“No justice for racial abuse victims in UK” by Reeta Sharma appears to
be based uncritically on reports which are posted on the website of the
National Civil Rights Movement. An organisation that campaigns for civil
rights for minorities or others is obviously noble, unfortunately as with
so many similarly self-professed noble organisations, the National Civil
Rights Movement is no such thing. The two reports quoted by Ms Sharma are
misleading, the second outrageously so.
To take the first report first, Lakhvinder Reel died in October 1997,
not October 1977 — an obvious typo. It is by no means certain that this
youth was murdered; he disappeared after splitting from three friends.
According to later reports, the four of them were attacked or abused by
two white youths. As no weapons appear to have been involved in this
incident, as the alleged attackers were outnumbered, and as Reel and his
friends were drinking — ie. alcohol — the claim that the four were in fear
of their lives is to be treated with great reserve.
The best evidence indicates that Reel fell in the river while
urinating. The inquest jury returned an open verdict partly due to
pressure by campaigners, and partly due to the fact that the cause of
death could not be properly determined. This means exactly what it says it
means, cause of death unknown. In spite of this, Mrs Reel in particular
continues to claim both that her son was murdered and that his murder was
racially motivated. Although this is understandable, one should not allow
a mother’s grief, and possible sense of guilt, to poison race relations.
The behaviour of the police in this case is rather typical of their
behaviour in similar cases regardless of the race of the victim, although
I would not like to comment on this further.
The report on the case of Satpal Ram and the murder of Clarke Pearce
(note the spelling) is not just misleading but overtly mendacious. Satpal
Ram was not attacked by Pearce or by anyone else; he stabbed his victim in
the back in a drunken frenzy, gloated over him as he lay dying, then fled
the scene of the crime with the murder weapon in his hand. The motive for
this senseless murder appears to have been a comment the victim made about
the background music being played in the restaurant at the time.
Mr Ram and his supporters have spread outrageous lies about this case,
the most obscene of which is that the victim was responsible for his own
death by refusing medical treatment. The plain truth is that Mr Pearce was
in no position to refuse medical treatment. He certainly did not discharge
himself from hospital (an admitted lie) but died on the operating table
less than two hours after the attack.
Ram was parolled in June of this year, but instead of counting his
blessings he is now railing at the then Home Secretary (now Foreign
Secretary) Jack Straw who blocked his release, obviously concerned that a
dangerous and unrepentant thug was being turned loose on the public.
The true, documented, irrefutable facts of Regina v Ram can be found on
the website below: http://www. geocities.com/satpalramisguilty/index.html.
Among other things this site contains the Court of Appeal transcripts from
1989 and 1995.
A BARON, Sydenham, London
