UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Mark Alexander was in September 2010 convicted of the murder of his elderly reclusive father Samuel (70), an Egyptian-born former University lecturer. => Topic started by: Daisy on October 19, 2016, 09:21:31 AM
-
Please could I draw your attention to this case and I welcome your comments.
http://www.mojuk.org.uk/MOJUK%202015/Mark%20Alexander.html
(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/285x214/198345_1.jpg)
Murder victim Samuel Alexander (left) with son Mark who was convicted of his murder.
76
-
Please could I draw your attention to this case and I welcome your comments.
http://www.mojuk.org.uk/MOJUK%202015/Mark%20Alexander.html
The actions of the son were indicative of guilt.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-11259049
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jan/18/direct-payment-fraud-murder-neglect
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1310193/Law-student-Mark-Alexander-murdered-father-buried-body-garden.html
-
This conviction sounds a bit dodgy. Let's hear more of it.
-
This conviction sounds a bit dodgy. Let's hear more of it.
Dodgy? Have you not read about what the son did AFTER the father died? The poor old guy was dead and the son was living off his care allowances. Son sent out Christmas cards in father's name to hide the fact he was dead.
-
Thanks to John and Eleanor for your comments regarding this case. There are lots of unanswered questions and I hope to learn a lot more about the murder of Samuel. I have been writing to Mark for around a year and my gut feeling is that he is innocent. I appreciate the links you posted John but don’t jump to conclusions before hearing all the facts. You above all must appreciate that the papers sensationalise things and as the saying goes “never let the truth get in the way of a good story.”
I would like to point out some of the inaccuracies in this matter. First of all Mark’s parents were not married as has been reported.
The serious case review I think it pointing more at the incompetence of Buckinghamshire Council than the guilt of Mark Alexander. This account was set up as a joint account for Mark and his father and Mark had Power of Attorney. At the time Mark was running his own IT business and was paying a considerable amount into the account which his father was free to dip into. Mark also had every right to draw money from the account. There were indeed carers employed but on many occasions Samuel ignored the door or had violent arguments with them and they refused to go back to the house. He certainly had some serious anger issues.
One has to appreciate that Samuel was a very complex character with various aliases. He regularly posted on sex chat websites posing as a man in his 20s, and had several mobile phones. This information was only given to Mark by the police after his father had died which horrified Mark as he had no idea of what his father was up to. Mark last saw his father on 15th October 2009 but the police plucked a date out of the air to fit in with what they believed. There has been no formal date of death confirmed.
It is known that Samuel had many enemies. In fact the neighbours were frightened of him and once he went after one of them waving a knife. He employed casual labour and then argued with workers and threw them out of his property.
The neighbours kept a dossier on Mark with the encouragement of two former police officers who lived in the village. It is concerning to hear that Samuel’s car was used after his death by an unknown person while Mark was at University but the neighbours saw nothing. They also have no knowledge of who laid the first two layers of mortar, carried out by a professional.
I am keen to get to the bottom of this mystery and if anyone has connections to Drayton Parslow I would be interested to hear.
Please help me with this and ask more questions which I can then put to Mark.
-
Thanks to John and Eleanor for your comments regarding this case. There are lots of unanswered questions and I hope to learn a lot more about the murder of Samuel. I have been writing to Mark for around a year and my gut feeling is that he is innocent. I appreciate the links you posted John but don’t jump to conclusions before hearing all the facts. You above all must appreciate that the papers sensationalise things and as the saying goes “never let the truth get in the way of a good story.”
I would like to point out some of the inaccuracies in this matter. First of all Mark’s parents were not married as has been reported.
The serious case review I think it pointing more at the incompetence of Buckinghamshire Council than the guilt of Mark Alexander. This account was set up as a joint account for Mark and his father and Mark had Power of Attorney. At the time Mark was running his own IT business and was paying a considerable amount into the account which his father was free to dip into. Mark also had every right to draw money from the account. There were indeed carers employed but on many occasions Samuel ignored the door or had violent arguments with them and they refused to go back to the house. He certainly had some serious anger issues.
One has to appreciate that Samuel was a very complex character with various aliases. He regularly posted on sex chat websites posing as a man in his 20s, and had several mobile phones. This information was only given to Mark by the police after his father had died which horrified Mark as he had no idea of what his father was up to. Mark last saw his father on 15th October 2009 but the police plucked a date out of the air to fit in with what they believed. There has been no formal date of death confirmed.
It is known that Samuel had many enemies. In fact the neighbours were frightened of him and once he went after one of them waving a knife. He employed casual labour and then argued with workers and threw them out of his property.
The neighbours kept a dossier on Mark with the encouragement of two former police officers who lived in the village. It is concerning to hear that Samuel’s car was used after his death by an unknown person while Mark was at University but the neighbours saw nothing. They also have no knowledge of who laid the first two layers of mortar, carried out by a professional.
I am keen to get to the bottom of this mystery and if anyone has connections to Drayton Parslow I would be interested to hear.
Please help me with this and ask more questions which I can then put to Mark.
Hi Daisy
Not having seen all the documents relating to the alleged building work, can Mark give an explanation as to why he undertook to order the concrete?
-
Hi Misty this is a very valid point. This is the story of the concrete. There were conifer trees growing at both the front and rear of the property and a surveyor advised that these should be removed as the roots were growing into the foundations of the house. Samuel discussed the underpinning and concrete work with Mark and this would be done once the trees were down. In photos of the crime scene there is a tent erected at the front of the property but the area where Samuel was buried was at the back.
Mark came home from University and could see that in all areas the first part of the work had been completed. Samuel had informed Mark that once this had been done, then they would need to order ready-mix concrete to add on top. Therefore Mark ordered this and laid it. It was a very amateur job compared to the layers underneath which experts have said were laid by a professional
-
Daisy...
Can you pinpoint exactly where this "concrete" was laid on the bird's-eye view below. Behind the house, or behind the double garage to the right.
On the MoJ site you originally linked to, the concrete is referred to as mortar. Is this a mistake, because mortar is just a mixture of cement and sand, so it seems strange that three layers of this relatively weak material was used to underpin? the foundations?
Was the ready-mix concrete firm who supplied this mortar/concrete not consulted by the police as to when it was delivered?
And what about the people/builders involved with the laying of those first three layers. Were they interviewed and cleared?
(http://i.imgur.com/UMU1dx6.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/3EIEGqD.jpg)
Rear/side view of property...
(http://i.imgur.com/COaD6bo.jpg?1)
-
Hi Myster
Thank you for your questions. I am going to put all this to Mark as I do not have access to all the case files. However I can tell you that Mark ordered the top layer of concrete on 17th November and this was delivered on the 19th. This has all been verified with the firm who delivered it. They knew both Mark and his father as various building works were carried out on the property over a ten year period.
No one has knowledge of who did the first part of the work and if we did then we would know who buried Samuel's body. As previously stated, Samuel often used casual labour.
Please give me a couple of weeks to report back as I have to get a letter off to Mark and then wait for his reply.
-
This is an interesting case, and there are some comparisons with the WHF murders. If ever a book is written, I really hope it's entitled "Nothing ever happens in Drayton Parslow."
-
This is an interesting case, and there are some comparisons with the WHF murders. If ever a book is written, I really hope it's entitled "Nothing ever happens in Drayton Parslow."
I can't see any comparisons with the WHS farm murders. The only thing Mark has in common with Jeremy is he was privately educated.
-
Thanks to John and Eleanor for your comments regarding this case. There are lots of unanswered questions and I hope to learn a lot more about the murder of Samuel. I have been writing to Mark for around a year and my gut feeling is that he is innocent. I appreciate the links you posted John but don’t jump to conclusions before hearing all the facts. You above all must appreciate that the papers sensationalise things and as the saying goes “never let the truth get in the way of a good story.”
I would like to point out some of the inaccuracies in this matter. First of all Mark’s parents were not married as has been reported.
The serious case review I think it pointing more at the incompetence of Buckinghamshire Council than the guilt of Mark Alexander. This account was set up as a joint account for Mark and his father and Mark had Power of Attorney. At the time Mark was running his own IT business and was paying a considerable amount into the account which his father was free to dip into. Mark also had every right to draw money from the account. There were indeed carers employed but on many occasions Samuel ignored the door or had violent arguments with them and they refused to go back to the house. He certainly had some serious anger issues.
One has to appreciate that Samuel was a very complex character with various aliases. He regularly posted on sex chat websites posing as a man in his 20s, and had several mobile phones. This information was only given to Mark by the police after his father had died which horrified Mark as he had no idea of what his father was up to. Mark last saw his father on 15th October 2009 but the police plucked a date out of the air to fit in with what they believed. There has been no formal date of death confirmed.
It is known that Samuel had many enemies. In fact the neighbours were frightened of him and once he went after one of them waving a knife. He employed casual labour and then argued with workers and threw them out of his property.
The neighbours kept a dossier on Mark with the encouragement of two former police officers who lived in the village. It is concerning to hear that Samuel’s car was used after his death by an unknown person while Mark was at University but the neighbours saw nothing. They also have no knowledge of who laid the first two layers of mortar, carried out by a professional.
I am keen to get to the bottom of this mystery and if anyone has connections to Drayton Parslow I would be interested to hear.
Please help me with this and ask more questions which I can then put to Mark.
Hi again Daisy. My apologies for not responding earlier. I will have a fresh look at the case but first can you ask Mark why he sent out Christmas cards in his fathers name when his father was dead as far back as August/September?
And why did he lie when he claimed that his father was living with friends in London?
Do you really think a third party could have been involved in this murder because I find it extremely unlikely. Had someone else murdered Mr Alexander they could not have got away with burying him in the garden. Only Mark had access to the property, the neighbours would have found anyone else's presence suspicious. I'm afraid it just doesn't point to a miscarriage of justice.
I am always willing to be persuaded however knowing what I do about the justice system.
-
Please could I draw your attention to this case and I welcome your comments.
http://www.mojuk.org.uk/MOJUK%202015/Mark%20Alexander.html
Can I enquire how you got involved with this case?
-
I've only just started to look in to this case so unable to give fair comment on the case in general, however who ever buried Samuel it suggests someone close to him and had the time to remove the body, bury Samuel and clean up the crime scene.
I'm a retired police officer with a distinction in Criminology and profiling. At this time I am studying Forensic Science. I look forward to interacting with the people on here that love to get their teeth in to unsolved crimes or weak convictions.
-
Samuel Alexander's neighbours were gobsmacked at his disappearance, and as nosey as the Eatons and Boutflours in the Bamber case...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1311020/Lies-midsomer-murderer-As-gifted-son-gets-life-butchering-pushy-father-amateur-village-sleuths-unravelled-elaborate-pretence-victim-alive.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1311020/Lies-midsomer-murderer-As-gifted-son-gets-life-butchering-pushy-father-amateur-village-sleuths-unravelled-elaborate-pretence-victim-alive.html)
Location of the "grave" by the corner of the double garage where the black downspout is...
(http://i.imgur.com/CvENkws.jpg)
An amateurish underpinning job, if that's what it's supposed to be. Is that a carbon stain on the wall from the attempted burning of Samuel Alexander's body?...
(http://i.imgur.com/ckeXmXI.png)
-
Obviously the evidence demonstrates to any reasonable person that he is guilty. And it's a pity that bogus claims of innocence like his muddy the waters for those people who have been genuinely wrongfully convicted.
-
Another few questions for you Daisy.
A simple means of checking if someone is still alive is by looking at their banking, telephony and online activities.
It was accepted by both the defence and the prosecution that Sami Alexander was an oddball, a bit of a recluse who used multiple aliases when using internet sites. My question is simple, when his internet accounts were checked did the activity cease on or around the 5th September 2009, this being the day Mark left home?
Did Sami withdraw any money from his bank accounts or buy anything online after the 5th Sepotember 2009?
We know that Mark Alexander made sizeable withdrawals from his fathers account to fund his own lifestyle. Did Sami use his bank cards locally or in London?
Did Sami make any telephone calls from a mobile or a landline.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/thames_chiltern/cps_thames_and_chiltern_news/son_found_guilty_of_murdering_his_father_gets_life_sentence_/
http://www.mojuk.org.uk/MOJUK%202015/Mark%20Alexander.html
-
I notice that in June 2011 Mark Alexander went to the Appeal Court claiming that his ‘cantankerous dad' had provoked him and this should have been put to the jurors.
'However, three senior judges, sitting at London’s Court of Appeal dismissed the claim as ‘speculation’ and upheld the conviction. Mr Justice Walker told the court Samuel Alexander used ‘brutal and callous treatment’ in bringing up his son after the boy’s mother left. He said the father was proud that Mark was reading English and French law, and told neighbours his son planned to study at Paris’ prestigious Sorbonne University in his third year. But the court heard Alexander wanted to change his course and live with his girlfriend in London.'
This suggests that Mark Alexander has now accepted his fate and is introducing excuses for his behaviour. This is not the actions of an innocent man but a guilty man now pleading mitigating circumstances.
Read more at: http://www.bucksherald.co.uk/news/crime/killer-provocation-claim-thrown-out-1-2809130
-
Obviously the evidence demonstrates to any reasonable person that he is guilty. And it's a pity that bogus claims of innocence like his muddy the waters for those people who have been genuinely wrongfully convicted.
