Documentary which aired tonight about an innocent man wrongly convicted of a crime h did not commit another example of a flawed justice system and police force not fit for purpose

Was that in the UK?

Implore any/everyone to check out these saints in the US:

https://innocenceproject.org/

It's rather sickening to see some of the wrongful convictions sent on bogus evidence and jurors unwilling to hear evidence against the initial, wrongful verdict.

Not Jurors unwilling to hear evidence but applications for appeals dismissed and then having been shown DNA evidence which eventually would prove his innocence the Criminal cases review commission refused to ask the Court of Appeal to review the case. All that was available by about 2010 and the man festered in prison for another 10 years. It was only when the Charity APPEAL took on the case in 2017 that matters moved slowly forward although the man was released under Licence as a sex offender etc in 2020 and only became a free man in 2023. If you think the Post Office scandal was bad just review the plight of this man.

Endless examples of Black people spending 30 or more yrs in jail here in the US.
Racism runs deep within the justice system & the general population.
Rich white people get away with almost anything..... Donald Trump for example or Robert Blake.

How many have been executed wrongfully........it's a farce.

It was a fascinating if tragic case. Can’t believe the conviction in the first place.

But anyway, the GMP were shocking. Borderline bribing the ‘witnesses’ and then strangely destroying the evidence which would have proved his innocence years later.

Seemed a really intelligent, interesting guy too. No compensation yet either. I thought the charity who helped him were amazing.

A disgusting miscarriage of justice

If this is the same guy then I believe that he has been informed that his food and board in prison will be deducted from any compensation he is awarded! If that is true then it is shocking!!

https://appeal.org.uk/the-inside-story- ... cumentary/

It might save some guessing.

ClaretDiver wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 7:00 am

If this is the same guy then I believe that he has been informed that his food and board in prison will be deducted from any compensation he is awarded! If that is true then it is shocking!!

That's been abolished.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 7:06 am

https://appeal.org.uk/the-inside-story- ... cumentary/

It might save some guessing.

You'd have allowed the public to vote for his execution.

taio wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 7:10 am

That's been abolished.

Yes, it was abolished after this miscarriage of justice.

Gross misconduct by the GMP-endless flaws. How did he ever get convicted in the first place with no DNA evidence. The guy deserves huge compensation, which should have been resolved by now. I believe that GMP have known whose DNA were left on the victims garments but not followed up the arrest on someone who was living in that area at the time of the assault

Clovius Boofus wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 9:47 am

Yes, it was abolished after this miscarriage of justice.

Yes, but such deductions not applied in the last ten years apparently

I watched this yesterday morning on the catch up service and it had me thinking about it all day.

1. It seems that he was basically stitched up - the 2 witnesses had been arrested both on the same day, suggesting they were given a lighter punishment if they both lied and said it was Andrew. This should be investigated to find out who the arresting / interviewing officers were and take appropriate action - cancel their pension for a start. Difficult to prove no doubt, but it should still be attempted.

2. The Criminal Cases Review Commission rejected his appeal even though it was obvious to anybody with an ounce of common sense that because they now knew the DNA wasn't his, it's likely to have been the rapist.

You don't even need any criminal experience to know that. Therefore, I would be also wanting to find out who made that decision and why - they obviously had an ulterior motive as you don't find out it's not his DNA and not accept the appeal, unless you're a dodgy sod and something is going on,

How can the police who initially stopped him I think on his motorbike 2 weeks previously get an arrest warrant as he sounded like he fitted the description of a man being hunted for rape … sounds madness to me and then it just got worse and worse .. shocking

Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 4:51 am

Rich white people get away with almost anything..... Donald Trump for example or Robert Blake.

How many have been executed wrongfully........it's a farce.

OJ simpson etc

Venkys4eva wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 12:56 pm

OJ simpson etc

OJ Simpson is the exact opposite of what i'm talking about!

This stuff makes my blood boil

He was completely fitted up by GMP for some reason

They had matched DNA of real culprit, Mr B and again for some reason decided to do nothing AND have still not arrested Mr B

Ruined his life
Left a violent rapist at large for 20 years and is still roaming the streets.

And most importantly no justice for the victim.

No one will get disciplined or have their pensions taken off them.

Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 4:20 pm

OJ Simpson is the exact opposite of what i'm talking about!

This is about a man who spent 17 years in jail for nothing .. it’s nothing to do with race .. black white .. it’s about corrupt police and a man in Manchester in England .

Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 4:20 pm

OJ Simpson is the exact opposite of what i'm talking about!

This is about a man who spent 17 years in jail for nothing .. it’s nothing to do with race .. black white .. it’s about corrupt police and a man in Manchester in England .

Carlos the Great wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 5:24 pm

This is about a man who spent 17 years in jail for nothing .. it’s nothing to do with race .. black white .. it’s about corrupt police and a man in Manchester in England .

Yes, and i'm talking about how common this kind of thing is in the US & it has everything to do with race....but even more to do with how much money you have.

Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 5:53 pm

Yes, and i'm talking about how common this kind of thing is in the US & it has everything to do with race....but even more to do with how much money you have.

Your right ….
That’s why OJ Simpson got off with murder because he had so much money and got the best legal team wag the whole world watched on tv he was guilty but got off

Some of you lot would’ve happily had him killed by the state.

I was surprised he was convicted on so little evidence. They never mentioned what was his alibi.

Swizzlestick wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 11:40 pm

Some of you lot would’ve happily had him killed by the state.

Having read the whole thread I really can’t see how you’ve come to that conclusion.

Awful, and scary story.

I hadn’t heard of this case and thought the programme was a bit light on the details of the trial and the evidence presented both for and against him.

Benson wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 11:54 pm

Having read the whole thread I really can’t see how you’ve come to that conclusion.

It’s a hark back to previous threads.

cblantfanclub wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 11:48 pm

I was surprised he was convicted on so little evidence. They never mentioned what was his alibi.

It’s a very good point that puzzled me too .. surely he had his telephone that would have cell sites somewhere else ? I know it was 2003 but perhaps his legal team let him down too with sloppy defence .. maybe they assumed he was guilty as well

Wouldn’t surprise me if Mr. B was a copper.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 11:55 pm

Awful, and scary story.

I hadn’t heard of this case and thought the programme was a bit light on the details of the trial and the evidence presented both for and against him.

Watched it on iPlayer this morning and that struck me as well.

The program suggested he was convicted on the evidence of the 2 alleged eye witnesses and the victim having picked him out of a police line up and stated in court she was 100% certain it was him.

Never mentioned any alibi or if he was even in the area at the time of the attack.
.

Vintage Claret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 10, 2024 1:01 pm

Watched it on iPlayer this morning and that struck me as well.

The program suggested he was convicted on the evidence of the 2 alleged eye witnesses and the victim having picked him out of a police line up and stated in court she was 100% certain it was him.

Never mentioned any alibi or if he was even in the area at the time of the attack.
.

You are right it never got mentioned how we transported from Grimsby to Manchester it just left the viewer assuming he must have been over that way when the crime took place.

How ironic. The majority of posters on this thread are always quick to condemn people and convict them from what they have read in the papers. Now they are seeing a different side. Who would have thought it.

pushpinpussy wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 10, 2024 4:10 pm

How ironic. The majority of posters on this thread are always quick to condemn people and convict them from what they have read in the papers. Now they are seeing a different side. Who would have thought it.

childish post. well done.

i saw the programme and wanted to boot the telly.

how can so many coppers dodge justice just because they've retired? the story of the cardiff five was equally unjust and nobody has been held to account.

and don't get me started on hillsborough.

This is why the death penalty can NEVER be re-introduced.

burnley007 wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 11, 2024 9:36 am

This is why the death penalty can NEVER be re-introduced.

100% agree even though there are times when I feel as murderous as the ones who kill-like that one eyed monster who lured those two women police officers in I think Tameside and shot them. I would set the tariff for any murder of 25 years.Given we know what average life expectancy is at various ages I think there should be an additional tariff for the number of life years you have taken by your crime. Thus an 18 year old man can expect to live to 87- so you serve 69 years for killing him plus 25 years. A 68 year old man can expect to live another 18 years so you would serve a minimum on 18 years plus 25 years and a minimum of 5 years for killing an 88 year old man plus 25 years.

At least with that sentencing plan, mdd2, there is a chance that those wrongly convicted will have a chance of release, before dying in prison.

yTib wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 11, 2024 7:15 am

childish post. well done.

i saw the programme and wanted to boot the telly.

how can so many coppers dodge justice just because they've retired? the story of the cardiff five was equally unjust and nobody has been held to account.

and don't get me started on hillsborough.

The list is endless.

The Bridgewater 4, Guildford 4, Birmingham 6, Barry George(Bulsara), Stefan Kiszko and many more.

The ones that you and I have listed are only the most serious high profile cases that have been in the public spotlight. How many thousands of people have been convicted of relatively minor offences and spent months and years in prisons for crimes that they did not commit?

The principle is that people should not be convicted if there is reasonable doubt. Sadly juries are often swayed by the most charismatic witness whether that be for the defence or the prosecution. It may also come down to which of the barristers is the most skilled orator. And you can also factor that some judges are very prejudiced and although they are only supposed to reference points of law when summing up in criminal trials they often influence juries to make decisions based on their own opinions.

Michael Stone has served 21 years for the murder of Lin and Megan Russell. A very dubious conviction at the time and even more so, now that Levi Bellfield has admitted the murders, after years of denial.

michael stone is a violent thug and anything levi bellend has to say has to be taken with a rather large pinch of salt.

both are monsters.

