Author Topic: Mark Alexander  (Read 3619 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Daisy

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #30 on: November 21, 2016, 08:21:02 PM »
Thank you Daisy, it is well established that the media embellish stories to suit their own ends. The following comment appeared in a Telegraph article.  Are you saying that this is untrue?
 
"Buckinghamshire Council's social services department continued to pay £945 into Mr Alexander's bank account every month to cover the cost of carers they thought he employed.

It was later discovered payments, of £100 or £240 at a time, continued to be withdrawn from the Nationwide account on a regular basis after Mr Alexander was murdered."


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7990744/Student-guilty-of-killing-controlling-father-and-burying-him-in-concrete.html


Not sure I have copied your comments correctly John.  I am not saying that what Buckinghamshire Social Services have said is untrue.  However, you have made a good point.  I wonder why this was not a stand alone account with money coming into the account and just going out to the carers.  The matter has been complicated by Mark transferring money, totalling £26,000 into it.  If it had been used for the sole purpose it was intended for, we would have a clearer picture.  I will be asking Mark about this.  Mark was not aware his father had been murdered and I will be addressing this in my next posts.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2016, 08:23:09 PM by John »

Offline Daisy

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #31 on: November 21, 2016, 08:37:40 PM »
Here are answers to some of your questions and the ones I cannot answer I will put to Mark.

First of all Mark’s father was not dead in August/September.  The police plucked a date out of the air in order to fit in with the time Mark was home and the last time the neighbours can remember seeing Sami.  Mark sent out Christmas cards from them both as many of us do.  How many of us have written our children’s names on cards when they are not even living at home but because they are part of the family?  There was no deliberate intention to deceive as Mark truly believed his father was still alive.  We have to remember that their lifestyle was unconventional.  The jury found it hard to believe that their way of life was not “normal” to them but I am sure we can look around at the way friends and neighbours live their lives and think it is not normal as we know it.  Sami made Mark study for hours on end and then rang a bell when it was meal times etc.  To me that is not normal but Mark knew no different.

Mark didn’t lie and say his father was in London.  He knew he had gone off on his travels and knew not to ask questions.  He was covering up for his father to save embarrassment.  Young people do this and are very loyal to their parents.  This is why a lot of abused children say when bruises are discovered on them that they have fallen over instead of admitting their parents have hit them.  Mark was fully aware that his father had serious anger issues and had he not covered for him then he would have been at the brunt of his father’s temper when he returned.

Mark last saw his father on 15th October and believes he died between 16th October and 16th November.  Mark is determined to prove that his father was alive when the jury was told he was dead. 

On 1st October Mark and his father were putting up a fence post and spoke to Aileen Wilson. I presume she was a neighbour.  So at the very least Sami was alive on that date and not already dead as the prosecution say.  There is not a shred of scientific evidence to prove he died in August or September, or in fact a date at all when he died.

Mark did not report his dad missing as it wasn’t unusual.  The neighbours even stated that he used to “drop off the radar” at regular intervals.  He kept the curtains in the house closed all day and night

Offline Daisy

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #32 on: November 21, 2016, 09:02:18 PM »
You may not be aware that Samuel was so secretive that he even had aliases for the carers who came round and recorded these names in a book.  Of course, when Social Services were shown it, they didn’t recognize them so this is where the story came from that no one went round.  Mark and his team have managed to track down a carer by her real name and she may be able to give them more information in time.

As you have pointed out John, Mark did go back to the appeal court claiming that it should have been put to jurors his “cantankerous dad” had provoked him.  Am I right in thinking that a convicted person can return to the appeal court soon after being imprisoned?  I put this appeal to Mark and said it made it sound as if he was guilty.  He explained that he wanted his case to go back to court as soon as possible in order that he could try and prove his innocence.  He wasn’t allowed to put any other factors forward and unfortunately it went against him.

Mark has said the smell was a “nonsense”. The neighbour in question had bats in their garage.  Also the smell came from the wrong place to be related to a body.  The prosecution claim his body was stored in the garage which was street facing.  Neighbours and the postman walked past every day and never smelt anything.  Mark didn’t smell anything when he visited.