I agree, the evidence albeit circumstantial does point to his culpability. I found it interesting that he talks of an alibi when in reality he could have slipped back to the fathers house any time he wished and would most probably never have been seen by the neighbours. When he was seen and challenged by concerned neighbours he told them his father had gone to stay with friends in London. When checked out by police this was found to be a total fabrication. The lies had found him out!
-
Here is a link to Mark Alexander's twitter and Facebook accounts which are run by his friends on the outside
https://twitter.com/MA_Campaign?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
It is worth noting that he is supported by Terry Waite and other influential people. I do not think they would be supporting someone who is guilty.
Please stop quoting articles from the papers and accepting them as fact. Come on you lot you are more intelligent than that. This is why I joined this forum and not the Blue.
One matter I must reiterate is that Mark did not use his father's money to fund his lifestyle. Please don't keep quoting this. His father had very little money. The police recovered two of Mark's chequebooks and he has sent me evidence of these. He had accounts at Lloyds, Natwest and HSBC. Mark was a wealthy young man having his own IT company and making a lot of money. I have seen records of cheque book stubs which the police found and a total of £26,000 was paid by Mark into his father's account. Many of the claims in the press relating to the case had in fact been retracted at trial - but it made a good story anyway.
I will be answering all your questions when I have trawled through his letters but any I cannot answer I will ask him directly and be reporting back.
-
Obviously the evidence demonstrates to any reasonable person that he is guilty. And it's a pity that bogus claims of innocence like his muddy the waters for those people who have been genuinely wrongfully convicted.
What a nasty judgmental person you are. I hope you are never called for jury service. You would have the defendant banged up just because you don't like the way he looks. You haven't seen any of the case files so you are not qualified to make such a sweeping statement.
-
You asked for people to comment, Daisy, so you can't blame them if they don't agree with your point of view, especially when you haven't seen any case files yourself but have been corresponding with Mark Alexander for a year.
Why would Sarah Prentice, a neighbour, say that there was a smell of decomposition coming from the property if it wasn't true? Mark Alexander couldn't have missed that when he was at home. Or similarly, Wendy Preston who was taken aback on being told that his father was living in London, when in her words "he clearly was not"?
Surely the alarm bells rang for you on learning that he sent out Christmas cards from Samuel, while keeping up the pretence that his dad was living in London.
-
You asked for people to comment, Daisy, so you can't blame them if they don't agree with your point of view, especially when you haven't seen any case files yourself but have been corresponding with Mark Alexander for a year.
Why would Sarah Prentice, a neighbour, say that there was a smell of decomposition coming from the property if it wasn't true? Mark Alexander couldn't have missed that when he was at home. Or similarly, Wendy Preston who was taken aback on being told that his father was living in London, when in her words "he clearly was not"?
Surely the alarm bells rang for you on learning that he sent out Christmas cards from Samuel, while keeping up the pretence that his dad was living in London.
Really? For your information Mark sent me the case files a month ago, so I know what I am talking about. In time you will know as much as me. Last year one of my neighbours was found dead in his house. When he stopped answering the phone to relations they called the police who broke in. He had been dead for six weeks! There was no smell coming from the property at all. We were all totally shocked when we found out even though he was a recluse. Don't forget the neighbours in Mark's case gave statements under the persuasion of two police officers who lived in the village. Identify a suspect and make him fit the crime.
-
I have read the account on the MoJ site and find it persuasive. It annoys me considerably when I hear about important factors not being revealed at trials, and when police "overlook" what could be important evidence and we only hear one side of the story. Trials which rely on "circumstantial" evidence only are asking to be found dodgy.
As for newspaper reports, they are sometimes inaccurate, and often very one sided and sensationalised.
It seems that there is a lot we don't know about Samuel, and the life he led-----and, apparently, even Mark did not know a lot of this, Samuel had enemies: have these people been found and questioned???? There is a lot we don't know about where he went, whom he knew, and who might have had motive to murder him.
On the other hand, it is clear that Mark was badly treated by his father and this could well have provided him with a motive to murder. If it is true that he sent Christmas cards to people and signed them as being from Samuel, we need to know why he did this. If he told neighbours that Samuel was living in London , we need to know why he said this. Was he covering up a murder, or did he really believe this?
So, there is a lot more I need to read about this case, and I look forward to Daisy putting more questions to Mark.
-
Here is a link to Mark Alexander's twitter and Facebook accounts which are run by his friends on the outside
https://twitter.com/MA_Campaign?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
It is worth noting that he is supported by Terry Waite and other influential people. I do not think they would be supporting someone who is guilty.
Please stop quoting articles from the papers and accepting them as fact. Come on you lot you are more intelligent than that. This is why I joined this forum and not the Blue.
One matter I must reiterate is that Mark did not use his father's money to fund his lifestyle. Please don't keep quoting this. His father had very little money. The police recovered two of Mark's chequebooks and he has sent me evidence of these. He had accounts at Lloyds, Natwest and HSBC. Mark was a wealthy young man having his own IT company and making a lot of money. I have seen records of cheque book stubs which the police found and a total of £26,000 was paid by Mark into his father's account. Many of the claims in the press relating to the case had in fact been retracted at trial - but it made a good story anyway.
I will be answering all your questions when I have trawled through his letters but any I cannot answer I will ask him directly and be reporting back.
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
-
Lets look at the facts.
Mark Alexander told everyone who enquired that his father Samuel had gone to stay with friends in London. If this is true who are these friends? If what he claimed was totally false why did he lie?
Mark Alexander sent out Christmas cards to his neigbours in his father's name. Why did he do that?
Mark Alexander took delivery of concrete and had it laid over the exact spot where his father had been buried. Is that a coincidence too far?
If Samuel Alexander had gone off on his own accord why did Mark Alexander not contact the police to report the matter?
-
What has happened to Forestlands and his questions?
I will be online later to post answers to as many of your questions as I can.
-
I have read the account on the MoJ site and find it persuasive. It annoys me considerably when I hear about important factors not being revealed at trials, and when police "overlook" what could be important evidence and we only hear one side of the story. Trials which rely on "circumstantial" evidence only are asking to be found dodgy.
As for newspaper reports, they are sometimes inaccurate, and often very one sided and sensationalised.
It seems that there is a lot we don't know about Samuel, and the life he led-----and, apparently, even Mark did not know a lot of this, Samuel had enemies: have these people been found and questioned???? There is a lot we don't know about where he went, whom he knew, and who might have had motive to murder him.
On the other hand, it is clear that Mark was badly treated by his father and this could well have provided him with a motive to murder. If it is true that he sent Christmas cards to people and signed them as being from Samuel, we need to know why he did this. If he told neighbours that Samuel was living in London , we need to know why he said this. Was he covering up a murder, or did he really believe this?
So, there is a lot more I need to read about this case, and I look forward to Daisy putting more questions to Mark.
Thank you Daisy for bringing this to our attention for discussion. I wholeheartedly agree with the above post.
I am, at this point, undecided about my opinion of guilt or innocence based on the information you have provided.
I am never convinced that circumstantial evidence is enough to convict for murder, I always assumed it had to be proved beyond reasonable doubt- that concerns me here.
The other point is about the mobility of Samuel, if he was in receipt of high level care allowance, how did he manage to 'disappear' off the radar so regularly? Who , if anyone assisted him getting to and from this 'other place' and what is the reasons behind him using aliases, was he up to no good ,involved in a criminal activity?
I believe the police did a shoddy job, and the prosecutors naming a death date without providing any factual evidence is really unacceptable.
Let's assume Mark is guilty, The very least I would expect is for some kind of hard evidence to show motive, means, and opportunity. Guessing dates and trying to fit a person to the crime is indeed an injustice.
Having said that, I a interested in reading answers to the questions posed by John and others on here.
-
This is a really interesting case Daisy with lots of members showing an interest so if you can provide answers direct from Mark as promised I will give the case its own board on the home page which will allow new topics to be created.
Could you develop the introduction a little giving a brief account of what occurred.
-
This is a really interesting case Daisy with lots of members showing an interest so if you can provide answers direct from Mark as promised I will give the case its own board on the home page which will allow new topics to be created.
Could you develop the introduction a little giving a brief account of what occurred.
I am now online and preparing my answers after reading all Mark's letters. Thank you so much John for giving this matter so much space. I am sure with lots of questions and different ideas we will be able to uncover the truth. I am sure you would be better at doing the introduction drawing information from the MOJUK website as you have far more experience than me.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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?
-
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?
-
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.
-
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?
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
Yes I have had several conversations with Mark about the way he was raised. The neighbours were concerned and I even suggested he should have been taken away from his father. Mark said he didn't know any different and because the jury couldn't identify with their way of life they made judgements about Mark. What is normal for one person isn't for another. There were happy times and they went on holidays together. Mark said his father was over protective towards him. He was happy for him to have girlfriends and he lived with a couple of them without his father objecting. When Sami had a colostomy bag fitted, Mark used to change it and regularly got up during the night to attend to him. That is an extremely unpleasant job so he must have really loved his father to attend to his personal care.
-
Yes I have had several conversations with Mark about the way he was raised. The neighbours were concerned and I even suggested he should have been taken away from his father. Mark said he didn't know any different and because the jury couldn't identify with their way of life they made judgements about Mark. What is normal for one person isn't for another. There were happy times and they went on holidays together. Mark said his father was over protective towards him. He was happy for him to have girlfriends and he lived with a couple of them without his father objecting. When Sami had a colostomy bag fitted, Mark used to change it and regularly got up during the night to attend to him. That is an extremely unpleasant job so he must have really loved his father to attend to his personal care.
Might also be worth asking Mark if his father became more controlling as time went on. Did it reach a stage where he was unreasonable and difficult to work with? Did Samuel retain full cognitive ability to the end?
-
Might also be worth asking Mark if his father became more controlling as time went on. Did it reach a stage where he was unreasonable and difficult to work with? Did Samuel retain full cognitive ability to the end?
The letter has been posted now so I will start compiling another list of questions. I know that the neighbours saw Sami shouting and arguing with Mark in the months before he died and Mark was crying. This makes me think he isn't the type of man who would resort to murder. Mark has always been eager to please everyone and doesn't strike me as an aggressive man in any way.
-
Yes I have had several conversations with Mark about the way he was raised. The neighbours were concerned and I even suggested he should have been taken away from his father. Mark said he didn't know any different and because the jury couldn't identify with their way of life they made judgements about Mark. What is normal for one person isn't for another. There were happy times and they went on holidays together. Mark said his father was over protective towards him. He was happy for him to have girlfriends and he lived with a couple of them without his father objecting. When Sami had a colostomy bag fitted, Mark used to change it and regularly got up during the night to attend to him. That is an extremely unpleasant job so he must have really loved his father to attend to his personal care.
Which makes it all the more unbelievable that he wasn't concerned enough to report his father was missing. Who was going to change Sami's bags... someone from this bogus Egyptian community in London he was supposedly staying with?
-
Which makes it all the more unbelievable that he wasn't concerned enough to report his father was missing. Who was going to change Sami's bags... someone from this bogus Egyptian community in London he was supposedly staying with?
Some colostomies are only temporary so this may have been the case. Mark learned not to ask about his father's whereabouts. Their lifestyle was alien to us but normal for them.
-
Some colostomies are only temporary so this may have been the case. Mark learned not to ask about his father's whereabouts. Their lifestyle was alien to us but normal for them.
Could you find out if the colostomy had been reversed, Daisy? If not, Samuel would have needed all of the bags, creams, wipes, disposable sacks etc. that at least twice daily changes would entail. How often were these things delivered to Samuel? Did he sign for them?
-
Daisy I haven't had much chance to read up on this case due to work etc but I am going to have a look today.
I just wondered how you are finding working on it? Going through the files etc is it obvious where the mistakes were made or are you still working through it?
Ive read some on others cases and know how hard going it is so wishing you all the best in the attempt to clear his name
-
Could you find out if the colostomy had been reversed, Daisy? If not, Samuel would have needed all of the bags, creams, wipes, disposable sacks etc. that at least twice daily changes would entail. How often were these things delivered to Samuel? Did he sign for them?
Thanks Puglove I hadn't thought of that. It is good to see how others look at the case. One lot of questions has been sent to Mark and I will make a list of subsequent ones. Mark is in the final year of his degree so he may not reply promptly but as soon as I hear back I will post all replies.
-
Daisy I haven't had much chance to read up on this case due to work etc but I am going to have a look today.
I just wondered how you are finding working on it? Going through the files etc is it obvious where the mistakes were made or are you still working through it?
Ive read some on others cases and know how hard going it is so wishing you all the best in the attempt to clear his name
Thanks Jixy. Mark has a legal team in place preparing his CCRC submission but I am doing ancillary work. I have been trying to follow an audit trail on Samuels loyalty cards such as store cards etc. However it is very difficult to find out anything as someone is still subject to the Data Protection Act when they are no longer alive. Some of the companies have said they need Samuel's permission before they release details!!! It is ridiculous.
-
it does sound ridiculous. hope you get through the red tape and get the answers you need
-
John and Puglove asked ALL of 8(8-))my questions lol.
I thought I would just throw a few thoughts about the 'comings and goings' which Mark was not allowed to question.
