Yousef Makki | Coroner concludes that he was unlawfully killed (p15)

Well he’s just summarised a two week trial in a couple of paragraphs.
Well I followed the trial every day and read all the evidence, I don't think people on here want me to quote it verbatum.

What went on before the stabbing was a ludicrous attempt to obtain drugs without paying for them. This led to a dispute between the three boys especially as Boy A had had his very expensive bike thrown over a hedge. Makki mocked Boy A (big mistake) and a scuffle took place resulting in the fatality. The only evidence regarding the true facts of the aforementioned scuffle came from Boy A.

Knowing what I know about Boy A's previous history in my opinion he got off lightly, but as we live in a democracy others on here hold different views to me. I am fine with that and long may it continue.
 
Knowing what I know about Boy A's previous history in my opinion he got off lightly, but as we live in a democracy others on here hold different views to me. I am fine with that and long may it continue.
I also agree he got off lightly. I don’t know how, even with his story of self-defence, it wasn’t at least manslaughter given the fact that he was carrying a knife with him. One suspects it wasn’t because he was a buddy Jamie Oliver.
 
I also agree he got off lightly. I don’t know how, even with his story of self-defence, it wasn’t at least manslaughter given the fact that he was carrying a knife with him. One suspects it wasn’t because he was a buddy Jamie Oliver.

Self-defence is a complete defence for both murder and manslaughter. However I think, where a defendant uses an excessive amount of force in self-defence, they should be convicted of manslaughter and not murder (which isn't the current law). And in this case, there is a big question of whether it's reasonable to stab someone straight in the heart in response to the perceived threat that Makki posed.
 
Last edited:
Well I followed the trial every day and read all the evidence, I don't think people on here want me to quote it verbatum.

What went on before the stabbing was a ludicrous attempt to obtain drugs without paying for them. This led to a dispute between the three boys especially as Boy A had had his very expensive bike thrown over a hedge. Makki mocked Boy A (big mistake) and a scuffle took place resulting in the fatality. The only evidence regarding the true facts of the aforementioned scuffle came from Boy A.

Knowing what I know about Boy A's previous history in my opinion he got off lightly, but as we live in a democracy others on here hold different views to me. I am fine with that and long may it continue.

Do you know whether the victim had any other wounds on him at all?
 
Not knife wounds. There were some superficial bruising to his fist which might have been casued by thumping Boy A.

Interesting, surely that suggests (although there are other explanations) that he was not holding the knife at the time of his death meaning:

1. The threat posed to Molnar wasn't that great (assuming the fist bruising wasn't a defensive wound)
2. The lack of injuries elsewhere indicate that Molnar was trying to kill Makki rather than merely defend himself
 
Interesting, surely that suggests (although there are other explanations) that he was not holding the knife at the time of his death meaning:

1. The threat posed to Molnar wasn't that great (assuming the fist bruising wasn't a defensive wound)
2. The lack of injuries elsewhere indicate that Molnar was trying to kill Makki rather than merely defend himself
You my friend should have been on the jury.
 
Screenshot-20190304-204953.jpg
hi im yousefs sister, anyone on here with any relevant information please please private message me. Jade akoum on facebook. Thank you
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.