a little earlier i spoke to marcia shakespeare, letisha's mother and asked her...two gangs who killed her daughter again today. i felt angry and disgusted to know that 11! years on, i'm constantly hearing the same gangs, the same two names are still terrorising parts of birmingham, and i can't understand why they are not stamped out. i know when i went and did some initial research within new york, when i met some bloods and crips over there, and they seemed to be quite faded, so i can't understand why these gangs are continuously happening and continuously recruiting young people. so there's been a marked uptick in violence this year, with a number of fatal shootings, not necessarily involving any of the people who are subject to this injunction, but why do you suppose that is? what is the problem with birminham? well, i know from speaking to young people who i work with, young boys in particular, they state that the problem is what they're getting is they're walking on the streets, and when they're walking on their own, they're being attacked by people, large gro

back in 2003, two teenage girls, letisha shakespeare and charlene ellis, were the innocent victims ofafterjerome. the injunctions come after a spate of gun and knife attacks in the city. it enables police officers to challenge them if they‘re in particular areas where they‘re not allowed to be, in exclusion zones. if they‘re in company with people they are not allowed to be, it enables them to be challenged and taken back to court. it actually disrupts their lifestyle, and that‘s the one thing that they don‘t want to happen. but former gang members have told us injunctions don‘t work. i think it's very stupid, because if a gang person's from a certain area, you tell him now, you can't go to that area, what's stopping the person who he used to roll with, the friends he used to keep, from going to another area to meet the same group of people? so, in reality, all you're doing is making a problem there, and putting the same person in another area. but there is an argument that at least something is being done to stop gang activity. what would you say to that? i would just say engage a li

back in 2003, two teenage girls, letisha shakespeare and charlene ellis, were the innocent victims ofame's pc evans. we're afterjerome. the injunctions come after a spate of gun and knife attacks in the city. it enables police officers to challenge them if they're in particular areas where they're not allowed to be, in exclusion zones. if they're in company with people they are not allowed to be, it enables them to be challenged and taken back to court. it actually disrupts their lifestyle, and that's the one thing that they don't want to happen. but former gang members have told us injunctions don't work. i think it's very stupid, because if a gang person's from a certain area, you tell him now, you can't go to that area, what's stopping the person who he used to roll with, the friends he used to keep, from going to another area to meet the same group of people? so, in reality, all you're doing is making a problem there, and putting the same problem in anotherarea. but there is an argument that at least something is being done to stop gang activity. what would you say to that? i woul