Author Topic: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?  (Read 949 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #15 on: April 04, 2018, 03:51:18 PM »
I think it is considered hearsay?  Ie she was relaying what she claims JB told her.  It wasn't something she had direct evidence of unlike say the OCP break-in where she acted as a lookout.

No, it's not - I used to think the same until someone posted a definition on the blue forum - here is some info on it.

https://www.inbrief.co.uk/court-proceedings/hearsay-evidence-in-criminal-cases/

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1612
  • Total likes: 31
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #16 on: April 04, 2018, 03:54:41 PM »
Thank you for the various responses.

Caroline may be right actually that Mugford's testimony was NOT hearsay.

But that doesn't change my point about the probative value of her evidence at trial and the relevance of her evidence now.  I do stand by what I have said.

I actually doubt Mrs Smerchanski could be convicted of perverting the course of justice - there are too many hurdles - but even if she were, I simply don't see how that would undermine the conviction.  I am looking at this objectively, I have no axe to grind.
Of course, we must also take into account that even appellate judges look at these cases with some element of bias and 'greyzone' thinking, and it may well be that if Mugford's evidence is undermined, then moral pressure will be brought to bear to quash Bamber's conviction.  I appreciate that what happens in the courts isn't always strictly in accordance with evidence.

To what hurdles do you refer?

Months prior to Hall's admission of guilt he admitted to having burgled with a friend on the night of the murders. The friend he grassed up was also a main prosecution witness.
Halls mothers gave her son an alibi.
The police decided to not press charges in relation to the omittance of new evidence - no further action, and nothing, as far as I know, has been pursued in relation to his mothers evidence given under oath.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2018, 04:00:36 PM by Stephanie »
"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Senior Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6050
  • Total likes: 109
  • Bamber Campaign For Freedom, How Can I Help?!
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #17 on: April 04, 2018, 04:00:41 PM »
Thank you for the various responses.

Caroline may be right actually that Mugford's testimony was NOT hearsay.

But that doesn't change my point about the probative value of her evidence at trial and the relevance of her evidence now.  I do stand by what I have said.

I actually doubt Mrs Smerchanski could be convicted of perverting the course of justice - there are too many hurdles - but even if she were, I simply don't see how that would undermine the conviction.  I am looking at this objectively, I have no axe to grind.

Of course, we must also take into account that even appellate judges look at these cases with some element of bias and 'greyzone' thinking, and it may well be that if Mugford's evidence is undermined, then moral pressure will be brought to bear to quash Bamber's conviction.  I appreciate that what happens in the courts isn't always strictly in accordance with evidence.

I thought you said you had a good understanding of the different types of evidence?

I try to focus on aspects that potentially are black and white so to speak!  Aspects like JM's testimony, phone calls, windows I try to avoid.

4 x 13 year old teenage girls admitted lying "for a laugh" at Stefan Kiszko's trial.  They faced no punishment. 

Also that month, the four girls involved in the court trial admitted that the evidence they had given which had led to Kiszko's arrest and conviction was false, and that they had lied for "a laugh" and because "at the time it was funny". Burke said she wished she had not said anything but refused to apologise, saying she did not think it would go as far as it did. Buckley said it was not Kiszko who had exposed himself to her and that he had not been stalking them, but they had seen a taxi driver (not Ronald Castree) urinating behind a bush on the day of Molseed's murder. She also refused to apologise. Brown refused to make a statement. Hind was the most remorseful of the four, saying that what they did was "foolish but we were young" and that, had she appeared in court, she would have told the truth about Kiszko, unlike her friends, who all had committed perjury. She herself did not think Kiszko would be convicted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed

You have previously said you want to see elite male judges privately educated with double firsts from Oxbridge but maybe these sorts, or a high %, are low on emotional intelligence and struggle with testimony from young females?  I find it worrying that David Waddington QC was unable to break the four young girls.  The trial judge commented as follows:

"The judge praised the three girls who had made the exposure claims, Buckley in particular, for their "bravery and honesty" in giving evidence in court and their "sharp observations".
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1612
  • Total likes: 31
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #18 on: April 04, 2018, 04:06:44 PM »
I thought you said you had a good understanding of the different types of evidence?

