again.

I was actually being mild about Dacre and his goons..since the Rothemere/Nazi love-in from the 1930s, the Daily Mail is really the Daily Sieg-Heil...

Mon, 2012-01-09 05:28 — dillon (not verified)

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/...what if there innocent 20 years down the line,remember the birmingham 6.you lefty hyocrites.

Mon, 2012-01-09 07:30 — Captain Sensible (not verified)

Our politicians have wafted the stench away from them. It is like the muslim/buddhist suicides approach to taking other people lives. A grieving parent lets their loved ones cornea or lungs be used to give life. This black trash allow their sons death to be used as a battering ram against decent laws and get everybody rich into the bargain. It is like the congolese penchant for eating thier children before the whites put a stop to it!

Thu, 2012-01-05 12:53 — John P Reid (not verified)

Jaded I agree,but the vilifying of the Nutty professor ,speaks more aobut the public being give tehname of those arrested beofre they are charged let alone found guilty,this can apply to those falsely accused of rape having their lives ruined, the coalition wasgoing to give them anoinity, but was dropped after Labour oppose it.

Wed, 2012-01-04 17:45 — gerry (not verified)

Steven - good article. The sight of Paul Dacre and his horrific neo-Nazi rag claiming credit for the convictions of Dobson/Norris is sickening and vile, but not surprising..there is literally no level beneath which these national newspapers will sink, as we all know by now.

The Mail - like the Sun and the Times and the rest of them - are themselves essentially criminal enterprises, used to breaking the law with ease because they have the police in their pockets, and still do.

You and other NS journos must never let these national "journalist" filth-peddlars and their police-mafia protectors off the hook!

Thu, 2012-01-05 13:42 — john woods (not verified)

The deaths of Richard Everitt and Stephen Lawrence:

compare and contrast

Robert Henderson

The Death of Richard Everitt (see below) is an article I wrote in 1994. Compare and contrast the elite response to his death and that of Stephen Lawrence.

Richard was knifed to death by an Asian gang approximately 300 yards from my front door. The gang was large, perhaps as many as 15 members. The gang was known as the Drummond Street Posse and had gone out that night specifically looking for a “white boy” to attack because they felt they had been “wronged” by a white boy (http://www.mamaa.org/infalre.html).

The gang were arrested the same night for a separate incident and blood was found on 19-year-old Badrul Miah. This turned out to be a match for that of Richard. Miah, later boasted that he had “stabbed up some white boy”. http://www.mirror.co.uk/life-style/kids-and-family/2008/10/1...

After nine months the police had arrested 11 people in connection with the murder. The 11 dropped to six and after a committal hearing the number fell to 3. Eventually only two came to trial, Badrul Miah and Showkat Akbar. Akbar was found guilty of violent disorder and sentenced to three years, of which he served 18 months. Miah was sentenced to life but let out on licence after 11 years despite the trial judge describing it as an unprovoked racist attack (see Mirror link above).

The parents of Richard suffered beyond the loss of their child: “After the trial Mandy and Norman tried to move on but were the victims of threats and racial abuse. They had to leave the home where they raised their children and move out of London to Essex.” (http://www.mamaa.org/infalre.html)

Those are the bare facts of the Everitt murder. Compare the elite response to his murder with their response to that of Stephen Lawrence:

1. Only one person was convicted of the murder even though all were guilty of joint enterprise.

2. There has been no media campaign to bring the others to justice.

3. There has been no public inquiry into Richard’s murder.

4. The one person was convicted of Richard’s murder was released after 11 years without any media or political uproar.

5. There has been no concerted media campaign stretching over nearly two decades to bring the others in the gang to justice.

6. Unlike the Lawrence case where the Daily Mail accused the five suspects of murder in 1997 (http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/features/frontpage/lawrence.h...) , no representative of the national press or broadcasters called any other member of the gang which murdered Richard a murderer.

7. The gang members who attacked Richard were older than those accused of attacking Stephen Lawrence.

8. Unlike the Lawrence murder, British politicians from the word go not only refused to adopt the tone of moral outrage which they routinely do when the death of Stephen Lawrence is discussed, but actively tried to play down the racist aspect. Considerable pressure was put on Richard’s parents at the time to go along with the usual Maoist pc line that they were not racist and so on. The local MP, Frank Dobson, was most notable for his silence.