All language subtitles for Stephen.S01E03.WEBRip.x264-ION10

My son's killers were
identified 13 years ago.

I thought the killers
would just be arrested.

Never expected getting
justice to be my job.

Stephen's body was covered
in bruises and abrasions

from being kicked and punched.

There were two stab wounds, on the
right collarbone and left shoulder.

We've found Stephen's
blood. Found it where?

On Gary Dobson's jacket.

We're looking at a 15-year
game of pass-the-parcel

when it comes to exhibits.

If I was the defence,

I would be saying the blood stain
was the result of contamination.

So why do you need me?

Because forensics
alone won't be enough.

The DPP has agreed that
we can charge Gary Dobson

and David Norris for
Stephen's murder.

I hope to execute the
arrests within the week.

We're ready.

OK?

Yeah. Yeah, just
thought I should, er

you know.

He's had a long wait.

Today's the day.

Today's the day.

Let's get to work.

The world and his dog knows
that, for the last five years,

we've been investigating
young Stephen's murder.

One of our suspects is
a definite flight risk,

and if he gets a whiff
of what we're up to,

he'll be on the first
flight out to Belarus.

So, timeline.

The targets themselves are
in two separate locations,

so we need to synchronise
their arrests.

Number one... is Gary Dobson.

How are we gonna
find him? Yeah, yeah.

He's, er, in Belmarsh,
doing a five-year stretch

for trafficking 350Ks'
worth of cannabis.

To preserve the secrecy
of the operation,

we won't execute the arrests until
he's out of earshot of the screws.

Norris - bit more difficult.

No fixed address. He's been
crashing at mates' houses.

Currently residing in a room
above a pub in Greenwich.

Once we pick him up, we
take him to Sutton nick,

where there's a video link to
Camberwell Magistrates' Court,

so we can get proceedings
underway as quickly as possible.

So the boys at Sutton
nick do know, then?

I'm glad you asked me that.

Welcome to Operation Sirwoy

a highly sensitive action
against a Tamil drug gang

operating out of East Ham.

Well, we had to tell
them something.

Operation Sirwoy's targets
are Gurutither Dobaranga

and Daaresh Nattar.

GD and DN for short.

Any questions? Sirwoy?

After Sir Roy Hodgson,

who took Fulham FC all the
way to the UEFA Cup Final.

You can be as indiscreet as
you like about Operation Sirwoy

because, of course, it
doesn't actually exist.

So, ladies and gentlemen,

I'm gonna have to ask you
all to hand in your phones

for the duration
of this operation.

Today, you'll be going
out to arrest Gary Dobson

and David Norris on suspicion of
the murder of Stephen Lawrence.

Good luck.

You coming with? Thought
you'd hang back here.

If this goes wrong, I'm
gonna answer for it myself.

What's this all about?

Police! Open the door.

Hands behind your
back. Stand still.

David Norris, I'm arresting you

on suspicion of the murder
of Stephen Lawrence.

You do not have to say anything,
but it may harm your defence

if you do not mention
when questioned

something which you
later rely on in court.

Anything you do say may
be given in evidence.

This again? Sweet.

For a minute there, I thought
it was something serious.

The riot squad's
a bit much, innit?

Feel sorry for you.

Wasting your time,
to be honest, mate.

You could be out there,
chasing real criminals.

Book him in, quick as you like.

There's another one coming in a
minute, and I don't them to meet.

So I suppose you won't be needing
the Tamil translator, then?

Name?

I'd like you to tell me how
Stephen Lawrence's hair was found

on the jeans seized from your
bedroom on May 7th, 1993.

No comment.

I am asking you to account for the
presence of Stephen Lawrence's blood

on a grey jacket found
in your possession

at the time of your
arrest. No comment.

Is there any account that
you can give us right now,

so that we can go away
and prove your innocence?

No comment.

David Norris, you're charged
that, on the April 22nd, 1993,

you did murder Stephen Lawrence,
contrary to common law.

You do not have to say anything,
but it may harm your defence

if you do not mention now something
which you later rely on in court.

Anything you do say may
be given in evidence.

Do you have any response,
Gary, to the charge of murder?

Nothing whatever. No comment.

Done?

Done.

Hello?

'Mr Lawrence? It's Clive.'