Sami had secrets, double /triple lives why and who would require such a cloak of secrecy? These are just some suggestions:
1. a government spy
2. a terrorist
3 a bygamist
4. a gambler/drinker/protistute user(secret life for some)
5. a crook/drug dealer/smuggler
to name a few.
I understand many would think Mark's life, upbringing strange, but you just have to look at the West Family who were exposed to horror as normal.
It is indeed very interesting. Thank You Daisy for bringing us this to look at.
-
John and Puglove asked ALL of 8(8-))my questions lol.
I thought I would just throw a few thoughts about the 'comings and goings' which Mark was not allowed to question.
Sami had secrets, double /triple lives why and who would require such a cloak of secrecy? These are just some suggestions:
1. a government spy
2. a terrorist
3 a bygamist
4. a gambler/drinker/protistute user(secret life for some)
5. a crook/drug dealer/smuggler
to name a few.
I understand many would think Mark's life, upbringing strange, but you just have to look at the West Family who were exposed to horror as normal.
It is indeed very interesting. Thank You Daisy for bringing us this to look at.
It's fascinating to come to a case with no preconceptions. I have no idea if Mark is innocent or not. I have a thousand questions, but at least Daisy will be fair.
-
It's fascinating to come to a case with no preconceptions. I have no idea if Mark is innocent or not. I have a thousand questions, but at least Daisy will be fair.
I will and if there anything which causes me to doubt something Mark says then I will share it but there is a lot more to this case than meets the eye and I intend to find out the truth.
-
Hi Daisy,
One of the news articles stated that Samuel recorded every financial transaction in a diary. Could you ask when the last transaction was dated?
-
If what is being suggested about Egyptian-born Samuel Alexander, also known as Sami Yacoub El-Kayoubi, is correct and he was involved in clandestine dealings with shady individuals then his internet record and banking transactions should reflect this.
(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/285x214/198345_1.jpg)
Murder victim Samuel Alexander (left) with son Mark Alexander.
-
If what is being suggested about Egyptian-born Samuel Alexander, also known as Sami Yacoub El-Kayoubi, is correct and he was involved in clandestine dealings with shady individuals then his internet record and banking transactions should reflect this.
(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/285x214/198345_1.jpg)
Murder victim Samuel Alexander (left) with son Mark Alexander.
They should indeed.
-
I had another look at the details of this case today but still find several points of concern with Mark's defence. He was brought up by his father in circumstances which any normal person would find odd so conflict was inevitable. Could it be that all those years of conflict exploded one night into violence?
-
Hi Daisy,
One of the news articles stated that Samuel recorded every financial transaction in a diary. Could you ask when the last transaction was dated?
Hi Caroline
This is all paper talk. Samuel did not record every financial transaction in a diary and this statement is very misleading.
-
I had another look at the details of this case today but still find several points of concern with Mark's defence. He was brought up by his father in circumstances which any normal person would find odd so conflict was inevitable. Could it be that all those years of conflict exploded one night into violence?
It could be but there is no witness, forensic or any other evidence to link Mark to his father's death, just suggestions by the prosecution. Until I see any evidence, I will believe Mark to be innocent.
-
It could be but there is no witness, forensic or any other evidence to link Mark to his father's death, just suggestions by the prosecution. Until I see any evidence, I will believe Mark to be innocent.
My point is that had Mark killed his father in a moment of madness and admitted it instead of trying to hide his body and make up some story then he could have admitted to manslaughter. He would have been out in a few years.
-
I think the poor old sod is likely innocent. But then you all know me by now.
-
My point is that had Mark killed his father in a moment of madness and admitted it instead of trying to hide his body and make up some story then he could have admitted to manslaughter. He would have been out in a few years.
Where is the evidence to support this statement?
-
Where is the evidence to support this statement?
Its an observation of the facts on which he was found guilty of murder. He has yet to provide a shred of evidence to support his claim of total innocence. Only he had the means and the opportunity to kill the old man and hide his body beside the garage. No third party intruder would have dared make several trips back to the house to lay multiple layers of concrete, only Mark Alexander had the means to do that while avoiding suspicion. The story he came up with about underpinning the garage wall was a load of rubbish. It was all too coincidental that the position of the claimed underpinning just happened to be the exact spot where Samuel Alexander was buried. In any event what he did had no engineering value whatsoever. He thought he had got away with it and by adding a final layer of concrete so publicly he would seal his fathers grave for ever. Had it not been for the concern expressed by suspicious neighbours he would have succeeded.
-
Its an observation of the facts on which he was found guilty of murder. He has yet to provide a shred of evidence to support his claim of total innocence. Only he had the means and the opportunity to kill the old man and hide his body beside the garage. No third party intruder would have dared make several trips back to the house to lay multiple layers of concrete, only Mark Alexander had the means to do that while avoiding suspicion. The story he came up with about underpinning the garage wall was a load of rubbish. It was all too coincidental that the position of the claimed underpinning just happened to be the exact spot where Samuel Alexander was buried. In any event what he did had no engineering value whatsoever. He thought he had got away with it and by adding a final layer of concrete so publicly he would seal his fathers grave for ever. Had it not been for the concern expressed by suspicious neighbours he would have succeeded.
There was more than one area of underpinning and not just one which everyone keeps assuming. A geologist has stated that the first layers on all areas were carried out by a professional but the top layer was not. This means that Mark did not carry out all the work. There were other individuals involved. If someone buried the body when it was dusk or dark then no one would have seen anything. Once you have closed your curtains at night do you keep looking outside to see if anything is happening in your neighbourhood?
-
There was more than one area of underpinning and not just one which everyone keeps assuming. A geologist has stated that the first layers on all areas were carried out by a professional but the top layer was not. This means that Mark did not carry out all the work. There were other individuals involved. If someone buried the body when it was dusk or dark then no one would have seen anything. Once you have closed your curtains at night do you keep looking outside to see if anything is happening in your neighbourhood?
No, I guess not but wouldn't concreting something name a noise? I don't know, I'm just assuming.
-
No, I guess not but wouldn't concreting something name a noise? I don't know, I'm just assuming.
Depends how it was delivered and/or laid. The house is quite a distance from the few neighbouring ones, whose occupants might have been out during the day and so never saw anything. A concrete lorry could park on the tarmac hardstanding to the south of the double garage, and the mix barrowed to the hole from there, as I understand the last cubic metre load was by Mark Alexander himself, with the lorry operative witnessing. For the first three layers, if it was simply "mortar", this could have been mixed by hand on site hidden from view in the shaded area north of the garage, from pre-delivered bags of sand and cement.
What bothers me is the description of those first three layers as "mortar", which by definition consists of a mix of cement, sand and water, used for laying bricks and concrete blocks, and nowhere near strong enough for underpinning, when aggregate (and sometimes reinforcement) would be included. According to the surveyor, the "mortar" was laid more professionally, so I presume not by cowboys, although why it should be in three layers is a mystery. It sounds more like the work of one person doing the job over a period, allowing time in between for the "mortar" to set and for further raw materials to be bought. Sami supposedly made a careful account of whatever he spent, so there should be some indication of payment for this work, unless the people involved were paid cash in hand, no questions asked.
Location of the concrete and body indicated by the black arrow...
(http://i.imgur.com/55UFVHo.jpg)
-
Does anyone think it fortuiteous that buidling work was being carried out at a time someone wanted to hide a corpse? I mean this would suggest Sami was killed on is property. What about the timing Do we know when he was killed before or after the building work was discussed/started?
What I am getting at is this: if this is a opportunistic killing by a stranger- would his son not notice a body being in the mortar before adding the rest? Also, did Mark notice that Sami took all his regular stuff with him when we went on his many travels? which is why he didn't suspect anything about him not being at home. and did he never, EVER say bye son seen you in few days.weeks?
Daisy, any news on the questions yet?
-
Does anyone think it fortuiteous that buidling work was being carried out at a time someone wanted to hide a corpse? I mean this would suggest Sami was killed on is property. What about the timing Do we know when he was killed before or after the building work was discussed/started?
What I am getting at is this: if this is a opportunistic killing by a stranger- would his son not notice a body being in the mortar before adding the rest? Also, did Mark notice that Sami took all his regular stuff with him when we went on his many travels? which is why he didn't suspect anything about him not being at home. and did he never, EVER say bye son seen you in few days.weeks?
Daisy, any news on the questions yet?
There is no evidence that Samuel was killed on the property. Extensive forensic examination was carried out in the house and garage and it is thought he was killed elsewhere. Building work had been going on in one way and another for ten years. Myster has a good grasp of the case and the laying of the mortar etc. Mark has sent me a brief letter to say he is working on the answers to the questions and will be replying shortly.
-
I take that Mark didn't live with his father?
-
I take that Mark didn't live with his father?
Yes Mark did live with his father but was at University in London and came home regularly. I have been looking over the case files again and we know Samuel was receiving a care package from Social Services. He employed private careers and paid them cash in hand so they didn't pay tax or National Insurance. That is why they have been so difficult to trace.
It is also worth mentioning that Samuel was accomplished in evading the authorities. When Mark was a young child he was placed on the "at risk" register but was regularly moved from school to school so he couldn't be found. By the end of primary school he had attended more than ten schools,
-
OK thanks Daisy.
-
Does anyone think it fortuiteous that buidling work was being carried out at a time someone wanted to hide a corpse? I mean this would suggest Sami was killed on is property. What about the timing Do we know when he was killed before or after the building work was discussed/started?
What I am getting at is this: if this is a opportunistic killing by a stranger- would his son not notice a body being in the mortar before adding the rest? Also, did Mark notice that Sami took all his regular stuff with him when we went on his many travels? which is why he didn't suspect anything about him not being at home. and did he never, EVER say bye son seen you in few days.weeks?
Daisy, any news on the questions yet?
Too much of a coincidence is about right and takes some explaining. If Sami was murdered elsewhere by a third party what are the chances that they would bring his remains back to the garage, dig a hole outside it and bury the remains overlaying it with several layers of concrete all of which went unnoticed by son Mark or any neighbours?
Garage walls don't usually require underpinning so that claim in itself is highly speculative.
-
Too much of a coincidence is about right and takes some explaining. If Sami was murdered elsewhere by a third party what are the chances that they would bring his remains back to the garage, dig a hole outside it and bury the remains overlaying it with several layers of concrete all of which went unnoticed by son Mark or any neighbours?
Garage walls don't usually require underpinning so that claim in itself is highly speculative.
They wouldn't, they would want to distance themselves from the body immediately. There do seem to be lots of coincidences and if, as you say, there is no traceable time line for Sami after the time his son last saw him, then that would be very odd.
-
They wouldn't, they would want to distance themselves from the body immediately. There do seem to be lots of coincidences and if, as you say, there is no traceable time line for Sami after the time his son last saw him, then that would be very odd.
Coincidences aren't evidence. Let's wait for Mark to answer the questions. The prosecution plucked a date from the air for the time of death which was a month before Mark last saw him! The prosecutions case was a joke. This proves that someone can be convicted on hunches. No pathologist was called to establish a date of death.
-
Coincidences aren't evidence. Let's wait for Mark to answer the questions. The prosecution plucked a date from the air for the time of death which was a month before Mark last saw him! The prosecutions case was a joke. This proves that someone can be convicted on hunches. No pathologist was called to establish a date of death.
It must be a month since I provided several questions for you Daisy, is Mark having some difficulty providing answers?
-
It must be a month since I provided several questions for you Daisy, is Mark having some difficulty providing answers?
I understand your frustration and I would like the answers too. Mark did tell me that it would be a couple of weeks before he could reply. You need to understand that he can't talk about exactly what he wants in letters as he needs permission from the prison. They could make life difficult for him as prisoners are not supposed to talk about their victims so he needs to tread carefully. He also had to run it past his legal team as they are preparing a submission to the CCRC. We know how long solicitors take to reply. I am expecting a response from him soon after Christmas with as many answers as possible. In the meantime can I wish you all a happy and peaceful Christmas.
-
I understand your frustration and I would like the answers too. Mark did tell me that it would be a couple of weeks before he could reply. You need to understand that he can't talk about exactly what he wants in letters as he needs permission from the prison. They could make life difficult for him as prisoners are not supposed to talk about their victims so he needs to tread carefully. He also had to run it past his legal team as they are preparing a submission to the CCRC. We know how long solicitors take to reply. I am expecting a response from him soon after Christmas with as many answers as possible. In the meantime can I wish you all a happy and peaceful Christmas.
Thank you for the response Daisy. You raise an interesting point about permissions, I must say I've never heard of such a thing except in the case of Cat A prisons and situations where a letter has caused offence. I don't think either apply to Mark?
In the meantime Happy Holidays, I look forward to his reply.
-
Thank you for the response Daisy. You raise an interesting point about permissions, I must say I've never heard of such a thing except in the case of Cat A prisons and situations where a letter has caused offence. I don't think either apply to Mark?
In the meantime Happy Holidays, I look forward to his reply.
I thought it applied to all prisoners. After all a victim is a victim wherever the prisoner is held. I have looked on the HMP Coldingley website and it clearly states that victims must not be mentioned in letters and information must not be posted on social networking sites. I know many prisoners have websites run by friends so maybe the prisoner is risk assessed first. Anyway once the post gets back to normal I hope to hear from Mark and will give u the answers we all want.
