More embarrassing revelations about the Stephen Lawrence investigation

Last week's BBC documentary, Stephen Lawrence: The Sixth Suspect, identified a new suspect and asked a crucial question about police 'mistakes'

Along with Daniel Morgan case, the botched investigation into the racist murder of teenager Stephen Lawrence in 1993 is the biggest running sore in the Met’s history.

Scotland Yard has apologised several times for its failings, and was obliged to do so again in the face of revelations from a BBC documentary,

Stephen Lawrence: The Sixth Suspect is a report by Daniel De Simone that names a man called Matthew White as the sixth person present among the young man’s attackers on 22 April 1993.

The crucial point the documentary makes is that White was never investigated properly in the early stages of inquiries despite clear indications that he was very much a person of interest.

Lawrence had been waiting at a bus stop with his mate, Duwayne Brooks, in Eltham, south London, when they were set upon by a white gang. Brooks identified a group of six, but the original focus was on five local young men – David Norris and Gary Dobson, who were finally convicted of the murder 11 years ago; Luke Knight; and brothers Neil and Jamie Acourt.

Knight and the Acourt brothers denied involvement, and Neil Acourt and Knight were acquitted of murder in 1996.

Sixth Lawrence: The Sixth Suspect can be viewed on BBC iPlayer (UK only)

The Sixth Man – more suspect than witness?

However, the case has never fully been solved and there have always been questions about who the sixth man was, as reported by witnesses on the scene.

A description was given of a man leading the charge on Lawrence and Brooks, said to have fair, fizzy hair.

The BBC documentary demonstrates how suspiciously inept efforts were to find the sixth man and uncover whether he was a witness or a suspect in the attack.

Like the original five, Matthew White was part of the inquiry, known publicly as Witness K. He was in the vicinity of the murder, encountered several people and was at the home of two of the suspects that evening.

He claimed to have visited the home of the Acourt brothers, saw Dobson there, and relayed to them news that there had been a stabbing. He also said he had told others about the incident, too.

One youth who met White after the attack went to the police. He was given the alias ‘James Grant’. His source was White himself and what he passed onto police should have made them see White as a suspect rather than witness.

‘James Grant’ told police that Norris and Neil Acourt had stabbed Lawrence and that a blond kid was involved, potentially the fair-haired attacker seen by witnesses.

It should have been obvious, based on what White had told ‘James Grant’, that he must have been at the scene of the crime and should have been investigated.

Despite all the evidence, detectives failed to investigate White properly

Kent police, brought in to review the Met’s handling of the case in 1997, certainly thought so. One of their recommendations was that the Met should fully investigate White.

Furthermore, in 1993 White’s stepfather told police that White was not telling officers everything he knew. The stepfather told this to a detective who was a friend but not a part of the inquiry. He did, though, pass on the intel to the murder team.

However, there was a complication with the stepfather. White’s mother had remarried twice, so he had two. The message on record named the second and wrong stepfather, meaning that detectives were sent in the wrong direction. This incorrect information was also passed onto the Macpherson inquiry, which found the Met’s failings were down to ‘institutional racism’ in 1999, a conclusion London’s police have found hard to live down.

Was the stepfather mix-up a simple mistake that innocently diverted the investigation? A subsequent development outlined in the documentary suggests that, once again, a more determined effort would have spotted the stepfather confusion.

This was down to Detective Chief Superintendent Clive Driscoll, who took over the inquiry in 2006 (and secured the convictions of Dobson and Norris). When his team, reviewing the case in 2013, approached the wrong stepfather, he quickly worked out that there was a second stepfather.

This was Jack Severs. When Driscoll finally approached Severs two decades after he first told his detective friend of his doubts about White, Severs said to the detective, ‘You’re rushing this job, aren’t you, officer?’

Severs told Driscoll that White had been present at the murder and had said Lawrence ‘deserved it’.

The documentary traced the unnamed the detective friend of Severs’ and he confirmed Severs’ account. He said he passed the information onto the homicide team in 1993.

The film also reveals that the Senior Investigating Officer, Detective Superintendent Brian Weeden, had planned a meeting with White and his stepfather, but White never showed up. A potentially crucial meeting never happened.

It was left to Driscoll to follow it up two decades later.

Lord Sentamu, former Archbishop of York who advised the Macpherson inquiry, told the BBC reporter here that the murder case would have been resolved in 1999 if the Met had done its job.

Driscoll reveals that he arrested and questioned White in 2013, but White refused to answer questions. Before he could conclude his investigation, Driscoll was asked a few weeks later to retire.

Finally, the documentary shows that White’s alibi was worthless. So he had no alibi, bore a good resemblance to the fair-haired man seen by witnesses, and even told another witness – ‘Witness Purple’ – that he had taken part in the violence.

Apologies and mistakes

However, repeated police ‘mistakes’ meant he was never properly investigated. A heroin user, he died in a bedsit in 2021.

This rather shocking but excellent documentary concludes with Deputy Assistant Commissioner Matt Ward apologising for the ‘many mistakes made’ in the investigation.

The Met has also repeatedly apologised for mistakes in the 1987 murder of private investigator Daniel Morgan.

So many damaging mistakes, leaving so many question marks in these criminal investigations. This surely suggests a police service that is either seriously ineffective, or that has a certain few officers who have sabotaged cases to protect the guilty.

Officers such as Clive Driscoll work hard to do their job. A few play for the other side.

There have been several indications that Stephen Lawrence’s attackers may have been shielded by bent officers in league with local criminals.

When I was writing The Real Ted Hastings, which looks at the real-life police corruption behind the BBC drama Line of Duty, I spoke to a former detective. He told me that one type of corruption was the ‘light investigation’.

This is where the intention is to hide guilt, so promising leads are not followed, material suspects not questioned. The subsequent recommendation would be that there is not enough evidence to charge anyone.

This really well researched BBC exposé has basically done the Met’s job for it in showing how White should have been examined. Sadly, it is decades too late. If anyone had wanted the Lawrence investigation undermined, they succeeded.

Watch Stephen Lawrence: The Sixth Suspect on BBC iPlayer (UK only)

Daniel De Simone’s written feature on the case

I’ll be taking a few weeks off for summer hols. Persons Unknown will be back in action next month. Wishing readers a crime-free summer!