Alleged Miscarriages of Justice > Sin Jenkins and the murder of his adopted daughter Billie-Jo.

Lois Jenkins: The truth I was not allowed to tell

<< < (2/7) > >>


--- Quote from: John on July 21, 2012, 09:26:58 PM ---We must be clear though that just because someone has a quick temper and beats his wife and kids doesn't necessarily make them a killer...just a low life.

I wonder how his new bird gets on with him?

Unquestioning love: Tina Jenkins has no doubt that her husband Sion is innocent of the murder of his daughter, Billie-Jo.

Isn't that what Debbie Garlick said about Adrian Prout?

--- End quote ---

My first instinct is I can't trust that face:  I felt the same when when he was interviewed on TV with this woman - he seemed to be playing the perfect puppy dog to her.  But then if he's got a violent temper at home he's bound to know how to put on a different face in public - however as John says that doesn't automatically mean he's a murderer.  I certainly think she is a relationship of convenience:  she lends him credibility and I believe is very wealthy.

Next reaction. I don't doubt he was an arsehole at home - but I'm surprised that if Lois thought he chastised her own children too harshly (beating them with a stick is, after all, a criminal offence) even if she couldn't bring herself to leave him (often difficult in domestic abuse) why would she knowingly bring a foster child into her home?

And if there were violent rages and other things amiss, why would she leave him alone with her own children, let alone someone else's?

All a bit rummy.

Well, I can understand why two, or was it three, Juries had trouble deciding.
I think he did it. I don't like the look of him.
And then I think his wife fitted him up. I don't like the look of her either.

I was no longer living in Britain when this happened.  No Internet, and I didn't buy newspapers.  So I am completely ignorant of this case.

Three things stand out for me. 
He doesn't appear to have had blood splatters when he went to The DIY.
Two of his daughters were in the house when he supposedly did it.
One of his daughters said he didn't hurt them or beat his wife.

On balance I think he is probably innocent.  In so far as Not Proven.

Can anyone enlighten me further?

Ditto all of that!

I must admit I thought the odds of the random tramp doing it were utterly ridiculous but now I'm reading up about this Mark Lynam bloke and have heard there was an empty house next door I'm certainly starting to wonder.

This Article in the Daily Mail says they had an au pair who made a statement to the police saying she never saw any unpleasantness in the household.  Having been an au pair myself briefly I'd say it's going to be impossible to hide from someone actually living in the house.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version