So the police fabricated evidence and made up a scenario for Julie to follow and then convinced her friends to go along with it - all so they wouldn't be prosecuted for dealing weed? None of them could have thought that highly of Jeremy if they were willing to take on board he was capable of such a crime and as I said before, if they didn't think him capable it is more likely that they had reasons to think so. Also if EP gave Julie a script - why bother including a hit man and why would they choose MM?
Who are the professionals? Everyone at the COA COLP, CCRC, doctors, lawyers and Indian Chiefs, who haven't managed to see through the grand conspiracy (I was going to include politicians - but thought better of it given that the word 'stupid' was involved).
I'm glad you haven't fallen for for the 'call from Nevill' nonsense.
Exactly, you both compared statements and David suggested that they all colluded to come up with a consistent scenario. You suggest that the opposite was true, at least where JM and SB are concerned. I don't think the police are so stupid and to make such a balls up of the statements, which could easily be ripped apart if collusion or consistent lies were present. We can scrutinise every sentence and find fault, but I think we have to consider what significance such similarities are differences make? I think there is something of the drama Queen about JM and that she is capable of exaggerating - that's different from lying.
JB's case is no different from other long running MoJ's that go back and forth to the appeal courts.
Stefan Kizsko"We can find no grounds whatsoever to condemn the jury's verdict of murder as in any way safe or unsatisfactory. The appeal is dismissed". Lord Justice Bridge.
Stephen Downing"The court felt that her evidence was not credible and secure enough to allow an appeal against the conviction".
Sally Clarke"Despite recognition of the flaws in Meadow's statistical evidence, the convictions were upheld at appeal in October 2000."
Guildford Four"Both the Guildford Four and the Maguire Seven unsuccessfully sought leave to appeal their convictions immediately".
"The Guildford Four tried to obtain from the Home Secretary a reference to the Court of Appeal under Section 17 of Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (later repeled) but were unsuccessful.
Birmingham 6"In March 1976 their first application for leave to appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, presided over by Lord Widgery CJ".
"In January 1988 after a six week hearing (at that time the longest criminal hearing ever held), the convictions were ruled to be safe and satisfactory. The Court of Appeal, presided over by the Lord Chief Justice Lord Lane dismissed the appeals".
There are numerous cases where the 'great and good' have made a huge balls up on a grand scale over a very long period of time. They are not all restricted to the judicial system. Probably the best recent example is the global financial crisis of 2008. Other examples are Stephen Lawrence and Hillsborough.
All the above mentioned cases involve wrongdoing and incompetence.
