(1) The Acourt brothers and their three associates were openly branded murderers by a tabloid newspaper, but a close examination of the evidence indicates that although they were both credible suspects and nasty pieces of work, they were not at the crime scene. One possibility later mooted by the police is that the Acourt gang were on their way to a confrontation with another white gang that night.
(2) Which in this case means that the explanation Ram gave the police was not credible.
(3) Ram’s trial was held at Birmingham Crown Court in June 1987; his first appeal was dismissed at the leave stage by the full court in March 1989; his second appeal was dismissed in November 1995.
(4) Ram’s campaigners have even duped Parliament. On January 12, 2000, the Labour MP John McDonnell tabled an Early Day Motion which claimed that Ram had been the victim of a gang attack and that (the unnamed) Clarke Pearce died because he refused medical treatment.
(5) There is a parallel case in the United States, that of Mumia Abu-Jamal who was sentenced to death for the December 1981 slaying of police officer Daniel Faulkner. The case against Abu-Jamal is overwhelming, but because he is black he must be the victim of a racist frame-up.
(6) A shining example of this was the appointment of Kamlesh Bahl to run the Law Society. She was clearly chosen because she was both Asian and a woman. When she turned out to be a battle axe and the organisation tried to get rid of her she sued them for race and sex discrimination. Which begs the question why did they appoint her in the first place if they were so racist and sexist?
(7) Incredibly, this piece of genocidal sewage is extracted from a discourse on tolerance which was published in the March 1992 issue of the magazine New Humanist.

Return To Text
Back To Other Articles Index
Back To Site Index