I think the recent TV "drama" where two juries from the public were picked and neither knew of the others existence but both sat through a real trial using the transcript of that trial with actors playing the role of barristers, judge witnesses etc. We saw the deliberations of the juries and it was quite striking how one alpha male on one jury influenced a majority of the other 11 and similar but less intense activity went on with the other jury. They came to different verdicts and from memory Zazir Afzal the guy who was brave enough as DPP in NW to take on the Rochdale paedophile gang, felt that we may need a different way of conducting trials.
It was a very good programme. Wonder what other folk thought if they saw it.

mdd2 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:10 am

I think the recent TV "drama" where two juries from the public were picked and neither knew of the others existence but both sat through a real trial using the transcript of that trial with actors playing the role of barristers, judge witnesses etc. We saw the deliberations of the juries and it was quite striking how one alpha male on one jury influenced a majority of the other 11 and similar but less intense activity went on with the other jury. They came to different verdicts and from memory Zazir Afzal the guy who was brave enough as DPP in NW to take on the Rochdale paedophile gang, felt that we may need a different way of conducting trials.
It was a very good programme. Wonder what other folk thought if they saw it.

Yes that programme went to show how unfit for purpose trials by jury are and certainly made a good case for having professional jurors who understand the law. The experiment went to show how the loudest mouths can shout down the majority of people, a number of which are sat on the fence.

It also showed how little the jurors pay attention to the actual facts of the case, the law, and their job to take into account ‘reasonable doubt’ and instead default to their prejudices and own personal life experiences.

There’s no way I could trust a jury in this country to decide my fate.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:18 am

Yes that programme went to show how unfit for purpose trials by jury are and certainly made a good case for having professional jurors who understand the law. The experiment went to show how the loudest mouths can shout down the majority of people, a number of which are sat on the fence.

It also showed how little the jurors pay attention to the actual facts of the case, the law, and their job to take into account ‘reasonable doubt’ and instead default to their prejudices and own personal life experiences.

There’s no way I could trust a jury in this country to decide my fate.

It is a really interesting idea the 'professional jury', although one I don't think we will be likely to see.

I went to sit in the gallery at the Old Bailey last month and watched some of a serious sexual assault case. One lady in the front row of the jury looked to be nearly asleep slumped down in her chair and a few others appeared barely interested, just flicking through the case files as a cursory look. I wasn't there long enough to get a feel over his guilt or innocence, but if that was me and I was innocent, I would have been seriously flapping about the outcome looking at the jury.

Poulton-le-Claret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:34 am

It is a really interesting idea the 'professional jury', although one I don't think we will be likely to see.

I went to sit in the gallery at the Old Bailey last month and watched some of a serious sexual assault case. One lady in the front row of the jury looked to be nearly asleep slumped down in her chair and a few others appeared barely interested, just flicking through the case files as a cursory look. I wasn't there long enough to get a feel over his guilt or innocence, but if that was me and I was innocent, I would have been seriously flapping about the outcome looking at the jury.

I think it’s unlikely too. We would need a lot of professional jurors I would expect?! I wonder how many jurors are sitting at any one time?

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 12, 2024 11:10 am

I think it’s unlikely too. We would need a lot of professional jurors I would expect?! I wonder how many jurors are sitting at any one time?

From a (very) quick look at the published stats (as I am on holiday ), it is really difficult to tell how many pro jurors we would need to make it work.

I suppose there would be plenty of risks involved, such as how impartial do these people become if they are regularly seeing cases of a similar nature e.g., once you've seen a hundred serious sexual assault cases, then could you become 'numb' to the plight of victims or quick to convict people? Not to mention other aspects such as cost and the age old phrase of justice must be seen to be done - harder to do if we excluded the ordinary Joe from their civic duty.

Certainly something I think the country should explore though

I suppose it depends on how much weight you put on the victim’s identification of the accused. You can discount the witness statements as they don’t appear reliable. As far as the DNA evidence is concerned, if I remember rightly it didn’t say what sort of dna it was and wasn’t it near her shoulder or somewhere? I can’t remember exactly, what I am trying to say is that is wasn’t sperm recovered from the victims vagina or anything like that.

Whilst it doesn’t prove that the accused was innocent of the crime it does introduce an element of doubt which should have been recognised by the review board.

Again, it depends on the circumstances of the victims identification and the weight that you place on that.

Plenty of heanous monsters that are guilty beyond doubt and fully deserve the death penalty.

as a citizen a death penalty would make me party to a murder.

no thanks.

Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 4:51 am

Endless examples of Black people spending 30 or more yrs in jail here in the US.
Racism runs deep within the justice system & the general population.
Rich white people get away with almost anything..... Donald Trump for example or Robert Blake.

How many have been executed wrongfully........it's a farce.

Oh...and OJ Simpson inexplicably got away with it and he ain't white bro...

It Is What It Is wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 12, 2024 2:44 pm

Oh...and OJ Simpson inexplicably got away with it and he ain't white bro...

Nope.........just rich and famous, as discussed.
I assume the bloke in the article isn't rich......

I can honestly say there is no evidence to support the claim that the death penalty will be a deterrent. If someone is going to rape or murder someone they will do it no matter the sentence or outcome at court.