Clive.

Oh, sorry. I always forget
the time difference.

Is it...? It's five
in the morning. Go on?

We arrested and remanded
them this morning.

'We're going to trial.'

Thank you, Clive.

Now... Thank you.

After a
lifetime of waiting,

the parents of Stephen
Lawrence were in court today

for the start of
a trial of two men

accused of stabbing the
Black teenager to death.

What forensic
scientists found on clothes,

including a bomber jacket and jeans
alleged to belong to the accused,

Gary Dobson and David Norris,
is at the centre of this trial.

The question facing the jury is how
the fibres and fragments got there.

The prosecution case against
Gary Dobson and David Norris

is that they participated in a
joint attack on Stephen Lawrence.

This was a group of
likeminded young white men

who acted together in the
execution of this attack as one

on seeing two young Black men.

The only discernible
reason for the attack

was the colour of their skin.

Members of the jury, on
the night of his murder,

Stephen was wearing
a red polo shirt.

Fibres from that shirt
were found on the clothing

of both Dobson and Norris,

and a human hair matching Stephen's
DNA was found on Norris' jeans,

and a spec of Stephen's
blood was found on the collar

of Dobson's jacket.

The charge brought
against Gary Dobson

is based on unreliable evidence.

At the time Stephen
Lawrence was being attacked,

Gary Dobson was at home,
at his parents' house.

He is innocent of this charge.

Now, the, er, papers in
this case are voluminous,

but the actual physical evidence
upon which this charge is based

wouldn't fill a teaspoon.

The truth is

that, in the 13 years preceding
this apparent forensic breakthrough,

there were manifold
opportunities

for blood and fibres
from Stephen Lawrence

to make their way onto
Gary Dobson's clothing.

Members of the jury, the
simple fact is... Clive.

David Norris was not in Eltham
on the night of April 22nd, 1993.

The clothing seized from his
home did not belong to him.

He is entirely innocent of...

Sure.

Yeah, bye.

It's Duwayne. What about him?

He's here, isn't
he? He's on soon.

He's here, he's here,
but... his dad died.

Oh, God. He passed
away last night.

We'll just have to
reschedule, won't we?

Let me talk to him.

Here.

Thank you.

I wanna do this... for Steve.

And you will, but, er...
take a few days, eh?

I'm sure we can shuffle
things around. I'm here now.

It's amazing that you
are, and we're grateful.

But this is gonna be tough. No.

They've been let off the
hook for long enough.

I'm ready.

I heard a voice from
my left, so I turned.

These guys were running
across the road.

One of them shouts,
"What, what, nigger?"

I was afraid, so I ran.

I shouted to Steve to run.

I thought he was just
behind me, but when I turned

when I turned around...

The jury should be aware

that Mr Brooks' father sadly
passed away last night.

He has chosen to give
evidence as planned.

If you require a break at
any point, Mr Brooks...

I'm OK.

The group converged on Steve.

When I looked back, I saw
one of the guys had a weapon,

ran straight into him, and then

wham.

Just like that.

What was the approximate
size of the weapon you saw?

It was about this
big, and it was shiny.

But then Steve jumped
up, so I was relieved.

He caught up, and
we were running.

We were both running.

Then he kept asking
me, "What's wrong?"

"What's wrong with me?"

That's when I saw
blood was streaming out

from around his neck.

Through...
through his jacket.

I'm sorry.

We was running,

and Steve's blood was
dripping on the floor...

Mr Brooks, would you
like to take a break?

I can deal with this
quite quickly. No. No.

I wanna say what happened.

He kept saying to me,
"What's happened to me?"

And I told him to
just keep running

because I was frightened that
the guys would come back round.

He then said to me...
One last time, he said,

"Duwayne..." and his
voice was all funny.

And that's when he
fell... at the tree.

Thank you, Mr Brooks.

No further questions.

Mr Brooks?

Um

You did him proud.

I hope it works.

It's time we had some justice.

Come on, Mum.

He was asking questions.

Who was? Your brother.

He was scared.

He wanted to know what was
happening, and I wasn't there to

to answer him.

Mum...

I wasn't there

to hear him, to comfort him.

The motive
for the murder

of the London teenager
Stephen Lawrence

was set out in court today.