-
I thought it applied to all prisoners. After all a victim is a victim wherever the prisoner is held. I have looked on the HMP Coldingley website and it clearly states that victims must not be mentioned in letters and information must not be posted on social networking sites. I know many prisoners have websites run by friends so maybe the prisoner is risk assessed first. Anyway once the post gets back to normal I hope to hear from Mark and will give u the answers we all want.
Thank you. I look forward to it.
-
I am still waiting for a reply from Mark. There is nothing else I can say until I do. Sorry to keep you all waiting.
-
I am still waiting for a reply from Mark. There is nothing else I can say until I do. Sorry to keep you all waiting.
It is up to Mark whether he reveals anything but his delay in responding is not encouraging for someone allegedly so determined to prove his innocence.
-
It is up to Mark whether he reveals anything but his delay in responding is not encouraging for someone allegedly so determined to prove his innocence.
I agree John and am surprised he hasn't answered yet. If I don't receive a letter from him today I will email him and ask for the reason for the delay.
-
I hope you get an answer soon and then can update us. Things move slowly at the best of times but worse over Christmas.
Do you speak on the phone or just via letters?
-
I hope you get an answer soon and then can update us. Things move slowly at the best of times but worse over Christmas.
Do you speak on the phone or just via letters?
We correspond by letter but just before Christmas Mark said he would add my number so we could discuss the admin tasks I am carrying out for him. I hope you won't have to wait much longer for answers.
-
Keep up the good work. I know how difficult it can be waiting on answers to update people.
Even more so when the prison have restrictions you have mentioned
-
Keep up the good work. I know how difficult it can be waiting on answers to update people.
Even more so when the prison have restrictions you have mentioned
Thank you Jixy. John has given me a huge platform to discuss Mark's case and I owe it to him to provide answers to posters. I really hope I can do this soon.
-
It is a very good platform with some very intelligent people who seem to look at all side of a case. You have sparked my interest in the case I was working on!
-
I have received a phone call from Mark this evening to say that he has posted a letter to me which I should receive tomorrow. He has answered the questions and says that his answers are very long and comprehensive. He has nothing to hide and would like everyone to have as full a picture of his case as possible in order to make up their own minds. As soon as the letter arrives I will start to post answers, probably one at a time to give posters time to respond. He also welcomes more questions. I know a couple were submitted after I had sent the initial ones off so these will be included in my next letter to him.
-
I have received a phone call from Mark this evening to say that he has posted a letter to me which I should receive tomorrow. He has answered the questions and says that his answers are very long and comprehensive. He has nothing to hide and would like everyone to have as full a picture of his case as possible in order to make up their own minds. As soon as the letter arrives I will start to post answers, probably one at a time to give posters time to respond. He also welcomes more questions. I know a couple were submitted after I had sent the initial ones off so these will be included in my next letter to him.
I have a question for Mark.
Would he be prepared to have a brain scan to check for psychopathy and for his brain scan results to be published on the World Wide Web alongside all this published articles?
-
I understand your frustration and I would like the answers too. Mark did tell me that it would be a couple of weeks before he could reply. You need to understand that he can't talk about exactly what he wants in letters as he needs permission from the prison. They could make life difficult for him as prisoners are not supposed to talk about their victims so he needs to tread carefully. He also had to run it past his legal team as they are preparing a submission to the CCRC. We know how long solicitors take to reply. I am expecting a response from him soon after Christmas with as many answers as possible. In the meantime can I wish you all a happy and peaceful Christmas.
Sorry to say this Daisy but it seems to me you are being duped; presuming of course you are still in contact with Mark?
What were the results of his pre trial assessment reports?
-
Sorry to say this Daisy but it seems to me you are being duped; presuming of course you are still in contact with Mark?
What were the results of his pre trial assessment reports?
Have u read all the documents on the case?I wonder what makes you think I am being duped.
I don’t know if Mark had any pre trial assessment reports. I was under the impression that these are not standard procedure and are only done if there are concerns about a persons mental state.
Yes I am still in touch with Mark.
-
I don’t know if Mark had any pre trial assessment reports. I was under the impression that these are not standard procedure and are only done if there are concerns about a persons mental state.
Mark would have had a pre sentence report https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/pre-sentence-reports#Pre-Sentence_Reports
-
I wonder what makes you think I am being duped.
Mark fits the "blueprint" Daisy, to a T
-
Have u read all the documents on the case?I wonder what makes you think I am being duped.
I don’t know if Mark had any pre trial assessment reports. I was under the impression that these are not standard procedure and are only done if there are concerns about a persons mental state.
Yes I am still in touch with Mark.
Btw Daisy I think you've done the right thing sharing what you have here 8((()*/
-
Thanks to John and Eleanor for your comments regarding this case. There are lots of unanswered questions and I hope to learn a lot more about the murder of Samuel. I have been writing to Mark for around a year and my gut feeling is that he is innocent. I appreciate the links you posted John but don’t jump to conclusions before hearing all the facts. You above all must appreciate that the papers sensationalise things and as the saying goes “never let the truth get in the way of a good story.”
I would like to point out some of the inaccuracies in this matter. First of all Mark’s parents were not married as has been reported.
The serious case review I think it pointing more at the incompetence of Buckinghamshire Council than the guilt of Mark Alexander. This account was set up as a joint account for Mark and his father and Mark had Power of Attorney. At the time Mark was running his own IT business and was paying a considerable amount into the account which his father was free to dip into. Mark also had every right to draw money from the account. There were indeed carers employed but on many occasions Samuel ignored the door or had violent arguments with them and they refused to go back to the house. He certainly had some serious anger issues.
One has to appreciate that Samuel was a very complex character with various aliases. He regularly posted on sex chat websites posing as a man in his 20s, and had several mobile phones. This information was only given to Mark by the police after his father had died which horrified Mark as he had no idea of what his father was up to. Mark last saw his father on 15th October 2009 but the police plucked a date out of the air to fit in with what they believed. There has been no formal date of death confirmed.
It is known that Samuel had many enemies. In fact the neighbours were frightened of him and once he went after one of them waving a knife. He employed casual labour and then argued with workers and threw them out of his property.
The neighbours kept a dossier on Mark with the encouragement of two former police officers who lived in the village. It is concerning to hear that Samuel’s car was used after his death by an unknown person while Mark was at University but the neighbours saw nothing. They also have no knowledge of who laid the first two layers of mortar, carried out by a professional.
I am keen to get to the bottom of this mystery and if anyone has connections to Drayton Parslow I would be interested to hear.
Please help me with this and ask more questions which I can then put to Mark.
Is there any evidence to support Marks claims about his Dad?
-
I notice that in June 2011 Mark Alexander went to the Appeal Court claiming that his ‘cantankerous dad' had provoked him and this should have been put to the jurors.
'However, three senior judges, sitting at London’s Court of Appeal dismissed the claim as ‘speculation’ and upheld the conviction. Mr Justice Walker told the court Samuel Alexander used ‘brutal and callous treatment’ in bringing up his son after the boy’s mother left. He said the father was proud that Mark was reading English and French law, and told neighbours his son planned to study at Paris’ prestigious Sorbonne University in his third year. But the court heard Alexander wanted to change his course and live with his girlfriend in London.'
This suggests that Mark Alexander has now accepted his fate and is introducing excuses for his behaviour. This is not the actions of an innocent man but a guilty man now pleading mitigating circumstances.
Read more at: http://www.bucksherald.co.uk/news/crime/killer-provocation-claim-thrown-out-1-2809130
Have only just seen this and I agree
But he's still in contact with Daisy and still maintaining innocence https://insidetime.org/tweeting-prisoners/
-
I have a question for Mark.
Would he be prepared to have a brain scan to check for psychopathy and for his brain scan results to be published on the World Wide Web alongside all this published articles?
I will ask Mark next time I speak to him. However the decision won’t be his as he will need permission from the prison. You have certainly posted a lot Steph and I welcome other views and comments. Bear with me and I will answer everything as soon as I can.
-
I will ask Mark next time I speak to him. However the decision won’t be his as he will need permission from the prison. You have certainly posted a lot Steph and I welcome other views and comments. Bear with me and I will answer everything as soon as I can.
You asked me yesterday had I read everything, to which I've now done and sorry to say but Mark comes across like a con artist.
I know you sussed this in Jeremy Bamber a while back Daisy. I think in time you'll do the same with Mark.
-
I will comment on the Mark Alexander thread but we have to bear in mind that there are only two people who know the truth - the victim and the perpetrator. The victim can’t speak as he is dead and the perpetrator may or may not be Mark. None of us know as we weren’t there. There are still many unanswered questions in this complex case.
But this could be said in many cases, even in cases where the perpetrator is caught on CCTV committing the act, they will claim it's someone else.
-
What an interesting case, I have spent more of my working day reading all that's been posted than I probably should have.
Daisy you are to be commended for the time and effort you have obviously put into Mark's case and for the way you fight his corner. I'm ever so slightly in awe!!
What I've been left wondering about is the time between when the police claim he died and when Mark said he last saw him, which is quite a considerable difference (sorry didn't make a note of the actual dates!). Now I know there is a thread about "simple means of checking if someone is alive" that discusses this but surely if he were alive for that period there would be at least some shred of evidence, another sighting at least. I get that he used aliases which makes things difficult but it is really that easy to open a bank account using an alias? You say he paid with cash but the cash had to come from somewhere didn't it? It just seems too unlikely that someone can live for that long a period without leaving any mark. I hope Mark's team manages to find something to prove that the date of death is wrong but if they haven't by now what are the chances?
Has anyone ever satisfactorily explained why his Dad felt the need to have so many aliases? What was he up to? I get that Mark's upbringing was unconventional and his Dad, from what I have read, seemed like an eccentric (nicest way to put it!!) but is that explanation enough? There was some talk about possible grooming online, was this followed up because him upsetting an online vigilante group isn't beyond belief.
This feels like one of those cases where the police decided on a suspect and found evidence to prove they were right, possibly ignoring other leads along the way. But that doesn't mean they were wrong though. He does seem like the most likely suspect.
I hope some piece of evidence comes to light that proves he is innocent but I have my doubts. I am well and truly on the fence with this one!!
-
Any further updates Daisy?
-
Mark would have had a pre sentence report https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/pre-sentence-reports#Pre-Sentence_Reports
I have spoken to Mark today and asked the question. He did not have a pre sentence report as he has no previous convictions.
-
I have spoken to Mark today and asked the question. He did not have a pre sentence report as he has no previous convictions.
You are quite clearly being led up the garden path Daisy.
Why don't you tell Mark that "previous convictions" are not relevant to pre sentence reports for murder!
This article, and others and indeed much of what Mark has asked you to post here suggests he did indeed have a pre sentence report https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-11259049
You may want to read and absorb the following and let Mark know he's not pulling the wool over our eyes!
"The definition of a pre-sentence report is contained in s. 158 Criminal Justice Act 2003
158 Meaning of "pre-sentence report"
(1) In this Part "pre-sentence report" means a report which:
(a) with a view to assisting the court in determining the most suitable method of dealing with an offender, is made or submitted by an appropriate officer, and
(b) contains information as to such matters, presented in such manner, as may be prescribed by rules made by the Secretary of State.
The court is required to obtain a Pre-Sentence Report (PSR), or a Specific Sentence Report (SSR) prepared by the Probation Service or the Youth Offending Team before imposing a custodial or community sentence: s.156 Criminal Justice Act 2003
The PSR should include an assessment of the nature and seriousness of the offence, and its impact on the victim.
The PSR must be disclosed to the offender or his legal representative: s.159(2)(a) Criminal Justice Act 2003
The PSR must also be disclosed to the prosecutor, if the prosecutor is a Crown Prosecutor, or represents the CPS, Revenue and Customs prosecutors, the DSS or the SFO. If the prosecutor is not of a description prescribed by order of the Secretary of State (e.g. Local Authority), a copy of the report need not be given to the prosecutor if the court considers it would be inappropriate to do so: s.159(2)(c) Criminal Justice Act 2003
If the offender is under 18, the court must give a copy of the report to his parent or guardian, even though a copy may also have been given to the offender or his legal representative: s.159(2)(b) Criminal Justice Act 2003
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/pre-sentence-reports
Dangerous Offenders
In assessing dangerousness, the court will need the benefit of a pre-sentence report. Probation officers have been carefully trained to include an assessment of the risk in the report, but will need the CPS to provide them with not only the usual PSR information package, but also with the facts of previous relevant convictions and the information relevant to a pattern of behaviour. Such information should be provided by the police with the case file on Form MG16, and should normally be provided to the Probation Service with the PSR information package. When accepting pleas to lesser offences or on a less serious basis, prosecutors should notify the probation service so that the new basis of sentencing can be factored in to the risk assessment by the probation officer.
-
You are quite clearly being led up the garden path Daisy.
Why don't you tell Mark that "previous convictions" are not relevant to pre sentence reports for murder!
This article, and others and indeed much of what Mark has asked you to post here suggests he did indeed have a pre sentence report https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-11259049
You may want to read and absorb the following and let Mark know he's not pulling the wool over our eyes!