As regards finding Samuel’s enemies, the police examined his computer, albeit in minute detail.  It is expensive to examine the hard drive of a computer for evidence.  What is the point when you already have a suspect lined up?  Mark’s team have requested that the computer is examined again as several individuals who Samuel was in contact with have not been traced.  There are lots of phone numbers which have never been followed up.  The police did a very amateurish job in my opinion.

On 13th October a newsletter was sent to residents in Drayton Parslow reporting suspicious activity in the area and for them to be on their guard.

On 19th November Janet Gear sees Samuels car leaving 2 Prospect Close around 5 to 6pm and returning later.  At that time Mark was at a function in Bond Street.

At around the time leading up to his death, Samuel’s health had improved considerably and neighbours saw him digging the garden so he was very mobile.  Mark still doesn’t know why his father used aliases and their relationship, although close, was the sort that Mark knew he couldn’t ask the questions he wanted.  He was told at the age of six that his mother had died.  It was only once he was arrested that his mother realized he was her son and resumed contact.  Imagine how Mark felt seeing his mother “come back from the dead?”  Well, he was extremely traumatized.

All other questions not answered, will be once I have heard back from Mark.  Once again thanks to everyone who has shown an interest.  I know it will mean a lot to Mark and he will be overwhelmed.

Offline John

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #33 on: November 22, 2016, 01:28:43 AM »
If someone goes off on their travels as Mark suggested his father did there would have been a considerable amount of unopened private mail sitting at home awaiting his return.  When someone goes off on their travels they generate a financial trail which in this day and age is extremely easy to follow.  I assume given the conviction that no such mail was ever found proving that there was any trail and that Sami never went on his travels as mark claims?
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #34 on: November 22, 2016, 01:34:16 AM »
One of my previous questions related to computer use.  We have been told that Sami used the internet considerably so one way to determine if he was alive or dead was to check his internet usage. One way of doing this is merely to examine his computer, tablet or mobile phone.  Another way is to forensically examine his telephony accounts and the accounts he had with internet service providers. If Sami was alive as Mark insists there will be accounts from these various sources showing a pattern of usuage connected to his own IP.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #35 on: November 22, 2016, 01:38:44 AM »
 
On 1st October Mark and his father were putting up a fence post and spoke to Aileen Wilson. I presume she was a neighbour.  So at the very least Sami was alive on that date and not already dead as the prosecution say.  There is not a shred of scientific evidence to prove he died in August or September, or in fact a date at all when he died.

So there will be a statement or affidavit from Aileen Wilson to that effect and if not, why not?  Did she testify at the trail, was she a defence witness?
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #36 on: November 22, 2016, 01:41:10 AM »
Why was a man who was supposedly mobile and capable of going off on his travels for weeks on end receiving a full care package from Social Services?
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #37 on: November 22, 2016, 01:44:01 AM »
You may not be aware that Samuel was so secretive that he even had aliases for the carers who came round and recorded these names in a book.  Of course, when Social Services were shown it, they didn’t recognize them so this is where the story came from that no one went round.  Mark and his team have managed to track down a carer by her real name and she may be able to give them more information in time.


So which carers did attend Samuel Alexander at home?  Social Services will have all that information because these things are all very well documented.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #38 on: November 22, 2016, 01:50:43 AM »
He was told at the age of six that his mother had died.  It was only once he was arrested that his mother realized he was her son and resumed contact.  Imagine how Mark felt seeing his mother “come back from the dead?”  Well, he was extremely traumatized.

Why was he told this and why did his mother not make contact with him much sooner?  Was there some sort of bizarre agreement between Samuel and his wife over Alexander or some sort of financial arrangement between them?
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #39 on: November 22, 2016, 01:54:22 AM »
As regards finding Samuel’s enemies, the police examined his computer, albeit in minute detail.  It is expensive to examine the hard drive of a computer for evidence.  What is the point when you already have a suspect lined up?  Mark’s team have requested that the computer is examined again as several individuals who Samuel was in contact with have not been traced.  There are lots of phone numbers which have never been followed up.  The police did a very amateurish job in my opinion.

Examing a computer hard drive is extremely easy for the right person and can be very revealing.  It does not have to be expensive.  It is only when data is encrypted that special software has to be used involving extra cost.  There is no reason why Samuel's computer hard drive should have been encrypted.

