Author Topic: Sion Jenkins and the murder of Billie Jo - The man of mystery with a fake CV  (Read 11438 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Brigadier

Jenkins is a cheat and a liar. 

No more than anyone else. Far more lies have been spoken about Sion than ones he has delivered himself. While he cannot be claimed to be a saint – after all who is? – He is most certainly not the pathological cheat and liar he is being made out to be. He admits to telling the one and only lie that the law courts held against him. Sion has explained why he told this one lie and his motivation behind it.

He invented qualifications to obtain a senior teaching post. 

As I thought I made clear in my previous post, he falsified one qualification in amongst an otherwise accurate and factual cv. The media and public speculation have depicted his cv as containing a solitary island of truth in a sea of lies; whereas the reality is the other way around. It was one lie amongst a history of relevant qualifications and experience.

At the time of the tragedy, he was on the cusp of being promoted to headmaster based not on his cv, but on the years of dedication he had put to his job and the school as well as personal recommendations. The old cv was largely an afterthought.

To suggest that a completely unqualified individual could worm their way all the way to the post of headmaster suggests a total lack of competence on the part of the local educational authority. Background checks on qualifications and references would have picked up anything amiss long ago. Besides which an inability to teach would have been realised right from the beginning. Never mind enable them to be promoted to the position of headmaster. So are you accusing Hastings local educational authority of gross incompetence?

Regardless, considerations on whether or not his cv is accurate is a moot point anyway. It simply has no bearing on Sion’s whereabouts and actions on the day. Discussing it to the nth degree is a waste of effort and a distraction from anything relevant on the matter.

He denied disciplining his daughters yet his wife and daughters have stated he lied. 

What he denies is using corporate punishment. The suggestion that a father could raise five children (including Billie) without having to instil some level of discipline is somewhat ludicrous. The only question is whether this discipline was appropriate and proportional. I was surprised to see the quote at the end of the video clip with the statement from the two younger girls. I had not seen this interview before, so thank you to Myster for bringing it to everyone’s attention. It is a shame that we only have one on screen sentence as opposed to them being interviewed as well. Then they could go into more detail such as when? How often? What punishments did Sion apply and for what sort of misdemeanours? After all they are young women in their own right now, so should be able to speak for themselves.

This leaves us with an impasse that on the face of it we have Sion stating that he did not heavily discipline his family, and they claiming that he did. As a means to resolve this we can remind ourselves that the social services were placing a very close eye on the Jenkins family. Throughout the time that Billie was fostered with the Jenkins she was still officially in the care of social services. She had private meetings with her own social worker checking how she was getting on. But no concerns were raised. What’s more around the time of the tragedy Billie herself had asked for them to adopt her. In order to go through this process, the Jenkins’ were exposed to even more scrutiny. Again nothing of concern was found. It beggars belief that nothing untoward was found by anyone from Hastings social services. If it were, it would have been flagged up very quickly. To suggest that Sion was able to pull the wool over all of their eyes and dupe so many people is beyond the realm of credibility. But even if that were not enough, Lois was herself working as a social worker. If Sion was as remotely brutal as she later claimed him to be, the more appropriate course of action she should have taken was to leave him, taking their four children to a safer environment. Or at the very least report the behaviour she later reckoned was so terrible. It’s not as if she would have known how to go about it. But she does neither. Instead it is at her instigation that the Jenkins’ bring a new child – Billie – into their lives. For her to bring a vulnerable young life into a supposedly violent and abusive environment is contrary to any maternal instinct, highly irresponsible and even guilty of professional misconduct.

The murder of Billie-Jo is still an unresolved murder enquiry.

Yes we know. The killer is still out there somewhere. The years and resources focused on convicting Sion are largely due to the efforts of Lois. If she had not effectively gagged the two daughters, they could have been defence witnesses and the original trial may never even have gone ahead in the first place. A prime suspect has never been interviewed.

Siôn Jenkins might have been acquitted after three trials but the High Court refused him compensation on the basis that his innocence has not been established beyond doubt.

Compensation can be claimed by defendants that are able to prove they are clearly innocent. It is not paid out automatically to those whose convictions are quashed on appeal. This is a principle that is in contrast to the prima facie basis of law. I.e. a defendant is ‘innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt’.

Offline Brigadier

Many thanks for posting those videos Myster.  I can understand why the police were immediately suspicious of Jenkins.  His attempts to justify what he did in the interview with TMcD were futile imo.

The police were not suspicious of Sion from the outset. It was only when the preliminary report from the forensics suggested that the blood splatter could be consistent with spray from a blunt instrument. It was only then that they turned their attention on to Sion and ignored all other lines of enquiry.