"The definition of a pre-sentence report is contained in s. 158 Criminal Justice Act 2003
158 Meaning of "pre-sentence report"
(1) In this Part "pre-sentence report" means a report which:
(a) with a view to assisting the court in determining the most suitable method of dealing with an offender, is made or submitted by an appropriate officer, and
(b) contains information as to such matters, presented in such manner, as may be prescribed by rules made by the Secretary of State.
The court is required to obtain a Pre-Sentence Report (PSR), or a Specific Sentence Report (SSR) prepared by the Probation Service or the Youth Offending Team before imposing a custodial or community sentence: s.156 Criminal Justice Act 2003
The PSR should include an assessment of the nature and seriousness of the offence, and its impact on the victim.
The PSR must be disclosed to the offender or his legal representative: s.159(2)(a) Criminal Justice Act 2003
The PSR must also be disclosed to the prosecutor, if the prosecutor is a Crown Prosecutor, or represents the CPS, Revenue and Customs prosecutors, the DSS or the SFO. If the prosecutor is not of a description prescribed by order of the Secretary of State (e.g. Local Authority), a copy of the report need not be given to the prosecutor if the court considers it would be inappropriate to do so: s.159(2)(c) Criminal Justice Act 2003
If the offender is under 18, the court must give a copy of the report to his parent or guardian, even though a copy may also have been given to the offender or his legal representative: s.159(2)(b) Criminal Justice Act 2003
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/pre-sentence-reports
Dangerous Offenders
In assessing dangerousness, the court will need the benefit of a pre-sentence report. Probation officers have been carefully trained to include an assessment of the risk in the report, but will need the CPS to provide them with not only the usual PSR information package, but also with the facts of previous relevant convictions and the information relevant to a pattern of behaviour. Such information should be provided by the police with the case file on Form MG16, and should normally be provided to the Probation Service with the PSR information package. When accepting pleas to lesser offences or on a less serious basis, prosecutors should notify the probation service so that the new basis of sentencing can be factored in to the risk assessment by the probation officer.
Thanks for further information. Actually I may have asked Mark if he had a pre trial report by mistake. Is there such a thing? If there isn’t then surely he would have said. I will have to clarify but he spoke about many prisoners not having one. It maybe worth you going on his website and asking the question. He told me all questions are answered.
-
Thanks for further information. Actually I may have asked Mark if he had a pre trial report by mistake. Is there such a thing? If there isn’t then surely he would have said. I will have to clarify but he spoke about many prisoners not having one. It maybe worth you going on his website and asking the question. He told me all questions are answered.
Daisy, is the common denominator (Bamber, Mark) you providing funds? I really hope not. I know you mean well, and Aggie endorses you, (everyone loves Aggie), but you seem to want to salvage something that can't be saved. It's been a very long day, and the right words are escaping me, but why do you tilt at windmills when these greedy, over-privileged young men can't prove their innocence? Why would anyone else kill Mark's father, if we're being real? And if Sheila killed the Bambers, her prints would be all over the gun. (Sorry, Holl, but they would be. And you are SO wrong about the blood flow.)
Daisy, you're very sweet and kind, but have a bit of a think. Don't let Mark fill some space in your life. Maybe talk to Myster, he's a legend. I think that Mark killed his dad. Clumsily. And thought that he could get away with it, and sail away with it, because he's young and pretty. Just like Bamber.
-
Daisy, is the common denominator (Bamber, Mark) you providing funds? I really hope not. I know you mean well, and Aggie endorses you, (everyone loves Aggie), but you seem to want to salvage something that can't be saved. It's been a very long day, and the right words are escaping me, but why do you tilt at windmills when these greedy, over-privileged young men can't prove their innocence? Why would anyone else kill Mark's father, if we're being real? And if Sheila killed the Bambers, her prints would be all over the gun. (Sorry, Holl, but they would be. And you are SO wrong about the blood flow.)
Daisy, you're very sweet and kind, but have a bit of a think. Don't let Mark fill some space in your life. Maybe talk to Myster, he's a legend. I think that Mark killed his dad. Clumsily. And thought that he could get away with it, and sail away with it, because he's young and pretty. Just like Bamber.
Ah Puglove it’s kind of you to be concerned. However I won’t be falling into the same trap as I did with Jeremy Bamber. I do not send Mark money and have made it clear that I won’t. I am carrying out some research for Mark regarding his father’s various aliases. This may come up with clues. There is no doubt that Sami had many enemies and people may be prepared to come forward. I certainly do not have a space to fill as I have a large family to keep me busy. However I am a people person and love to help others. I have thought about working for The Samaritans but I know I would get too involved. I am keeping an open mind regarding Mark. I don’t want to believe he killed his father but know it is a possibility.
I love Aggie as well. She is a dear friend.
-
Ah Puglove it’s kind of you to be concerned. However I won’t be falling into the same trap as I did with Jeremy Bamber. I do not send Mark money and have made it clear that I won’t. I am carrying out some research for Mark regarding his father’s various aliases. This may come up with clues. There is no doubt that Sami had many enemies and people may be prepared to come forward. I certainly do not have a space to fill as I have a large family to keep me busy. However I am a people person and love to help others. I have thought about working for The Samaritans but I know I would get too involved. I am keeping an open mind regarding Mark. I don’t want to believe he killed his father but know it is a possibility.
I love Aggie as well. She is a dear friend.
I think you are too kind Daisy. Mark Alexander is in denial imo but knows exactly what he is doing.
Pre sentencing reports are done in order to provide the judge with further information as to the convicted persons mental state and if appropriate, alternatives to incarceration. As Mark Alexander was deemed sane then there could only be one outcome, life with a minimum tariff.
I think you are flogging a dead horse Daisy.
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/705/640/673.gif)
-
Pre sentencing reports are done in order to provide the judge with further information as to the convicted persons mental state and if appropriate, alternatives to incarceration.
We can confirm that no pre-sentence report was conducted in Mark's particular case. The prison service has conducted three OASys (Offender Assessment System) reports on Mark. The first was on 10 January 2011, followed by 23 March 2015, and most recently 30 May 2018. Mark also received Mental Health counselling / therapy at the request of the prison, as part of his sentence plan. He underwent thirty 1-hour sessions over the course of a year between October 2014 and October 2015.
The Probation Officer who wrote Mark's first OASys report commented that "I had to base my assessment solely on the judges' comments and Mark's version of events as I did not have any of the CPS papers in relation to his case... obviously this was not ideal, but I had to complete the assessment in order to meet targets".
We enclose an extract from his latest OASys which shows that no pre-sentence report exists. We can only assume that since no alternative to custody was foreseen, that the need to compile a report in this case was dispensed with. Mark had no previous convictions or encounters with the police, so the facts of the case could be determined entirely upon the determination of the court.
-
I have a question for Mark.Would he be prepared to have a brain scan to check for psychopathy and for his brain scan results to be published on the World Wide Web alongside all this published articles?
With respect, this question seems a little gratuitous. For the record, Mark has been assessed by a Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist, a Consultant Clinical Psychologist, and at the request of the prison service a Mental Health counsellor (30 sessions over the course of a year). None of their findings indicate any evidence of pathology, psychopathy, or any other abnormality of the mind. Mark was understandably diagnosed with depression shortly after his conviction, and has been taking medication for anxiety as a result of this ordeal, but there are no underlying issues pre-dating his time in custody.
-
What I am getting at is this: if this is a opportunistic killing by a stranger- would his son not notice a body being in the mortar before adding the rest?
http://www.freemarkalexander.org/diary/#top22
http://www.freemarkalexander.org/faq/#construction
All that could be seen on Mark's arrival was a smooth surface. There was nothing unusual about the site that would suggest anything as awful or surreal as this.
-
Which makes it all the more unbelievable that he wasn't concerned enough to report his father was missing. Who was going to change Sami's bags... someone from this bogus Egyptian community in London he was supposedly staying with?
Mark nursed his father back to health until he was capable of looking after himself. He helped him change his colostomy bags when spillages occurred in the early period when Sami was still getting used to using them. By late 2008, Sami was already fitting these on his own. Sami did not undergo any further operations to reverse his colostomy. Supplies continued to be delivered to the home throughout 2009, but notably, no parcels were ever left outside the house uncollected until January 2010.
-
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?
Mark's mum left the family home when Mark was about 6 years old. From then on, Sami restricted her access to her son to pre-arranged visits. Gradually these reduced until she only saw him once a year. Eventually they stopped altogether. She felt unable to challenge Sami for custody over Mark, due to the control he exercised over her.
Sami had always denied her family any access to Mark as a child, and had even demanded that she keep her pregnancy secret. They didn't realise Mark existed until he was 2 years old, and Sami gave them a false address. They eventually had to contact the police to track her down.
-
I notice that in June 2011 Mark Alexander went to the Appeal Court claiming that his ‘cantankerous dad' had provoked him and this should have been put to the jurors. This suggests that Mark Alexander has now accepted his fate and is introducing excuses for his behaviour.
Mark's defence team put an appeal in within 28 days of his conviction. There was no new evidence at this stage, so they had to resort to appealing on a technicality, in the hope that the court would grant them a retrial and they could secure further funding to pursue further investigation and fresh evidence. The technical issue under discussion was whether the court ought to have left the question of provocation to the jury, given that the prosecution essentially based their case on this. Ultimately then, this wasn't a change of heart, but a tactical approach which didn't pay off.
-
Mark's defence team put an appeal in within 28 days of his conviction. There was no new evidence at this stage, so they had to resort to appealing on a technicality, in the hope that the court would grant them a retrial and they could secure further funding to pursue further investigation and fresh evidence. The technical issue under discussion was whether the court ought to have left the question of provocation to the jury, given that the prosecution essentially based their case on this. Ultimately then, this wasn't a change of heart, but a tactical approach which didn't pay off.
If Sami was alive after the time which the prosecution claimed that he had been killed then there would have been an electronic and a paper trail to prove it. A frail old man with medical issues just doesn't disappear in this day and age unless something dreadful had happened to him. That in my view was the crux of the case. If that was not the case then there would have been evidence to prove otherwise.
-
What I find questionable is why on returning home in January (and months of non-communication), after finding a pile of unopened mail, unpaid bills, etc. and a plumbing leak, which required major attention to the building fabric, judging by the need for three large Hippobags, that it wasn't Mark who informed the police of Sami's disappearance, but his neighbours and then only 24 days later! If it was left to Mark, I doubt that he would ever have reported his dad missing.
-
What I find questionable is why on returning home in January (and months of non-communication), after finding a pile of unopened mail, unpaid bills, etc. and a plumbing leak, which required major attention to the building fabric, judging by the need for three large Hippobags, that it wasn't Mark who informed the police of Sami's disappearance, but his neighbours and then only 24 days later! If it was left to Mark, I doubt that he would ever have reported his dad missing.
Another good point Myster. It's the little things that add up to lots of circumstantial evidence which sealed the killer's fate in this particular case.
-
What I find questionable is why on returning home in January (and months of non-communication), after finding a pile of unopened mail, unpaid bills, etc. and a plumbing leak, which required major attention to the building fabric, judging by the need for three large Hippobags, that it wasn't Mark who informed the police of Sami's disappearance, but his neighbours and then only 24 days later! If it was left to Mark, I doubt that he would ever have reported his dad missing.
Hi everyone, Happy New Year. Please see the thread below:
http://www.freemarkalexander.org/diary/#top19
http://www.freemarkalexander.org/diary/#top20
http://www.freemarkalexander.org/faq/#church
Mark doesn't for a minute deny that he took his eye off the ball here. There a number of problems. First of all, he was used to his dad either not being around, going away on 'business' trips without further explanation, and not returning his calls. This was just normal behaviour in their household. Odd to all of us, but normal for them.
Secondly, he had been brought up not to question his father's intentions, not to put his nose into his father's business. He, like his mum, had grown up in an environment in which huge emphasis was placed upon guarding his father's privacy and secrecy. So, even if Mark was concerned, or worried, which he was, he wouldn't have dreamed of involving the authorities, for risk of getting his father in trouble and upsetting him.
Thirdly, Mark drew some reassurance from the fact that the social services were monitoring his dad. If there had in fact really been an issue, they would have contacted him, or so he thought. The fact that they hadn't allayed his concerns.
Fourthly, Mark had become completely absorbed in his life at university, where he was not only studying, and enjoying student life, but running a business. Mark has a habit, evidenced here in this very Forum, of committing himself to too much and losing track of other things, like Rosie's letter. It took him 8 weeks to respond to her. It took him almost 12 weeks with his father, before he realised something was up on his return to the UK. Mark has never claimed to be perfect, but innocent people are no less fallible than the rest of us!
Finally, of course, Sami had had a go at Mark the last time they spoke. Mark was holding out for an apology, stubbornly, proudly, perhaps, but nevertheless he didn't want to be the first one to reach out.
All of this created the conditions in which Mark didn't react quickly enough to his father's silence, and failed to read the warning signs that something was wrong. Mark constantly questions whether he could have prevented his father's death if only he had acted sooner, and this possibility, that he could somehow have saved his father continues to plague Mark to this day.
-
If Sami was alive after the time which the prosecution claimed that he had been killed then there would have been an electronic and a paper trail to prove it. A frail old man with medical issues just doesn't disappear in this day and age unless something dreadful had happened to him. That in my view was the crux of the case. If that was not the case then there would have been evidence to prove otherwise.