It was, said the prosecution,
the colour of his skin.

The jury heard how he was swallowed
up by a gang of white youths

who had shouted a racist insult.

Our crime correspondent Jon Clements
was at the Stephen Lawrence trial

and heard today's evidence.

You searched Mr Dobson's
bedroom on May 7th,

seizing a cardigan and
a jacket, exhibit LH/5.

Where did you find the jacket?

It was in the wardrobe, hanging
up with some other clothes.

I took it off the coat hanger,

folded it up and put
it in an exhibits bag.

Miss Holden... in your role
liaising with the victim's family,

you visited the Lawrence
household on April 23rd, 1993,

the day after Stephen died.

Then again April
25th, 27th and 28th,

with a final trip on April 29th.

Is that correct?
That is correct.

Hmm.

When you searched Mr
Dobson's bedroom on May 7th,

did you not think to
yourself, "Just a minute

"I was in the Lawrence
household just last week.

"It might not be a good idea for me
to be at the two different scenes"?

It was over a week later, and I
was wearing different clothes.

Also, I do wash
fairly frequently.

Hm.

I didn't think there was
any risk of contamination.

Are you absolutely sure?

And can you swear, on oath,

that you didn't wear any
of the same clothing?

Positive.

We're talking about events
almost 18 years ago.

How can you be so sure?

I knew I was going
into a search,

so I chose clothes that, if they got
soiled or whatever, didn't matter.

We support Mr Roberts.

The jury has been
sufficiently educated

on the clear opportunities
for contamination.

That didn't go too
well today, did it?

The defence are just doing
their job, sowing doubt.

Long way to go yet.

The jury only wanna know one thing
- how did Stephen's blood get there?

In the end, they can't answer that
question, and we can, tomorrow.

I hope you're right.

Mr Jarman, you and your team
carried out microscopic analysis

of the suspects' clothing.

Could you tell the
court what you found?

We made a number of finds.

There were fibres matching
Stephen's polo shirt

found on Gary Dobson's jacket,

and fibres matching Stephen
Lawrence's green trousers

and red polo shirt were found
on David Norris' sweatshirt.

Fibres that matched the cuff and
wristband of Stephen's jacket

found on Gary Dobson's cardigan.

The two hairs found on David
Norris' trousers were a 1,000-to-1

mitochondrial DNA match
to Stephen Lawrence.

A blood stain matching Stephen's

was found on the collar
of Gary Dobson's jacket.

The defence have
repeatedly raised concerns

regarding cross-contamination.

In your view, is it possible

that the blood staining
to Mr Dobson's jacket

could have occurred later, at
Eltham Police Station, for example?

The nature of the staining,
the fact that the blood

has been absorbed into
the fibres of the jacket,

indicates that the
blood was still liquid

when it made contact
with the jacket.

Er, you said earlier that the
blood... Where are we now?

"Must have been wet" when it
was transferred to the jacket.

Is it possible that blood
fragments were moistened

during the course of the tests

you and your team carried
out on the jacket?

Well, this was a
hypothesis we explored.

In the event, we discovered that
exposing the fragments to moisture

caused them to become
gel-like, but not liquid.

This did not produce
a comparable stain.

It couldn't soak into
the weave of the fabric.

Isn't it true that
different blood samples

taken from the same individual
can have different compositions,

different characteristics?
Well, yes, there are a number...

Simple yes or no will suffice.

And the rigorous
tests you carried out,

exposing blood
samples to moisture,

they have not actually been carried
out with the specific blood sample

on the collar of the jacket. Well,
no, that wouldn't be possible.

But that does mean, does it not,

that we cannot completely
exclude the possibility

that the stain was produced
by your own testing?

In terms of likelihood,
the probability...

It wouldn't be right to
exclude it, would it?

We haven't excluded it.

However, it is a
statistical impossibility.

The probability is so low as to
bear no mention in any reasonable,

rational argument, which leaves us
with the more viable conclusion...

Thank you, Mr Jarman.
..that the... Thank you.

That the wearer of the jacket
was involved in the attack

on Stephen Lawrence.

Is this right? The defence
are trying to stop us

from showing surveillance
footage of Dobson and Norris?

Yeah, they claim that character
evidence isn't relevant

and could prejudice the jury.

But this is a racially
motivated murder.