I try to focus on aspects that potentially are black and white so to speak!  Aspects like JM's testimony, phone calls, windows I try to avoid.

4 x 13 year old teenage girls admitted lying "for a laugh" at Stefan Kiszko's trial.  They faced no punishment. 

Also that month, the four girls involved in the court trial admitted that the evidence they had given which had led to Kiszko's arrest and conviction was false, and that they had lied for "a laugh" and because "at the time it was funny". Burke said she wished she had not said anything but refused to apologise, saying she did not think it would go as far as it did. Buckley said it was not Kiszko who had exposed himself to her and that he had not been stalking them, but they had seen a taxi driver (not Ronald Castree) urinating behind a bush on the day of Molseed's murder. She also refused to apologise. Brown refused to make a statement. Hind was the most remorseful of the four, saying that what they did was "foolish but we were young" and that, had she appeared in court, she would have told the truth about Kiszko, unlike her friends, who all had committed perjury. She herself did not think Kiszko would be convicted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed

You have previously said you want to see elite male judges privately educated with double firsts from Oxbridge but maybe these sorts, or a high %, are low on emotional intelligence and struggle with testimony from young females?  I find it worrying that David Waddington QC was unable to break the four young girls.  The trial judge commented as follows:

"The judge praised the three girls who had made the exposure claims, Buckley in particular, for their "bravery and honesty" in giving evidence in court and their "sharp observations".

FYI Campbell Malone also represented Hall on appeal in 2010 https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/nov/11/ukcrime.duncancampbell
"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Senior Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6050
  • Total likes: 109
  • Bamber Campaign For Freedom, How Can I Help?!
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #19 on: April 04, 2018, 04:12:09 PM »
FYI Campbell Malone also represented Hall on appeal in 2010 https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/nov/11/ukcrime.duncancampbell

In the case of Stefan Kiszko he was proved 100% to be factually innocent.  Subsequent to his acquittal the perp, Ronald Castree, was caught using DNA evidence, tried and found guilty. 
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1612
  • Total likes: 31
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #20 on: April 04, 2018, 04:15:05 PM »
In the case of Stefan Kiszko he was proved 100% to be factually innocent.  Subsequent to his acquittal the perp, Ronald Castree, was caught using DNA evidence, tried and found guilty.

Taken from the above link - "Stefan Kiszko will be remembered not for what he did but for what he didn't do - and what was done to him. Along with his modest grave, with its vase of plastic roses, a fitting memorial might be an acknowledgement that a frightened, vengeful society can still lock up the wrong man."

This case is far removed from cases like Bamber's (even from a pro point of view).

« Last Edit: April 04, 2018, 05:04:29 PM by Holly Goodhead »
"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"

Offline Caroline

Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #21 on: April 04, 2018, 04:15:38 PM »
In the case of Stefan Kiszko he was proved 100% to be factually innocent.  Subsequent to his acquittal the perp, Ronald Castree, was caught using DNA evidence, tried and found guilty.

Yes, this is one of the saddest instances of a MOJ - such an easy target!

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Senior Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6050
  • Total likes: 109
  • Bamber Campaign For Freedom, How Can I Help?!
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #22 on: April 04, 2018, 04:20:28 PM »
I thought you said you had a good understanding of the different types of evidence?

I try to focus on aspects that potentially are black and white so to speak!  Aspects like JM's testimony, phone calls, windows I try to avoid.

4 x 13 year old teenage girls admitted lying "for a laugh" at Stefan Kiszko's trial.  They faced no punishment. 