This is a fair point John, even if Sami wasn't frail by then:
http://www.freemarkalexander.org/faq/#health
Our understanding of Sami's activities during September and October are still pretty sketchy:
http://www.freemarkalexander.org/faq/#financial
What we have been doing however, is establishing patterns in his past when he had behaved in the same way, seemingly 'disappearing' or going 'off grid'. This is helping to demonstrate that Sami had previous form. Even his own neighbours had commented that:
"He was perfectly capable of dropping off the radar when he wanted" JP
"There was no point in pursuing him if he didn’t want to be pursued... Even if he was in, he wouldn’t necessarily answer the door or see anyone" SSP
"If he wanted to remain private and uncommunicative, he would do just that" MP
And the Serious Case Review panel "observed 'he seemed not to exist'"
Let's just run with the prosecution theory for a minute though. If we forget about the question of whether he really was around for another month, and say that Sami died in September, the evidence still goes in Mark's favour. He wasn't there long enough, even on this timeline, to carry it all out. The motive is implausible, the forensics are missing, and the crime doesn't fit the man. All the indicators point to him being innocent.
-
So if Mark didn't do it... who did?
An aggrieved father in the building trade who discovered that Sami was up to some questionable monkey business online with his underage daughter, found out where he lived then took the law into his own hands?
or
An itinerant jerry-builder who dug a big hole behind the garage, but disposed of Sami when they argued over the cost, then stored his body until he'd gathered enough raw materials i.e. sand and cement to make an amateurish "professional" three-layer mortar root-barrier with Sami underneath as the fourth?
or
Someone from Sami's landlord flat rental days who took exception to his Egyptian origins?
or....?
-
If Sami was known to disappear from time to time, why did it seem strange to the neighbours when he disappeared the final time? Was it Mark's answers to their questions that made them suspicious?
I wonder why they didn't go to the police, rather than confiding in a neighbour who was a retired policeman?
-
If Sami was known to disappear from time to time, why did it seem strange to the neighbours when he disappeared the final time? Was it Mark's answers to their questions that made them suspicious?
I wonder why they didn't go to the police, rather than confiding in a neighbour who was a retired policeman?
More to the point, why didn't a single one of them simply walk up to his front door and knock on it? Why didn't any of the neighbours actually pick up the phone and call his home? Remarkably, you might think, none of them did. Odd?
-
So if Mark didn't do it... who did?
The investigation, and our understanding of Sami to date, seems to indicate three main possibilities:
1) A house-keeper or other employee who took advantage of the cover of anonymity they gained from Sami's benefit scam. Because Sami was returning claims with false employee names, they avoided having to register with the authorities, or being vetted. Receiving payment in cash, they could avoid declaring their earnings. They had easy access to the house and would have known the area well.
2) A direct or indirect victim of one of Sami's confidence tricks, perhaps through his online activity on adult dating sites and chatrooms.
3) A loan-shark Sami owed money to, or had defrauded. In other words, Sami's past caught up with him, there was a confrontation of some description, and something went wrong. There is also the possibility, given the very unusual and extreme manner of burial, that some kind of message was being sent out to those in criminal circles.
We believe whoever was responsible could not have acted alone.
Samuel knew he had made “many enemies” over the years, as he confided in AH who he once asked to “look after Mark for me” should anything “happen” to him. A violent altercation (http://www.rottenborough.org.uk/SamiElKalyoubi.html)with one of his tenants, who tried breaking into Samuel's home, led to a criminal conviction. Samuel even kept a list of some ‘enemies’ in his address book. Mark's grandfather has also described how Sami “could easily accumulate many enemies”.
One victim of fraud has described Sami as follows: "He is basically a clever thief and has meticulously planned to make easy money out of a naïve young girl and me". He alleges that "my signature has been forged on the deeds of trust and the transfer of the mortgage" in order to place his step-daughter's share of the property into Sami's own name without her family realising. Her family describe how she was "in such fear of [Sami] that she... gave him power of attorney" over her financial affairs. Sami went on to secure mortgages in her name without her knowledge, selling the properties without repaying them, and then leaving the lady laden with the debt.
-
With respect, this question seems a little gratuitous. For the record, Mark has been assessed by a Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist, a Consultant Clinical Psychologist, and at the request of the prison service a Mental Health counsellor (30 sessions over the course of a year). None of their findings indicate any evidence of pathology, psychopathy, or any other abnormality of the mind. Mark was understandably diagnosed with depression shortly after his conviction, and has been taking medication for anxiety as a result of this ordeal, but there are no underlying issues pre-dating his time in custody.
This means diddly squat and again boils down to a matter of opinion
-
With respect, this question seems a little gratuitous. For the record, Mark has been assessed by a Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist, a Consultant Clinical Psychologist, and at the request of the prison service a Mental Health counsellor (30 sessions over the course of a year). None of their findings indicate any evidence of pathology, psychopathy, or any other abnormality of the mind. Mark was understandably diagnosed with depression shortly after his conviction, and has been taking medication for anxiety as a result of this ordeal, but there are no underlying issues pre-dating his time in custody.
You could be referring to numerous murderers; this isn’t uncommon
-
The investigation, and our understanding of Sami to date, seems to indicate three main possibilities:
1) A house-keeper or other employee who took advantage of the cover of anonymity they gained from Sami's benefit scam. Because Sami was returning claims with false employee names, they avoided having to register with the authorities, or being vetted. Receiving payment in cash, they could avoid declaring their earnings. They had easy access to the house and would have known the area well.
2) A direct or indirect victim of one of Sami's confidence tricks online.
3) A loan-shark Sami owed money to, or had defrauded. In other words, Sami's past caught up with him, there was a confrontation of some description, and something went wrong. There is also the possibility, given the very unusual and extreme manner of burial, that some kind of message was being sent out to those in criminal circles.
We believe whoever was responsible could not have acted alone.
The above has been manufactured by Mark, who in turn has manipulated others to go along with the theories.
-
The investigation, and our understanding of Sami to date, seems to indicate three main possibilities:
1) A house-keeper or other employee who took advantage of the cover of anonymity they gained from Sami's benefit scam. Because Sami was returning claims with false employee names, they avoided having to register with the authorities, or being vetted. Receiving payment in cash, they could avoid declaring their earnings. They had easy access to the house and would have known the area well.
2) A direct or indirect victim of one of Sami's confidence tricks online.
3) A loan-shark Sami owed money to, or had defrauded. In other words, Sami's past caught up with him, there was a confrontation of some description, and something went wrong. There is also the possibility, given the very unusual and extreme manner of burial, that some kind of message was being sent out to those in criminal circles.
We believe whoever was responsible could not have acted alone.
The above appears to sit alright with you but the following doesn’t?
But why at this moment in particular? The timing is off. The idea that he would nurse his father back to health, only to turn on him, just doesn't sit right. And this at the very moment when he is supposedly being granted his freedom. If he wanted to get away from Sami, all he had to do was walk out of the door and never come back. He could have made a clean break in Paris or London quite easily.
Not as yet. Mark's lawyers collated a list of about 40 contractors who Sami had hired to do work at the house over the years, and phoned them all. Nothing really came out of this however, and it seems unlikely that anyone would implicate themselves that way at any rate.
Since Sami tended to pay labourers and housekeepers in cash, there are very few records of any of the work that occurred at the home. Despite building work of this nature being noisy and labour-intensive, the neighbours maintain that they saw no-one doing any work until Mark showed up for an hour and a half on 19 November.
http://www.freemarkalexander.org/faq/#contractors
http://www.freemarkalexander.org/faq/#night
-
The above appears to sit alright with you but the following doesn’t?
Sorry Nicholas, maybe we're being a bit slow here but can you explain what you mean? What's the inconsistency?
-
Here is a link to Mark Alexander's twitter and Facebook accounts which are run by his friends on the outside
https://twitter.com/MA_Campaign?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
It is worth noting that he is supported by Terry Waite and other influential people. I do not think they would be supporting someone who is guilty.
‘Mark Alexander’ on twitter
”Smart Justice' also means focusing on the quality of a sentence, rather than the quantity - using the time that people spend in prison 'smartly', rather than extending sentences in an unproductive fashion. Time must be seen as a resource to be invested not wasted
‘The voices of miscarriages of justice victims go largely unheard and ignored. We believe it's important that people like Mark are included in discourse about criminal justice reform, because they have first hand experience of how the system has failed them.
‘With respect, you cannot simply project your bad experiences with Simon Hall onto all other miscarriage of justice victims. The person, the circumstances, and the facts are completely different from case to case.
‘These cases are disturbing, but mustn't be allowed to undermine efforts at bringing about real and meaningful change in the criminal justice system to help prevent miscarriages of justice happening in the first place
‘Mark's father had a habit of disappearing for periods of time, linked to fraudulent activities under 11 separate aliases, so it was not unusual. He had also brought his son up to maintain secrecy around his affairs, so Mark was understandably reluctant to go to the authorities '
“It is worth noting that he is supported by Terry Waite and other influential people. I do not think they would be supporting someone who is guilty.
Daisy are you claiming Terry Waite and ‘other influential people’ can’t be hoodwinked?
-
Have only just seen this and I agree
But he's still in contact with Daisy and still maintaining innocence https://insidetime.org/tweeting-prisoners/
1st June 2012
Tweeting prisoners by Matthew Whitehead Andy Stanford-Clark with contribution from Mark Alexander HMP Gartree
“When my friend and colleague Mark Alexander was convicted of the murder of his father in 2010 it wasn’t long before I started talking to a friend of mine to work out how we could increase Mark’s ability to communicate with the outside world. Working in the technology industry it’s not long before either of us tries to apply our skills to a given problem. Andy has a long and established history of developing technologies that allow remote devices to connect with the rest of the world. To both of us Mark was just another hard-to-reach source of information and we wanted to make sure he was connected.
Before Mark went to prison he was an avid user of Twitter. By the time he was convicted in September 2010 he had around 100 friends following him. To us Twitter seemed to be the perfect way for Mark to keep in touch with what his friends were up to, and to allow him to remain more closely in touch with people he could longer contact as easily as he used to.
As well as keeping Mark informed, it was also designed to let his community of online friends know more about life in prison. It wasn’t long before it was serving more of a purpose than just letting his friends know what was on the menu that day, how he felt, or how his music practice was going; Mark has been working to clear his name ever since his conviction 18 months ago. As he goes through the process of appeals and his legal team make progress, we wanted Mark to be able to give his friends updates on the case and his campaign.
When Andy and I sat down to work out a way to connect him to Twitter we already had a raft of tools at our disposal. First and foremost we knew we had to have a way of getting messages into the prison. Without this it wouldn’t matter how clever our software was, we’d have to call it a day before we’d even begun. Mobile phones are banned and we knew inmates didn’t have access to email, but we did know about a website called emailaprisoner.com. The website provides a service that allows anyone to write to a prisoner. When an email reaches the prison it’s destined for, it’s printed out and delivered by hand just as if it had been received through the post. We’d both been using the service already to write letters directly to Mark and we decided it would be the perfect way for us to get messages to Mark.
The application we’ve written works by subscribing to the messages Mark’s friends post on Twitter. When messages are posted online they’re received by our software and compiled into a list of messages long enough to make up a complete email. Because the emailaprisoner.com website allows messages of up to 2,500 characters and Twitter messages can be up to 140 characters, each email we send tends to contain 15-20 individual messages. Mark’s friends can also send him messages directly by sending a DM or ‘direct message’ to his Twitter account. Their message gets appended onto the next email and we tag the different types of message so Mark knows whether they’ve been posted on a friend’s feed or sent directly to him.
To allow Mark to reply to messages and post his own updates on Twitter we still have to rely on more traditional means. Every couple of weeks Mark writes a letter to one of us listing the updates he’d like posting. We then type up each message and post it on his Twitter account.
While writing this article about the project we asked Mark if he could sum up the benefits he gets from using the system:
“It keeps me in tune with the fast paced nature of the world I find myself cut off from in prison. I feel tangibly closer to my friends because I get a real sense of their day to day lives and experiences through their updates, whilst in turn I’m able to share my own. In pervading such an extreme environment it brings a whole new dimension to our normal conception of ‘social media’, and offers a real gateway to reality. The impact it has had is enormous.”
We hope that our software will allow Mark to stay in touch more closely with his friends and to keep up to date with the latest activity on a social network the rest of us take for granted. With people becoming more used to rattling off quick Twitter-length messages on the move, it also makes it easier for people to fit messaging Mark into their busy lives.
Written by Matthew Whitehead and Andy Stanford-Clark, with contribution from Mark Alexander (HMP Gartree)
https://insidetime.org/tweeting-prisoners/
-
1st June 2012
Tweeting prisoners by Matthew Whitehead Andy Stanford-Clark with contribution from Mark Alexander HMP Gartree
“When my friend and colleague Mark Alexander was convicted of the murder of his father in 2010 it wasn’t long before I started talking to a friend of mine to work out how we could increase Mark’s ability to communicate with the outside world. Working in the technology industry it’s not long before either of us tries to apply our skills to a given problem. Andy has a long and established history of developing technologies that allow remote devices to connect with the rest of the world. To both of us Mark was just another hard-to-reach source of information and we wanted to make sure he was connected.