Whether those two are racist
or not is very relevant.

That's exactly what
Mr Ellison is arguing.

Let's hope the judge sees sense.

But for now, all
we can do is wait.

On the bright side, Mr Jarman didn't
do too badly yesterday, did he?

Not what the papers are saying.

I told her not to look at them.

I wanted to see what
the jury are reading.

The jury aren't allowed to
read the papers. Oh, please.

"Stephen Lawrence trial.
Forensics do not fit."

Well, th-that's not right!

The defence haven't
proven any contamination.

I mean, where are they
getting this stuff?

Excuse me. Excuse me.
Are you in court 15?

Er, no, I'm 16, the
Lawrence case. Your case.

Are you sure?

Because from what
you've been writing,

I'd swear you were
watching a different trial.

I mean, anyone reading it

would think the prosecution
was about to collapse.

Where are you getting
your information from?

To be honest, we're getting most
of it from your press office.

They seem, er, pessimistic.

The Met are feeding you this?

What are you doing?

Think I know where all the
negative coverage is coming from.

Unbelievable. That's
how the brass work.

They wanna lower expectations
in case it doesn't go our way.

Or maybe they don't
want a conviction.

We're getting called back in.

The judge said yes to the
tapes. Oh, that is a result!

And now, we get to
cross-examine them.

How come?

Well, the defence aren't
gonna want that horror show

to be the only impression the
jury get of their clients,

so they'll have to
put 'em on the stand.

'He got my
arm, twisted it behind my back,

'started mucking about.

'And I had a Stanley
knife in my pocket,

'so I pulled it out, I bit
the thing off, and I said,

' "That'll do there, Mick, before
I end up fucking cutting you."

'All fucking day, he was
getting on my nerves, you know?

'I said, "You tap me once
more, you silly cunt",

' "I'm gonna just fucking
slice this down you." '

'If I was gonna kill
myself, do you know what I'd do?

'I'd go and kill every Black
cunt, every Paki, every copper,

'every mug that I know.
I'm telling you, right?'

'I'd go down Catford, places
like that, I'm telling you,

'with two sub-machine guns.

'I'd take one of them, skin
the Black cunt alive, mate.

'Torture him, set him alight.

'I'd blow the two legs and arms
off and say, "Go on, swim now." '

The court
has just watched footage

filmed 17 years ago, when
you were a young man.

We heard you frequently
use racial slurs.

How do you feel
about that language?

Well... I think,
with that, like,

I've always listened to
hip-hop over the years,

so I used to use the N-word.

We heard you threaten violence
against a Black colleague.

Were you a violent man at
that time? No, not at all.

All it was was a bit
of friendly banter.

Workplace banter kind of
thing. A bit of bravado.

Can you account for your whereabouts
on the evening of April 22nd, 1993?

I was at home. I stayed in.

I had some curry,
played on the computer,

and then later, about half 11, I
went to Neil and Jamie's house.

Why did you visit the
Acourt brothers' house?

Just visiting my mates.

I wanted to borrow a
Bob Marley CD off 'em.

So, to confirm, at 10:40pm, the time
of the attack on Stephen Lawrence,

you were at home? Yeah.

Gary, did you have anything
to do with the events

that led to the death
of Stephen Lawrence?

No, I didn't.

Mr Dobson, how can you
account for a jacket

stained with Stephen Lawrence's
blood being found in your wardrobe?

I never even wore that jacket.

Never? Well, I wore it
to school once or twice,

and I had the complete mick taken
out of me, so I never wore it.

The problem is, the jacket
appeared to be heavily worn.

It had cigarette
burns, a broken zipper.

Yeah, it was worn. It
got worn, but not by me.

Who had been wearing
it, Mr Dobson?

My mum, my auntie, my
brother. Your auntie?

Yeah.

I suggest to you that you went
out with your friends that night.

You were coming home across Well
Hall Road at about ten thirty,

and you saw two Black
boys on your manor.

You saw their very presence
as a provocation. No.

And you attacked them, didn't you?
Definitely not. Absolutely not.

Did you have anything to do with
the death of Stephen Lawrence?

No. Certainly not, no, sir.

The jeans seized by police
from your home on May 7th, 1993

did they belong to you? No, sir.

