Author Topic: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.  (Read 19054 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Fact Checker

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #270 on: March 28, 2019, 09:40:44 AM »
It appears that Sami bought an extra triangular-shaped area of land to the NW containing a long line of conifers, many of which have since been felled and shredded by the present owner.

This land always belonged to the 2 Prospect Close plot, but in the original plans was situated outside the back garden. Sami removed the dividing fence and merged the two bits of land, encircling everything with a line of tall Lleylandi conifers which he planted.

T4 (Ash)?... but that tree wasn't on Sami's property and nowhere near the garage, according to the TPO plan of the former BT Training Centre.

Correct, this large Ash tree (T4) was felled by the Council itself. It was just East of the garage.

That small Hepworth inspection chamber is raised about 3 or 4 inches above the level of the weak concrete base, which suggests that either concrete flags or those Marshalls paviors were meant to be laid on top, presumably by the landscape contractor who never finished the job.  Maybe if you tried to contacted him, he would enlighten you whether they were root barriers or not.  Marshalls or the builders' merchant who supplied those paviors should have a past record of who ordered them, which is normally the person who is doing the work, not the client.

All helpful suggestions. Our biggest problem to date has been trying to identify which contractors and suppliers were actually involved in this site, or indeed any of the other sites (including behind the garage). We have a long list, but very few of the individuals our lawyers and investigators contacted were willing to talk. We are now awaiting copies of Sami's diaries pre-2009 from the police and are hopeful that these will help us identify who he hired for what work.
This account is run by volunteers on the freeMarkAlexander.org team. We welcome healthy debate, but please try to avoid making unsubstantiated or libelous claims. Please excuse us if we do not respond to a post immediately. We may need to conduct further research before we can answer a question fully and this might take some time. All of our posted images are licensed by freeMarkAlexander.org under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Offline Daisy

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #271 on: April 23, 2019, 09:28:25 AM »

All helpful suggestions. Our biggest problem to date has been trying to identify which contractors and suppliers were actually involved in this site, or indeed any of the other sites (including behind the garage). We have a long list, but very few of the individuals our lawyers and investigators contacted were willing to talk. We are now awaiting copies of Sami's diaries pre-2009 from the police and are hopeful that these will help us identify who he hired for what work.

I do not buy this excuse. When it comes to a murder investigation the police are not interested in whether the contractors did “cash in hand” jobs or whether they paid tax. The same goes for the housekeepers. If Mark is really innocent these people would want to help free an innocent man.  One wonders if they know he is guilty.

Online mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1559
  • Total likes: 580
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #272 on: April 29, 2019, 12:36:43 PM »
I do not buy this excuse. When it comes to a murder investigation the police are not interested in whether the contractors did “cash in hand” jobs or whether they paid tax. The same goes for the housekeepers. If Mark is really innocent these people would want to help free an innocent man.  One wonders if they know he is guilty.

If they know he is guilty, why wouldn't they say so?

Would these people realise that the police are not interested in whether they paid tax or not?  If it were me, I wouldn't have realised, and I would have said as little as possible!!!

Offline Nicholas

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #273 on: May 05, 2019, 11:49:58 AM »
I do not buy this excuse. When it comes to a murder investigation the police are not interested in whether the contractors did “cash in hand” jobs or whether they paid tax. The same goes for the housekeepers. If Mark is really innocent these people would want to help free an innocent man.  One wonders if they know he is guilty.

You may want to read up on controlling or coercive behaviour Daisy
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Daisy

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #274 on: May 06, 2019, 08:38:47 AM »
You may want to read up on controlling or coercive behaviour Daisy

I am not sure I understand. What has it got to do with potential witnesses coming forward?

Online John

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #275 on: June 03, 2019, 03:44:58 PM »
I do not buy this excuse. When it comes to a murder investigation the police are not interested in whether the contractors did “cash in hand” jobs or whether they paid tax. The same goes for the housekeepers. If Mark is really innocent these people would want to help free an innocent man.  One wonders if they know he is guilty.

I tend to agree Daisy, the police aren't interested in black market jobbing when a man was murdered. If contractors have been identified then the police have adequate power to question them.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed and an exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Nicholas

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #276 on: December 07, 2019, 12:01:33 PM »
Convicted murderer Mark Alexander opinion on ‘Crime & Consequence’

 http://crimeandconsequence.libsyn.com/website/the-case-for-decriminalisation-mark-alexander

A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #277 on: December 08, 2019, 04:27:24 PM »
The following is from the ‘Progressing Prisoners Maintaining Innocence’ (PPMI) website

Case Studies
In this section, you will find some examples of convicted prisoners who maintain their innocence. We hope that their stories will help you to understand something of the many problems that such people can face.
 
Case of Mark Alexander.
Mark was wrongly convicted of murder in 2010 and received a mandatory life sentence.  He has always maintained his unqualified innocence and both sides of his family are calling for his exoneration.  Mark touches the lives of everyone he meets and his family just want him home.  Having spent almost a decade in prison for a crime he did not commit, each day he is forced to wait for justice is another day wasted.  A charge bargain would have freed him many years ago on manslaughter, but Mark won’t settle for anything less than the truth.

Mark writes, “Given that my ‘risk’ levels are so low, why is the open prison estate arbitrarily restricted to the last 3 years of a sentence?…  ROTLS (Release On Temporary Licence) would not only enable me to demonstrate in practical terms that I am not a ‘risk’ to anyone, but would alleviate some of the injustice of being wrongly imprisoned  by helping me reconnect with the world.  There is no reason why I ‘need’ to be in closed conditions.  In addition, there is no longer any sentence review for prisoners convicted after 2003 who make ‘exceptional progress.”