Before Mark went to prison he was an avid user of Twitter. By the time he was convicted in September 2010 he had around 100 friends following him. To us Twitter seemed to be the perfect way for Mark to keep in touch with what his friends were up to, and to allow him to remain more closely in touch with people he could longer contact as easily as he used to.
As well as keeping Mark informed, it was also designed to let his community of online friends know more about life in prison. It wasn’t long before it was serving more of a purpose than just letting his friends know what was on the menu that day, how he felt, or how his music practice was going; Mark has been working to clear his name ever since his conviction 18 months ago. As he goes through the process of appeals and his legal team make progress, we wanted Mark to be able to give his friends updates on the case and his campaign.
When Andy and I sat down to work out a way to connect him to Twitter we already had a raft of tools at our disposal. First and foremost we knew we had to have a way of getting messages into the prison. Without this it wouldn’t matter how clever our software was, we’d have to call it a day before we’d even begun. Mobile phones are banned and we knew inmates didn’t have access to email, but we did know about a website called emailaprisoner.com. The website provides a service that allows anyone to write to a prisoner. When an email reaches the prison it’s destined for, it’s printed out and delivered by hand just as if it had been received through the post. We’d both been using the service already to write letters directly to Mark and we decided it would be the perfect way for us to get messages to Mark.
The application we’ve written works by subscribing to the messages Mark’s friends post on Twitter. When messages are posted online they’re received by our software and compiled into a list of messages long enough to make up a complete email. Because the emailaprisoner.com website allows messages of up to 2,500 characters and Twitter messages can be up to 140 characters, each email we send tends to contain 15-20 individual messages. Mark’s friends can also send him messages directly by sending a DM or ‘direct message’ to his Twitter account. Their message gets appended onto the next email and we tag the different types of message so Mark knows whether they’ve been posted on a friend’s feed or sent directly to him.
To allow Mark to reply to messages and post his own updates on Twitter we still have to rely on more traditional means. Every couple of weeks Mark writes a letter to one of us listing the updates he’d like posting. We then type up each message and post it on his Twitter account.
While writing this article about the project we asked Mark if he could sum up the benefits he gets from using the system:
“It keeps me in tune with the fast paced nature of the world I find myself cut off from in prison. I feel tangibly closer to my friends because I get a real sense of their day to day lives and experiences through their updates, whilst in turn I’m able to share my own. In pervading such an extreme environment it brings a whole new dimension to our normal conception of ‘social media’, and offers a real gateway to reality. The impact it has had is enormous.”
We hope that our software will allow Mark to stay in touch more closely with his friends and to keep up to date with the latest activity on a social network the rest of us take for granted. With people becoming more used to rattling off quick Twitter-length messages on the move, it also makes it easier for people to fit messaging Mark into their busy lives.
Written by Matthew Whitehead and Andy Stanford-Clark, with contribution from Mark Alexander (HMP Gartree)
https://insidetime.org/tweeting-prisoners/
Tweet-a-Prisoner: Social Media and Prisoners Posted by clarehooper
A friend of mine called Mark Alexander is in prison, wrongly convicted of murdering his father. I know Mark from my IBM days, which means our mutual friends include the wonderful Andy Stanford-Clark and Matt Whitehead.
He’s been in prison for quite some months (good lord, they went fast :/ ), and we’ve primarily been staying in touch via a service called Email a Prisoner. You type your letter into an online form, pay 30p and hit ‘send’. It gets printed in the prison in question, popped into an envelope and delivered to the prisoner, who of course can reply by snail mail.
(Andy and I have been discussing related issues of latency — for example, hearing bad news by phone one day and receiving a happy letter from before that news the next. I believe he may write about this shortly.)
Email A Prisoner is a nice service, and has been complemented by us visiting Mark, and by phone calls between Mark and Andy (in which Andy often ends up relaying greetings!). Still, these communication mechanisms are a world away from the fast-paced world of social media, even if Email A Prisoner does make things easier: as an expat living in the Netherlands, I have much more contact with my online British friends than the offline ones.
So I was absolutely delighted when Andy and Matt implemented Tweet A Prisoner! As you might imagine, it rather does what it says on the tin — Mark has a Twitter account (tap_MA), and with a bit of technological and social jiggery-pokery is able to update it from prison. Andy’s written an excellent explanation of how the system works.
I wanted to share a few words about the relevance of this to my EngD, where I focused on the redesign of digital experiences for non-digital contexts. As Andy observes in his write-up, in this case we were forced to use non-digital media for parts of the system, yet unless you’re Matt (i.e. the ‘social component’ of the system — the person who is so kind as to close the loop and upload tweets written by Mark) that’s effectively invisible. If I didn’t know Mark’s situation (or read the content of his posts!), I could easily assume he just happens not to log into Twitter on a daily basis.
I’ve yet to chat with Mark about his personal point of view, but this certainly gives him a new way to interact with a bunch of people: he can stay in touch with friends and ex-colleagues, and share his experiences more widely. I’m intrigued as to how his visceral experience of Twitter is changed by this rather unusual set-up.
Unsurprisingly, there’s a dearth of work on prisoner engagement and social media, but I wonder if this isn’t a topic for conversation: social media can help prisoners reconnect with healthier environments. Would that now have an impact in areas such as mental health and rates of recidivism?
On a personal note, I was absolutely thrilled when I saw the first set of Mark’s tweets. Thank you Andy and Matt!
https://clarehooper.wordpress.com/tag/twitter/
-
“When my friend and colleague Mark Alexander was convicted of the murder of his father in 2010 it wasn’t long before I started talking to a friend of mine to work out how we could increase Mark’s ability to communicate with the outside world. Working in the technology industry it’s not long before either of us tries to apply our skills to a given problem. Andy has a long and established history of developing technologies that allow remote devices to connect with the rest of the world. To both of us Mark was just another hard-to-reach source of information and we wanted to make sure he was connected.
Before Mark went to prison he was an avid user of Twitter. By the time he was convicted in September 2010 he had around 100 friends following him. To us Twitter seemed to be the perfect way for Mark to keep in touch with what his friends were up to, and to allow him to remain more closely in touch with people he could longer contact as easily as he used to.
As well as keeping Mark informed, it was also designed to let his community of online friends know more about life in prison. It wasn’t long before it was serving more of a purpose than just letting his friends know what was on the menu that day, how he felt, or how his music practice was going; Mark has been working to clear his name ever since his conviction 18 months ago. As he goes through the process of appeals and his legal team make progress, we wanted Mark to be able to give his friends updates on the case and his campaign.
I don’t know if Matthew Whitehead or Andy Stanford-Clark are behind ‘Mark Alexanders’ recent tweets or whether it is another of his mates but for the record I’ve made a formal complaint to the Ministry about the account and it’s content (About me) and will be following it up until it is dealt with
Mark Alexander
Dec 9
The voices of miscarriages of justice victims go largely unheard and ignored. We believe it's important that people like Mark are included in discourse about criminal justice reform, because they have first hand experience of how the system has failed them.
Convicted murderer Mark Alexander’s focus should be on understanding why he chose to murder his father and bury his remains in his back garden.
Mark Alexander
Dec 9
Yes, discussions were had with the MOJ some years ago about the terms and parameters of his use of this account. All tweets are handwritten by Mark and sent out in normal post, subject to all the normal checks.
“All tweets are handwritten by Mark” Are they?
-
Lets look at the facts.
Mark Alexander told everyone who enquired that his father Samuel had gone to stay with friends in London. If this is true who are these friends? If what he claimed was totally false why did he lie?
Mark Alexander sent out Christmas cards to his neigbours in his father's name. Why did he do that?
Mark Alexander took delivery of concrete and had it laid over the exact spot where his father had been buried. Is that a coincidence too far?
If Samuel Alexander had gone off on his own accord why did Mark Alexander not contact the police to report the matter?
Via his twitter account
Mark Alexander
Dec 9
3 cards were sent, more than 3 months after the crime allegedly took place. It is deeply cynical to frame a friendly Christmas gesture as evidence of a cover up.
Student jailed for 16 years for murdering father Sept 2010
“A law student who murdered his father in a bid to escape his "controlling influence" was jailed for life today with a minimum term of 16 years.
Mark Alexander, 22, killed 70-year-old Samuel at the family home before burying his body in concrete in the garden.
Passing sentence at Reading Crown Court, Judge John Reddihough said he accepted that Alexander may have been in fear of his father, but added that, after his death, he acted in a "despicable, callous and sometimes cunning manner".
Alexander remained impassive as he was taken down to the cells.
The partially-burned remains of the former lecturer were only found after neighbours became suspicious of his son and compiled a dossier of information for police.
The residents of Prospect Close, a cul-de-sac in the small village of Drayton Parslow, Buckinghamshire, were concerned they had not seen Egyptian-born Mr Alexander since a garden party in August 2009.
The victim's neighbours were praised in court today for building up a dossier of their concerns and going to the police.
Mr Alexander was eventually reported missing in February this year, five months after it is believed he was murdered.
Officers found his badly decomposed remains buried under mortar and concrete in the garden. His son had attempted to burn parts of the body in a bid to disguise its identity.
During the course of a six-week trial it emerged that Mark Alexander, who was studying law and French at King's College, London at the time, faked his father's signature in Christmas cards as part of a plan to conceal the murder.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/student-jailed-for-16-years-for-murdering-father-2075994.html
-
I notice that in June 2011 Mark Alexander went to the Appeal Court claiming that his ‘cantankerous dad' had provoked him and this should have been put to the jurors.
'However, three senior judges, sitting at London’s Court of Appeal dismissed the claim as ‘speculation’ and upheld the conviction. Mr Justice Walker told the court Samuel Alexander used ‘brutal and callous treatment’ in bringing up his son after the boy’s mother left. He said the father was proud that Mark was reading English and French law, and told neighbours his son planned to study at Paris’ prestigious Sorbonne University in his third year. But the court heard Alexander wanted to change his course and live with his girlfriend in London.'
This suggests that Mark Alexander has now accepted his fate and is introducing excuses for his behaviour. This is not the actions of an innocent man but a guilty man now pleading mitigating circumstances.
Read more at: http://www.bucksherald.co.uk/news/crime/killer-provocation-claim-thrown-out-1-2809130
In response to the above, via twitter
Mark Alexander
Dec 9
That is an inaccurate assumption. The Court were asked to consider formal justice in respect of the options left to the jury (Murder, Manslaughter, Provocation), irrespective of the defendant's testimony. No fresh evidence was available at that time. Now there is.
-
I don’t know if Matthew Whitehead or Andy Stanford-Clark are behind ‘Mark Alexanders’ recent tweets or whether it is another of his mates but for the record I’ve made a formal complaint to the Ministry about the account and it’s content (About me) and will be following it up until it is dealt with
This matter was settled a long time ago:
Winter 2013 Edition of the Prisoners' Advice Service Magazine on Prisoner Rights (Issue #65)
http://www.prisonersadvice.org.uk/information/bulletin/ (http://www.prisonersadvice.org.uk/information/bulletin/)
Prisoners’ Use of ‘Social Networking Sites’
The Prisoners’ Advice Service recently took up the case of a prisoner ‘X’, who had been refused permission to send out content to a personal Twitter ac-count. X was using the Twitter account to raise awareness of and support for his campaign against conviction. Friends in the community were managing the Twitter account and uploading X’s contributions: he did not have direct access to the account himself.
In refusing X permission, the prison re-lied on section 12.11 of PSI 49/2011 Prisoner Communication Services, which provides in mandatory terms that, “Prisoners must not be permitted to access or contribute via a third party to any social networking site while in custody.”
PAS argued that X was using Twitter as a micro-blogging platform rather than a social networking site, and the prohibition in section 12.11 conflicted with section 11.3 (j) (iii) of PSI 49/2011, which states:
11.3 Correspondence may not contain the following:
In addition to restrictions on access to the media (see PSI 37/2010 Prisoners’ Access to the Media), material which is intended for publication or use by radio, television or the internet (or which, if sent, would be likely to be published or broadcast on these media channels) if it:
(iii) is about the prisoner's own crime or past offences or those of others, except where it consists of serious representations about conviction or sentence or forms part of serious comment about crime, the criminal justice system or the penal system. [emphasis in bold added]
PAS further argued that the ban constituted a breach of X’s right to freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR:
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
Article 10 does not provide an absolute right to freedom of expression, but any restriction of this right must be justified on Article 10(2) grounds. X was willing for the content he submitted to his Twitter account to be subject to prior checking by the prison (as is routine with out-going communications), and PAS submitted the ban was therefore neither necessary nor proportionate.
The Policy Lead at the Equality, Rights and Decency Group of NOMS, advised the prison that X could contribute mate-rial to his Twitter account for the purpose of making serious representations about his conviction, subject to the prison checking the content of his communications to ensure they did not breach the restrictions placed on the contents.
This case, and that of prisoners such as Ben Gunn, who fought for and gained permission to have a blog while in custody, illustrates that section 12.11 of PSI 49/2011 should not be read too strictly. Sites such as Facebook and Twitter, which are often characterised as social networking sites, may have other purposes. If a prisoner wishes to contribute to a web based site for the purpose of making serious representations about their conviction or sentence, or serious comment about crime, the criminal justice system, penal system – or indeed any other issue – should apply to the prison for permission to do so and seek legal advice if their request is refused.