They were my brother's jeans.
They'd have been too loose for me.

How, Mr Norris,
can you be so sure

you were not in Eltham
the night of the murder?

Cos I'm innocent.

You insist you were nowhere
near the scene of this murder,

and yet, as we have seen, fibres
matching Stephen Lawrence's clothing

and hairs matching
Stephen Lawrence's DNA

were found on your clothing.

Is there any
innocent explanation

for how those hairs and fibres
could have got on your clothing?

Nothing at all.

A little earlier, we
heard a recording of you

saying you would like
to kill Black people.

You have a murderous
hatred of Black people,

don't you, Mr Norris?
No. No, not at all, sir.

The truth is, you and your mates
attacked that young Black boy

that night, didn't you?
No, absolutely not, sir.

It was a school night.

There's no way David would
have been out at that time.

How can you be sure?

I had a routine, and I
was very strict with it.

They all knew they
had to be back.

Mrs Norris, isn't it true
that this is the first time

there has been a
breath of this alibi?

It is, is it not,
a recent invention?

No, that's not right.

Why has it only just
occurred to you that your son

was at home at the
time of the murder?

I didn't realise at the time
that it was a school night.

Of course, David wasn't actually
going to school, was he?

At 16, he'd finished school.

Why would a school night
have any relevance to him?

He had to stick to my rules,
the same as the rest of my kids.

My son would have been at home.

I went into the
kitchen at 10:30pm,

and that's when Gary
came in and made toast.

He had a pair of shorts on, so
I could see he hadn't been out.

Mrs Dobson, in your
1993 statement,

you say that Gary came down
to the kitchen at 10:45pm.

Why has this changed?

Well, 10:30, give or
take a few minutes.

Stephen Lawrence was killed
shortly after 10:30pm,

a few minutes away
from your home.

If we give Gary ten minutes, if we
have him in the kitchen at 10:45pm,

the time you gave in
your original statement,

then he no longer has an alibi.

No, he didn't do
it. He wasn't there.

Gary was in all evening.

Those two women.
If it was your son

wouldn't you encourage them
to take responsibility?

I mean, if you don't give
your children a conscience,

then what have you given them?

I think you've got an
optimistic view of human nature.

I meet a lot of young people
in my work in schools.

Some of them tough, you know.

Have to fend for themselves.
Mothers working shifts.

But most of these kids, when you
take the time to get to know them

they ain't bad.

You can see that they've
been given some goodness.

My grandmother raised me.

She was tough, but she was kind.

She drummed it into me
- be kind to everyone.

She didn't have much, but

she gave me that.

And I gave it to my children.

There are a few
key questions you must answer

before reaching a verdict.

You must decide if
the blood and fibres

found on the accused clothing
came from Stephen Lawrence.

If you're satisfied on this
point, you must then consider

whether you can exclude the
possibility of contamination.

The character of the
defendants is irrelevant,

unless you are convinced
by the physical evidence

putting them at the scene of
Stephen Lawrence's murder.

We shall reconvene
on January 3rd

for the jury to
consider their verdict.

And I wish you all, in
advance, a happy New Year.

Got you some birch
for the fireplace.

Yeah, it, er... burns
hotter than pine.

Smells nicer, too.

You don't need to chop down a tree
just to pop over for a cup of tea,

you know, Clive.

Thank you.

Any plans for New Year? Oh,
I'm too old for all that.

I'm on baby-sitting duty.

You're worried, aren't you?

It's the waiting.

This festive break is
not good for my nerves.

Well, I've had plenty of
practice with waiting.

Normally, when the jury
retires, that's it.

Whatever will be will be.

But, er... this case

your family, er, needs justice.

Clive, I've sacrificed
18 years of my life

fighting for
justice for Stephen,

but even if we win this
case, it won't be job done,

not for me.

To get this close...

You did all you could, but
justice is bigger than this case.

The judge said a
reinvestigation of the case

had led to new
scientific evidence.

The two accused men questioned
the handling of that evidence.

'Would all parties in
the case of Dobson and Norris

'please report to court 16?'

'Would all parties in the
case of Dobson and Norris

'please go to court 16?'

Time to be put
out of our misery.

Will the defendants
please stand?

Would the foreman of
the jury please stand?