Also that month, the four girls involved in the court trial admitted that the evidence they had given which had led to Kiszko's arrest and conviction was false, and that they had lied for "a laugh" and because "at the time it was funny". Burke said she wished she had not said anything but refused to apologise, saying she did not think it would go as far as it did. Buckley said it was not Kiszko who had exposed himself to her and that he had not been stalking them, but they had seen a taxi driver (not Ronald Castree) urinating behind a bush on the day of Molseed's murder. She also refused to apologise. Brown refused to make a statement. Hind was the most remorseful of the four, saying that what they did was "foolish but we were young" and that, had she appeared in court, she would have told the truth about Kiszko, unlike her friends, who all had committed perjury. She herself did not think Kiszko would be convicted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed

You have previously said you want to see elite male judges privately educated with double firsts from Oxbridge but maybe these sorts, or a high %, are low on emotional intelligence and struggle with testimony from young females?  I find it worrying that David Waddington QC was unable to break the four young girls.  The trial judge commented as follows:

"The judge praised the three girls who had made the exposure claims, Buckley in particular, for their "bravery and honesty" in giving evidence in court and their "sharp observations".

Slightly off-topic, might have to take myself in hand  8)-))), but maybe this is the reason family lawyer to the rich and famous, Fiona Shackleton, with a 3rd in law from Exeter is successful ie she is able to apply the law/intellect with other skills equally important in family matters ie emotional intelligence. 

Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Senior Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6050
  • Total likes: 109
  • Bamber Campaign For Freedom, How Can I Help?!
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #23 on: April 04, 2018, 04:24:20 PM »
Yes, this is one of the saddest instances of a MOJ - such an easy target!

Yes I agree but putting aside the personal tragedy for Stefan and his family, particularly his mother, it offers up an excellent example of how the judicial system can get it so wrong.

Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1612
  • Total likes: 31
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #24 on: April 04, 2018, 04:36:31 PM »
Yes I agree but putting aside the personal tragedy for Stefan and his family, particularly his mother, it offers up an excellent example of how the judicial system can get it so wrong.

Did you read the link above? See Campbell Malones statement!
"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Senior Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6050
  • Total likes: 109
  • Bamber Campaign For Freedom, How Can I Help?!
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #25 on: April 04, 2018, 04:38:37 PM »
No, it's not - I used to think the same until someone posted a definition on the blue forum - here is some info on it.

https://www.inbrief.co.uk/court-proceedings/hearsay-evidence-in-criminal-cases/

Thanks.  I'll have to read further.  I was a bit confused as several articles said hearsay evidence isn't admissible in criminal trials. 
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Senior Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6050
  • Total likes: 109
  • Bamber Campaign For Freedom, How Can I Help?!
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #26 on: April 04, 2018, 04:47:42 PM »
Did you read the link above? See Campbell Malones statement!

Yes, thanks.  I watched a film about the case on YouTube a few years ago.  It was very sad. 
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1612
  • Total likes: 31
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #27 on: April 04, 2018, 04:51:51 PM »
Yes, thanks.  I watched a film about the case on YouTube a few years ago.  It was very sad.

Oh, only you didn't acknowledge the fact the judiciary has changed since cases like this
"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Senior Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6050
  • Total likes: 109
  • Bamber Campaign For Freedom, How Can I Help?!
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #28 on: April 04, 2018, 04:59:43 PM »
Oh, only you didn't acknowledge the fact the judiciary has changed since cases like this

Do you mean with regard to PACE? 
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Senior Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6050
  • Total likes: 109
  • Bamber Campaign For Freedom, How Can I Help?!
Re: What is the relevance of Julie Mugford?
« Reply #29 on: April 04, 2018, 05:06:20 PM »
Taken from the above link - "Stefan Kiszko will be remembered not for what he did but for what he didn't do - and what was done to him. Along with his modest grave, with its vase of plastic roses, a fitting memorial might be an acknowledgement that a frightened, vengeful society can still lock up the wrong man."

This case is far removed from cases like Bamber's (even from a pro point of view).

What makes you think this?
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92