-
This matter was settled a long time ago:
Winter 2013 Edition of the Prisoners' Advice Service Magazine on Prisoner Rights (Issue #65)
http://www.prisonersadvice.org.uk/information/bulletin/ (http://www.prisonersadvice.org.uk/information/bulletin/)
Who was it settled with exactly?
According to the Briefing and Correspondence team of Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service and after HMPPS Digital Media Investigation Unit carried out an authorised internet investigation re convicted murderer Mark Alexander’s twitter it’s been claimed the account is fully controlled by a third party ?
Will be interesting to see where this leads especially given the Briefing and Correspondence team state it is not the position of the MoJ to intervene in communications between members of the public on public forums
-
Prisoners’ Use of ‘Social Networking Sites’
The Prisoners’ Advice Service recently took up the case of a prisoner ‘X’, who had been refused permission to send out content to a personal Twitter ac-count. X was using the Twitter account to raise awareness of and support for his campaign against conviction. Friends in the community were managing the Twitter account and uploading X’s contributions: he did not have direct access to the account himself.
In refusing X permission, the prison re-lied on section 12.11 of PSI 49/2011 Prisoner Communication Services, which provides in mandatory terms that, “Prisoners must not be permitted to access or contribute via a third party to any social networking site while in custody.”
PAS argued that X was using Twitter as a micro-blogging platform rather than a social networking site, and the prohibition in section 12.11 conflicted with section 11.3 (j) (iii) of PSI 49/2011, which states:
11.3 Correspondence may not contain the following:
In addition to restrictions on access to the media (see PSI 37/2010 Prisoners’ Access to the Media), material which is intended for publication or use by radio, television or the internet (or which, if sent, would be likely to be published or broadcast on these media channels) if it:
(iii) is about the prisoner's own crime or past offences or those of others, except where it consists of serious representations about conviction or sentence or forms part of serious comment about crime, the criminal justice system or the penal system. [emphasis in bold added]
PAS further argued that the ban constituted a breach of X’s right to freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR:
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
Article 10 does not provide an absolute right to freedom of expression, but any restriction of this right must be justified on Article 10(2) grounds. X was willing for the content he submitted to his Twitter account to be subject to prior checking by the prison (as is routine with out-going communications), and PAS submitted the ban was therefore neither necessary nor proportionate.
The Policy Lead at the Equality, Rights and Decency Group of NOMS, advised the prison that X could contribute mate-rial to his Twitter account for the purpose of making serious representations about his conviction, subject to the prison checking the content of his communications to ensure they did not breach the restrictions placed on the contents.
This case, and that of prisoners such as Ben Gunn, who fought for and gained permission to have a blog while in custody, illustrates that section 12.11 of PSI 49/2011 should not be read too strictly. Sites such as Facebook and Twitter, which are often characterised as social networking sites, may have other purposes. If a prisoner wishes to contribute to a web based site for the purpose of making serious representations about their conviction or sentence, or serious comment about crime, the criminal justice system, penal system – or indeed any other issue – should apply to the prison for permission to do so and seek legal advice if their request is refused.
I see Eric Allison is on the PAS board of trustees http://www.prisonersadvice.org.uk/about/who-we-are/
-
Will be interesting to see where this leads especially given the Briefing and Correspondence team state it is not the position of the MoJ to intervene in communications between members of the public on public forums
Mark Alexander
Dec 9
Yes, discussions were had with the MOJ some years ago about the terms and parameters of his use of this account. All tweets are handwritten by Mark and sent out in normal post, subject to all the normal checks.
Seems to me the Briefing and Correspondence team are discombobulated
-
Mark is taking the HMRC to court on 6th March. He will be appearing by video link. More information on his Twitter account.
-
Seems to me the Briefing and Correspondence team are discombobulated
what was the outcome?
-
what was the outcome?
If you look at the link to his twitter account you will see the outcome. Before it went to court HMRC agreed to hand over all information. This is significant as may give clues to the secret life Sami led and identify any enemies who wanted him dead.
-
Do you think Daisy it is still anticipated that Mark will receive the requested documents from HMRC in April (as mentioned on twitter) or will the virus delay it?
-
Do you think Daisy it is still anticipated that Mark will receive the requested documents from HMRC in April (as mentioned on twitter) or will the virus delay it?
I have no idea.
-
Do you think Daisy it is still anticipated that Mark will receive the requested documents from HMRC in April (as mentioned on twitter) or will the virus delay it?
Hi Matt, we are pleased to say we have received all the disclosure items requested from HMRC, and are now pressing on with follow up subject access requests with other agencies like www.cifas.org.uk (http://www.cifas.org.uk) which hold data about credit rather than tax history. With the Court Order we obtained in relation to HMRC, this will hopefully be much easier now.
-
I have received a phone call from Mark this evening to say that he has posted a letter to me which I should receive tomorrow. He has answered the questions and says that his answers are very long and comprehensive. He has nothing to hide and would like everyone to have as full a picture of his case as possible in order to make up their own minds. As soon as the letter arrives I will start to post answers, probably one at a time to give posters time to respond. He also welcomes more questions. I know a couple were submitted after I had sent the initial ones off so these will be included in my next letter to him.
Did it ever arrive?
-
Did it ever arrive?
Yes and the questions together with the answers were posted way back then. Look at each thread and you will find them.
-
Did it ever arrive?
Hi Vertigo, full details here:
So there are quite a few strands to this. In summary, the new evidence demonstrates:
1) That Mark grew up in an environment of extreme privacy in which he was conditioned into maintaining total secrecy for his father and covering his tracks.
2) That Samuel was in the habit of cutting off contact with people, avoiding detection, and evading calls and letters when it suited him. Samuel could be expected to go away for periods of time without telling anyone where he was going.
3) That other possible motives existed for Samuel's murder
4) That alternative suspects exist (and that the jury should have been made aware of this)
The first two points undermine some of the key arguments made at trial that Samuel's disappearance in September 2009 was 'out of character', or that Mark's perceived failure to 'raise the alarm' was motivated by a desire to conceal his death. Instead, we see how Mark's reluctance to involve authorities, or divulge information to third parties like the neighbours, was reasonable in the circumstances. It would have been the last thing Samuel would have wanted Mark to do. With this new context in place, Mark's behaviour has an innocent explanation.
This was the core thrust of the circumstantial evidence used by the prosecution to argue that Samuel died in September. If this is undermined, then their estimate as to his date of death is unreliable. Remember that all the forensic evidence supports Samuel being alive in October, it was only their use of the circumstantial evidence that brought that forward.
More generally, the basic idea that the jury should have all available information in front of them is really important if they are to reach an informed decision. They didn't know about Samuel's secret life, or evasiveness; and they weren't told about alternatives motives and suspects. From their perspective, Mark was the only person in the world who would have any reason to do this, and Samuel's apparent change of behaviour only pointed to his death. They believed this because information was withheld from them. That isn't just problematic, it is unjust.
To give you a sense of our current understanding of Samuel's life, this is a breakdown of some of the things we have found so far:
1. Sami Fahmi El-Kalyoubi
July 1988 Purchased 2 Prospect Close, Drayton Parslow, Milton Keynes, MK17 0JB (Land Registry, Title Number BM120148).
Jan 1998 Fraudulently obtained mortgage for 101 Elstree Road, Hemel Hempstead, HP2 7QN.
Sept 1999 Fraudulently obtained mortgage for 42 The Square, Marlowes, Hemel Hempstead, HP1 1EP.
Nov 2005 Redirection agreement set up with Royal Mail from 42 The Square, Marlowes, Hemel Hempstead, HP1 1EP.
2006 Aktiv Capital seek to collect debt under this alias from 42 The Square.
May 2006 Registers Fiat Punto, formerly under name of Samuel Alexander, to 6 Bilberry Court, Winchester, S023 8SP (Registration Certificate for OY04 SXU).
Mar 2007 Pursues civil claim in Milton Keynes District Registry Court and Queen’s Bench Division of the High court (Case 6MK00884).
May 2007 Redirection agreement set up with Royal Mail from Flat 6, Bilberry Court, Winchester, SO23 8SP.
Oct 2007 Registers with HMRC for tax purposes.
Jan 2008 Transferred 2 Prospect Close to Samuel Alexander.
April 2010 Inquiries made with SAGA to ensure car.
2. Sami Yacoub
Nov 1987 Registered as Mark's father on his birth certificate, residing at 210 Grasmere Way, Linslade, LU7 2QH.
Nov 1988 Registered at medical practice (41 Connaught Square, London, W2 2HL) with the address 3 Cambridge Court, Sussex Gardens, London, W2 1EX.
March 1989 Putative Mrs Yacoub registered at Norden House Surgery, Avenue Road, Winslow, MK18 3DP using address at 2 Prospect Close, Drayton Parslow, Mk17 0JB.
Oct 1989 Registered on the Aylesbury Vale electoral roll.
Nov 1994 Registered as Mark's father at High Ash CE Combined, Pound Hill, Great Brickhill, MK17 9AS.
Feb 1995 When cautioned for shoplifting, gives this name and address of 6 (rather than No. 2) Prospect Close, Drayton Parslow, MK17 0JB.
March 1995 Registered at The Surgery, 30 Mentmore Road, Linslade, LU7 7NZ using address 2 Prospect Close, Drayton Parslow, MK17 0JB.
April 1998 Registers with HMRC for tax purposes.
Oct 2003 Removed from Aylesbury Vale electoral roll.
Nov 2006 Registers at Dental Practice, 8 – 10 Bourbon Street, Aylesbury, HP20 2RR
May 2010 Letter from 1st Credit Ltd. Collections Officer received at 2 Prospect Close.
3. Sam Jacob
July 1994 Transfers out of medical practice, using address 7 Sandringham Place, Bletchley, MK2 2LW.
April 1995 Registered as Mark's father at Castles County First School using the address 72 Engaine Drive, Shenley Church End, MK5 6BE.
Oct 2003 Applied to Aylesbury Vale District Council for permission to fell trees at 2 Prospect Close.
4. Karl Jacob
Sept 1995 Registered as Mark's father at Alex Campbell County Middle School using the address 34 Great Denson, Eaglestone, MK6 5AU, and naming his putative ‘wife’ Mrs S. Jacob.
July 1996 Registered at Fishermead Medical Centre, Milton Keynes, MK6 2LR with the address 34 Great Denson, Eaglestone, MK6 5AU.
5. Samuel Alexander
Dec 2000 Opened Nationwide Building Society account.
Oct 2001 Registers Mark at medical practice (The Surgery, Valley Green, Hemel Hempstead, HP2 7RJ) using address 101, Elstree Road, Hemel Hempstead, HP2 7QN.
Aug 2005 Registered on the Aylesbury Vale electoral roll.
May 2006 Transfers ownership of Fiat Punto from 2 Prospect Close to Samuel El-Kalyoubi at 6 Bilberry Court, Winchester, S023 8SP.
June 2007 Registers with HMRC for tax purposes.
Jan 2008 Receives ownership of 2 Prospect Close from Samuel El-Kalyoubi.
6. Samuel Kaloubi / Kalyoubi
Sept 1995 Listed by Milton Keynes NHS Trust as alias under address 32 Columba Drive, Leighton Buzzard, LU7 3YN.
Financially connected to Samuel Alexander on Experian credit report.
7. Michael Boshra
Aug 1998 Orders a new central heating system from Homebase.
8. Simon Wahba
May 1998 Books Mark (now known as ‘Andrew’) in for a hospital appointment, under address 3 Chapterhouse Road, Luton, LU3 2JG.
9. Basil Demetrius
June 1999 Registered Mark (now known as ‘Alex’) at Medical practice (Masonic House Surgery, 26 High Street, Buckingham, MK18 1NU) under address Flat 3, 31 West Street, Buckingham, MK18 1HE.
June 1999 Registered with medical practice (Verney House, Gatehouse Road, Aylesbury, HP19 3ET) using address 5 Pond Close, Newton Longville, MK17 0BY.
10. Sam Heller
Sept 1995 Whalley Drive Clinic note Samuel also known by name of Heller.
11. Carlos Fernandez
Nov 1994 Transfers out of medical practice using address 29 Whiteley Crescent, Bletchley, MK3 5DQ.
Aug 1995 Buckinghamshire Child Protection Team note Samuel also known by name of Fernandez.
I wouldn't overstate this, the Judge himself recognised that Samuel had made a reasonable recovery by 2009, and their is some doubt as to the nature of the work that these employees were actually being paid to do.
This is actually a really important observation. The idea that Mark was responsible would have required him to excavate the site in a stop-start fashion over the course of 2 months, between 5 September and 31 October, returning to the crime scene on multiple occasions. This would have been an extraordinarily risky and reckless thing to do. He would have had to avoid being caught on each visit, clean himself up before each return to London, presumably exhausted for the evening ahead, all while running the risk of the body being discovered. The jury never considered the plausibility of such a scenario, and it is markedly inconsistent with the evidence given by Forensic Archaeologist Dr Stephen Litherland on behalf of the Crown, that "the grave was probably not open for a long time before the first layer of [mortar] was poured as there was little evidence of weathering of the sides of the grave or of any wind blow detritus (such as leaves) in its base".
All of this makes the point that this could not have been the act of a single person, let alone an inexperienced one like Mark.