The Mail's army of armchair lawyers are out in force on the story about the Mauritius trial - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... fence.html
Yes, on the basis of a few highly selective newspaper reports, and the fact that the victim was an attractive Irish woman, Mailites just know that those two wicked brown people did it. The fact that the jury who sat through the trial, heard the witnesses, saw the evidence, and heard all the arguments thought differently means nothing to them.
What I find extraordinary is that the mods let through their comments. Each is a direct accusation that the accused were guilty of murder and perjury, and is highly libellous, and I really can't see that the Mail's disclaimer would protect them at all - particularly given that the dog-whistle headline is positively inviting this sort of response. It wouldn't be in the least difficult for the two accused to find a lawyer willing to take this on on a no win no fee basis, because with a not guilty verdict available it's a pretty cut and dried case. It could be gratifyingly expensive.