Author Topic: Witness Statement  (Read 377 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Daisy

Witness Statement
« on: February 03, 2017, 09:28:11 AM »
AW was a prosecution witness. When she made her first statement to the police on 7th February 2010, she quite clearly recalled seeing us on 1st October 2009.

   “On 30th September 2009 I went to a residential course in Coventry. At around
   15:30 on 1st October 2009 I travelled home with my colleague. I had to walk past
   Sami’s house. It was a nice sunny day. I saw Sam and Mark at the rear of the
   house. They seemed fine, they were working together. We had a bit of a joke
   about my sunglasses.”

Six weeks later, on 18th March 2010 she was asked to ‘reconsider’ her account by uniformed officers, clearly because it didn’t suit the narrative they were constructing. Two of her neighbours were ex-policemen who retained contacts within Thames Valley police and who had themselves referred the case for investigation. AW changed her statement as a result.  When examined on this point at trial she admitted that she wouldn’t have reconsidered the date at all had it not been for their request. She felt that her initial statement was probably more accurate.

It was sunny on both of the days she mentions in her statements, 1st October being an unusually warm day for that time of year according to Met Office reports. I’ve attached copies of the two accounts so you can judge for yourselves (names have been removed to protect the identity of those involved). In the police schedule of non-material statements, we’ve spotted possible further sightings of dad which we’ve requested copies of.  So far, the police have refused to disclose them to us.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2017, 07:44:54 PM by John »

Online John

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #1 on: February 03, 2017, 07:48:40 PM »
Daisy, I have removed attachment Scan 2 as it was a duplicate of Scan 1 so not required.

It is unfortunate that the witness cannot be more specific as to which of the two days she saw Mark and Sami in the back garden.  I would have thought that by checking Marks whereabouts for both dates there was a good chance the correct date the witness saw them could be established ie the 27th August or the 1st October.  Mark should be able to establish from his own records where he was on those two dates.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2017, 07:52:13 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 mrswah

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2017, 12:08:31 PM »
If Mark can establish where he was on both dates, but cannot actually prove it, is he necessarily going to be believed??

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2017, 09:22:13 PM »
If Mark can establish where he was on both dates, but cannot actually prove it, is he necessarily going to be believed??

Good Point. I know what I was doing that day, I can't prove it!

Online John

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2017, 07:00:40 PM »
It's amazing what one can recall when one looks at bank statements etc.  Fuel receipts, nights out, visits to shops etc all provide a trail and some insight into what one was doing on a particular day.  Also computer records, e-mails etc can be a good source of information.

Did Samuel or Mark keep a diary per chance?
« Last Edit: February 15, 2017, 07:02:41 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: Witness Statement
« Reply #5 on: February 16, 2017, 07:21:05 AM »
It's amazing what one can recall when one looks at bank statements etc.  Fuel receipts, nights out, visits to shops etc all provide a trail and some insight into what one was doing on a particular day.  Also computer records, e-mails etc can be a good source of information.

Did Samuel or Mark keep a diary per chance?


I do not know if Samuel or Mark kept a diary. However Mark compiled a timeline of events ie trips to the theatre, work meetings, visits to friends etc. According to this he wasn't working in the garden on the said date in August but was on 1st October. They must have ordered the fence post from somewhere and if he can narrow it down to when it was ordered and paid for then he can prove that the police coerced AW to change her statement to fit in with their theory.

Offline jixy

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #6 on: February 16, 2017, 08:25:37 AM »
Do you believe it was October. It seems strange to remember seeing them and thinking about the last of the sun if that was then remembered as being August instead.

Hopefully you will be able to piece more of the timeline together and progress
smoke and mirrors

Offline Daisy

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #7 on: February 16, 2017, 09:21:43 AM »
Do you believe it was October. It seems strange to remember seeing them and thinking about the last of the sun if that was then remembered as being August instead.

Hopefully you will be able to piece more of the timeline together and progress

Yes I believe it was 1st October. If it had been August then AW would know there would be lots of sunny days to come. When you have two police officers telling you you got the date wrong and make you doubt yourself then sometimes you give in. Remember the police are trained to persuade a witness to give accounts to fit in with their theory.....an offence in itself.

Offline jixy

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #8 on: February 16, 2017, 09:26:57 AM »
yes I agree and can see how that would make someone doubt what they had previously thought
smoke and mirrors

Online John

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #9 on: February 16, 2017, 03:41:31 PM »

I do not know if Samuel or Mark kept a diary. However Mark compiled a timeline of events ie trips to the theatre, work meetings, visits to friends etc. According to this he wasn't working in the garden on the said date in August but was on 1st October. They must have ordered the fence post from somewhere and if he can narrow it down to when it was ordered and paid for then he can prove that the police coerced AW to change her statement to fit in with their theory.

That's a good point Daisy, there is always a way to find out these things if one has the will.  Police can be extremely manipulative and especially to female witnesses.  There could be invoices for other materials, wire, nails, cement etc?
« Last Edit: February 16, 2017, 03:43:46 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 Miss Taken Identity

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2017, 10:03:21 PM »
That's a good point Daisy, there is always a way to find out these things if one has the will.  Police can be extremely manipulative and especially to female witnesses.  There could be invoices for other materials, wire, nails, cement etc?

What was the weather report for that day in that area?. If it was heavy rain then he may not have gone to work in the garden.

Offline Daisy

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #11 on: March 07, 2017, 08:36:49 AM »
What was the weather report for that day in that area?. If it was heavy rain then he may not have gone to work in the garden.

According to the Met Office the weather on both days was warm and sunny. Mark's team are going to approach the buildiers merchants to see if they still have receipts going back that far. If it can be proved that the fence post and panel were bought after 26th August then the witness must have seen them in the garden on 1st October as per her original statement.

Online John

Re: Witness Statement
« Reply #12 on: March 07, 2017, 12:55:21 PM »
According to the Met Office the weather on both days was warm and sunny. Mark's team are going to approach the buildiers merchants to see if they still have receipts going back that far. If it can be proved that the fence post and panel were bought after 26th August then the witness must have seen them in the garden on 1st October as per her original statement.

Good point, this is the sort of thing good investigators should have looked into before the trial but alas we know they don't.
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.