Mark's legal team should have access to Samuel's computers and mobile phones so it is for them to extract the data contained within them in order to create a history and timeline of usage.

People just don't disappear these days without leaving a trail.  If no trail is found then it can be assumed that the person is dead or being deprived of their liberty. In the Prout case. husband Adrian claimed that his wife Kate had gone off but no financial trail was ever found and she left many of her personal possessions behind.

Since Alexander has claimed that his father went off, did police establish this to be the case in that his personal effects were absent from the family home?
« Last Edit: November 22, 2016, 02:08:30 AM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #40 on: November 22, 2016, 02:13:09 AM »
Mark has claimed that his father went off on his own.  I take it he didn't go off in the family car since there were ways to track the vehicle?  If he didn't go off in the family car how did he travel, what did he use for money, did Samuel withdraw funds from his account on a regular basis as most people do?

I'm sorry for asking so many questions but you can see a pattern here if you look hard enough.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2016, 12:39:52 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Daisy

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #41 on: November 22, 2016, 07:20:03 AM »
Mark has claimed that his father went off on his own.  I take it he didn't go off in the family car since there were ways to track the vehilcle?  If he didn't go off in the family car how did he travel, what did he use for money, did Samuel withdraw funds from his account on a regular basis as most people do?

I'm sorry for asking so many questions but you can see a pattern here if you look hard enough.


Please ask lots of questions John. This is the only way we will get to the truth. If you look at Marks Twitter account you will see that he has stated the defence were only made aware of certain information just before trial so didn't have time to follow it up. An application is currently being prepared for the CCRC so maybe a lot of these issues will be raised.  As regards Marks mother, she wasn't married to Sami. She was subjected to domestic violence and chose the easy route - to flee. She had no means to support Mark so thought it would better to leave him with his father. I have had many discussions with Mark and cannot understand how any mother could leave her child. It wasn't the Victorian times and she would have had support. I have made a list of the questions I cannot answer and will be sending this to Mark. If he fails to answer them then I will be suspicious. I know that he has spoken to Terry Waite extensively and if anyone could smell a rat he would. He still continues to support Mark.

Offline John

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #42 on: November 22, 2016, 12:39:43 PM »

Please ask lots of questions John. This is the only way we will get to the truth. If you look at Marks Twitter account you will see that he has stated the defence were only made aware of certain information just before trial so didn't have time to follow it up. An application is currently being prepared for the CCRC so maybe a lot of these issues will be raised.  As regards Marks mother, she wasn't married to Sami. She was subjected to domestic violence and chose the easy route - to flee. She had no means to support Mark so thought it would better to leave him with his father. I have had many discussions with Mark and cannot understand how any mother could leave her child. It wasn't the Victorian times and she would have had support. I have made a list of the questions I cannot answer and will be sending this to Mark. If he fails to answer them then I will be suspicious. I know that he has spoken to Terry Waite extensively and if anyone could smell a rat he would. He still continues to support Mark.

Thank you Daisy.  As I see it there is a huge vacuum in Mark's story as to where his father went but nobody disappears without leaving a trail these days unless they are being held against their will or are dead.  The search of Sami's personal accounts and internet usage should have revealed the exact day he went missing.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2016, 09:01:37 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Daisy

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #43 on: November 22, 2016, 01:32:51 PM »
Yes precisely. A letter is going to Mark today and hopefully we will be a lot wiser when he answers. I value your help with this case and of course I have to consider Mark may be guilty.

Offline John

Re: Mark Alexander
« Reply #44 on: November 22, 2016, 09:01:19 PM »
Yes precisely. A letter is going to Mark today and hopefully we will be a lot wiser when he answers. I value your help with this case and of course I have to consider Mark may be guilty.

The fact that he is willing to answer all questions is a good sign at least.

I forgot to add to my posts last night that I understand that Mark was raised in a manner which most of us would find quite bizarre.  On that basis alone,it renders this case of much interest. Maybe when Mark went out in the world he began to see his father for what he was.  Maybe this resulted in an inevitable conflict which boiled over one day, who knows.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2016, 09:06:45 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.