Have you reached a verdict on both
cases on which you are all agreed?

We have.

The verdicts in this case will
be received in complete silence.

Do you find the defendant
David Norris guilty

or not guilty on this
indictment of murder?

Guilty. GASPS.

Do you find the defendant
Gary Dobson guilty

or not guilty on this
indictment of murder?

Guilty.

He's innocent! He did
not kill that man!

You've condemned an
innocent man here today.

Hope you can live with that.

Is DCI Driscoll in court?

Yes, sir, My Lord.

You've been leading this
investigation since 2006.

Yes, My Lord.

This is a case that has shamed and
humbled the Metropolitan Police.

However, you and your officers
have worked incredibly hard,

and you deserve to be commended.

A measure of justice has
finally been achieved.

On the evidence
before the court,

there are at least three
other killers at large.

I expect you will continue your
efforts to bring them to justice.

Yes, My Lord.
Thank you, My Lord.

Congratulations, Mrs
Lawrence, Mr Lawrence.

We got there in the end, eh?

Mr Lawrence. Yeah?

Congratulations.

Thank you, Clive.

Do you have a statement?
Why did this take so long?

What's your reaction
to the verdict?

What about
the other suspects?

As senior investigating officer,
I welcome today's verdicts.

This is a case of
extraordinary importance,

not just to the
Metropolitan Police...

And all this time, I
thought you were SIO.

But to society at large.
Only if we'd lost.

We know that there were
more than two attackers

involved in this murder.

I would encourage any member of
the public who has information

that could support our ongoing
investigation to come forward.

Today is not a cause
for celebration.

How can I celebrate
when my son lies buried?

Now that we have
some sort of justice,

I want people to
think of Stephen

not only as a Black teenager
murdered in a racist attack.

I want people to remember him
as a bright, beautiful young man

that any mother would
have been proud of.

I miss him with a passion.

My greatest hope

is that these people now realise

that they've been found out,

and they're gonna
lie down in their bed

and think that they
are not the only ones

responsible for the
death of my son.

And they're gonna give
up the rest of the people

so that I can come out
here again in a year's time

and talk to you people again.

Mr Lawrence,
do you...? Thank you.

Do you have a message
for the other suspects?

You know, for so many years,

I resented those men
for not repenting.

But seeing them in the
court...

I pitied them, to
be honest with you.

You must have felt as though
a great weight was lifted.

I'm not ready to
forgive. Not yet.

But, for the first time

it feels possible.

I can imagine
leaving them behind.

The Home
Secretary, Theresa May,

has ordered a review
into allegations

that police corruption hampered
the original failed investigation

into the murder of
Stephen Lawrence.

Mark Ellison QC, the barrister
who secured convictions

against two of Stephen's
murderers earlier this year,

will head the review.

Stephen's mother,
Doreen Lawrence,

is meeting with the Home Secretary
to clarify the terms of reference.

Mr Ellison. How lovely
to see you again.

Do you know how many man hours I've
spent trying to get hold of these?

That's funny, it took me about
15 minutes to dig 'em out.

Thank you.

Anything else I can
do, just let me know.

We're all on the
same side, after all.

Like the judge said, we've got
three killers still at large.

The way I see it, your case is
only as good as your best witness,

and my hope is that the convictions
will sway a few key people

who were previously,
er, reluctant.

As you can see, the following
people came forward in '93,

but were never followed up on.

We're very hopeful of being
able to track them down.

Before we get into the detail,

I think we should discuss
the oversight of the case

and management of the
investigation going forward.

Dropping off those
tickets. Fulham-Arsenal.

One for you, one for Stuart.
Ah, looking forward to it.

Stuart said he'll try
and go easy on you.

What is it?

They're letting me go.

They're sacking you?

Compulsory retirement. Huh!

There'll be a handover.

They asked me to hand
over my rapport with you,

as a matter of fact.

They can't do that. I'll
talk to the Home Secretary.

I'm two years over my 30.

It's, er... It's at
their discretion.

They could keep me on if they
wanted to, but, er, well,

they don't want to.

This is how they reward you
for getting convictions?

They should be
giving you medals.

It's all right, Doreen.

It's like you said - justice is
bigger than a couple of convictions.

I mean, they can stop me, but
no-one's ever gonna stop you.