Why isn't there more coverage of the case of Yousef Makki?

[WobblyLondoner]

I'm really surprised there isn't more coverage of this case.

"A boy has been cleared of murdering a 17-year-old he stabbed in the heart with a flick knife." www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-48962845

The defender did kill him so I'm really unclear how he wasn't found guilty of manslaughter - I'm assuming it is because the defendant claimed self-defence but it's not that clear from the reporting. The victim's family are obviously bewildered at the verdict.

Interested in others' views, especially if you've been following the case. The boys involved sound like absolute idiots but the trial result does seem curious.

Check out the Manchester Evening News website, they had minute by minute live reporting from the court so you can follow the proceedings. The jury concluded that Boy One didn't intend to kill. Just so desperately sad for Makki's family.

I have heard that the three boys were well known as being a bad lot and had mugged other kids.
I used to live in the area where they were from.

As pp said there’s been loads of coverage in the MEN. I have been following it though not in enormous depth. I also felt it wasn’t made clear why he (the accused) was found not guilty though.

It seems an odd ruling but I haven’t read the transcript. I would have thought a seventeen year old carrying a flick knife that he used to kill someone with would be guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

It’s a tragic case whatever the ruling. I’m left wondering what the outcome would be for a poor, black, lad from Tower Hamlets.

I feel so sorry for his family.
Really don't feel justice has been served here. I don't understand how it's not manslaughter. They get to walk away gave their successful lives and Yousef is dead....

How very sad :( I feel for his parents

Thanks all. I have read the Manc news articles from yesterday but they weren't very detailed either as to what the legal case for finding not guilty was and how this would explain a not guilty verdict. Ditto one of the boys being found guilty of perverting the course of justice.

@CherryPavlova - yes, I was left wondering that too.

MEN has just posted a more in-depth article about the background.

From what I understood Yousef pulled a knife first, therefore it was self defence?

The boys called 999 and administered first aid.

I don’t think he meant to murder him, manslaughter would have been a more appropriate charge I think. I don’t understand how the boys will only be charged with carrying a knife. Maybe the judge will give them custodial for that?

A lot of the press coverage I've seen blames the victim for his own death. Possibly swaying the jury?

He was a non white private schoolboy on a scholarship, had he been white and fee paying I think the trial and press coverage would have looked very different sadly.

@Intheheatoflisbon, I think that’s only because the other two boys can’t be identified. We have no idea of their ethnicity or background

There has been lots made of the “middle class gangster” scene which they all seem to have been part of. They were boys playing at being “on the road”

Wow, people very quick to question the integrity of the jury. Unless you sat in court for the whole time, listening to all the evidence, how can you comment?

That probably plays a part too.

Although it seems to be clear that the two boys on trial were/are middle class and I can't help but think that was a factor in their acquittals too.

Even the assertion that they were playing at being gangsters minimises their actual actions.

All of them were carrying knives, all of them produced those knives and one is now dead, having been fatally wounded by a knife.

The middle class element seems to absolve them of full responsibility, when no such absolution would be afforded to a defendant who wasn't middle class.

It's as if somehow being middle class means they couldn't possibly have the intent to injure by carrying a knife.

And yet they did.

Wow, people very quick to question the integrity of the jury

I didn't question their integrity, I questioned if they'd been swayed by biased press reports. It's a tale as old as time.

Well to do family, middle class, either gets off or a reduced sentence because of their social status.

It's happened before and will happen again.

Errr. If you think they were 'swayed' by anything other than the evidence then you are by definition questioning their integrity!

I've read the Manchester Evening News reports daily as they detailed what was presented in court and am astonished at the verdict.

The character witnesses descriptions were negative about the accused, as was selfie footage, the fact that he lied to save his own skin and even his own account of what happened (though he conveniently 'couldn't remember' parts of it). Even the judge's summing up pointed to conviction.

Local Facebook is full of people horrified with the verdict too.

So what happened??

Boy One is long known to have been trouble but has wealthy parents so there you go.

Consensus seems to be that money talks.

It comes down to the charges presented in court.

I've done Jury service and the Judge made it very clear the we had to believe beyond doubt that the defendant had committed the crime with which were charged with.

In this case the jury had to believe that the defendant intended to kill the victim, as the charge presented was murder.

Had the charge presented been manslaughter the verdict may well have been different.

Frig sake dog stood on me before I'd finished hence all the poor grammar!

Not sure why the report says not guilty of murder and not guilty of manslaughter...... I didn't think the prosecution could present 2 different charges?

I haven't followed it in depth but I was surprised at the outcome.

All three seem to have been idiots. One was also unlucky.

I did wonder the same, OP. guess it has also largely to do with that fact that YM has an immigrant background and was not a white British boy. Cases like that u fortunately always get less media interest.

It's utterly disgraceful. This happened where I live .I know the family of the "boy A" and everyone on the local area knows who they both are.
The uproar in the local area is unbelievable.
The family is very wealthy and this boy has been in so much trouble even since primary school.
I honestly don't know how they can carry on living in this area.
Self defence is an utter joke.

Nobody knows if they are white middle class though. Where is that coming from?

The middle class element comes from the private school, area they lived in, family finances. You don’t know if they are white

They are white.

They are white and very wealthy

Accused are Asian background. Wealthy and connected. Boy 1 has form. Expelled from schools. Poor impulse control. Known druggie.
Complete travesty. Don't know how any jury could reach this decision. No physical evidence that victim had knife, only 'evidence' came from his killer. Boy 2 said to be scared of reprisals from boy 1; boy 2 didn't give evidence so couldn't be cross examined. If he had stood up for the victim, might have been a different outcome.
Local view for what it's worth? If accused had been white they would have been convicted.