For more on Mark’s story, and to get involved, please see: http://freemarkalexander.org
http://www.prisonersmaintaininginnocence.org.uk/case-studies/

The committee which’s makes up PPMI is as follows:

Chair:- John Stokes
Vice-Chair: Dean Kingham (Solicitor, Parole Board Lead for the Society of Prison Lawyers)
Treasurer:- Gerry McFlynn (Irish Commission for Prisoners Overseas)
Secretary:- Sue Stephens
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #278 on: December 08, 2019, 04:42:56 PM »
This land always belonged to the 2 Prospect Close plot, but in the original plans was situated outside the back garden. Sami removed the dividing fence and merged the two bits of land, encircling everything with a line of tall Lleylandi conifers which he planted.

Correct, this large Ash tree (T4) was felled by the Council itself. It was just East of the garage.

All helpful suggestions. Our biggest problem to date has been trying to identify which contractors and suppliers were actually involved in this site, or indeed any of the other sites (including behind the garage). We have a long list, but very few of the individuals our lawyers and investigators contacted were willing to talk. We are now awaiting copies of Sami's diaries pre-2009 from the police and are hopeful that these will help us identify who he hired for what work.

What prison is he currently in factchecker?
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #279 on: December 08, 2019, 10:13:05 PM »
This account is run by volunteers on the freeMarkAlexander.org team. We welcome healthy debate, but please try to avoid making unsubstantiated or libelous claims. Please excuse us if we do not respond to a post immediately. We may need to conduct further research before we can answer a question fully and this might take some time. All of our posted images are licensed by freeMarkAlexander.org under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.”

Who belongs to this group of volunteers?
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #280 on: December 09, 2019, 01:38:22 PM »
The following is from the ‘Progressing Prisoners Maintaining Innocence’ (PPMI) website

Case Studies
In this section, you will find some examples of convicted prisoners who maintain their innocence. We hope that their stories will help you to understand something of the many problems that such people can face.
 
Case of Mark Alexander.
Mark was wrongly convicted of murder in 2010 and received a mandatory life sentence.  He has always maintained his unqualified innocence and both sides of his family are calling for his exoneration.  Mark touches the lives of everyone he meets and his family just want him home.  Having spent almost a decade in prison for a crime he did not commit, each day he is forced to wait for justice is another day wasted.  A charge bargain would have freed him many years ago on manslaughter, but Mark won’t settle for anything less than the truth.

Mark writes, “Given that my ‘risk’ levels are so low, why is the open prison estate arbitrarily restricted to the last 3 years of a sentence?…  ROTLS (Release On Temporary Licence) would not only enable me to demonstrate in practical terms that I am not a ‘risk’ to anyone, but would alleviate some of the injustice of being wrongly imprisoned  by helping me reconnect with the world.  There is no reason why I ‘need’ to be in closed conditions.  In addition, there is no longer any sentence review for prisoners convicted after 2003 who make ‘exceptional progress.”

For more on Mark’s story, and to get involved, please see: http://freemarkalexander.org
http://www.prisonersmaintaininginnocence.org.uk/case-studies/

The committee which’s makes up PPMI is as follows:

Chair:- John Stokes
Vice-Chair: Dean Kingham (Solicitor, Parole Board Lead for the Society of Prison Lawyers)
Treasurer:- Gerry McFlynn (Irish Commission for Prisoners Overseas)
Secretary:- Sue Stephens

In relation to the Mark Alexander case Dean Kingham states,

Don’t claim it’s factual. No nothing about the case. Until today hadn’t heard of it. I head the team at Swain and Co prison dept but don’t know every case we have” (sic) 8th Dec 2019
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Fact Checker

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #281 on: December 09, 2019, 02:27:20 PM »
Convicted murderer Mark Alexander opinion on ‘Crime & Consequence’

http://crimeandconsequence.libsyn.com/website/the-case-for-decriminalisation-mark-alexander

The way you say 'convicted murderer' makes it sound like anyone who has a conviction isn't entitled to have an opinion, and doesn't have anything worth saying. Why not just say, "Mark Alexander's opinion on..."? We all know he was convicted, so why announce it loudly at the start of every sentence?

What prison is he currently in factchecker?

All of Mark's contact details are here:

www.freemarkalexander.org/contact

You are welcome to write to him, and he would be happy to meet you on a social visit so that you can actually get to know the guy instead of making ill-informed judgements about him from the comfort of your armchair.
This account is run by volunteers on the freeMarkAlexander.org team. We welcome healthy debate, but please try to avoid making unsubstantiated or libelous claims. Please excuse us if we do not respond to a post immediately. We may need to conduct further research before we can answer a question fully and this might take some time. All of our posted images are licensed by freeMarkAlexander.org under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Offline Nicholas

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #282 on: December 11, 2019, 12:22:21 PM »
In relation to the Mark Alexander case Dean Kingham states,

Don’t claim it’s factual. No nothing about the case. Until today hadn’t heard of it. I head the team at Swain and Co prison dept but don’t know every case we have” (sic) 8th Dec 2019

Dean Kingham “I’ve already made it clear I don’t know about this case.” (1:25 PM · Dec 9, 2019)
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: The murder of Samuel Alexander - Serious Case Review.
« Reply #283 on: December 14, 2019, 08:25:14 PM »
The following is from the ‘Progressing Prisoners Maintaining Innocence’ (PPMI) website

Case Studies
In this section, you will find some examples of convicted prisoners who maintain their innocence. We hope that their stories will help you to understand something of the many problems that such people can face.
 
Case of Mark Alexander.
Mark was wrongly convicted of murder in 2010 and received a mandatory life sentence.  He has always maintained his unqualified innocence and both sides of his family are calling for his exoneration.  Mark touches the lives of everyone he meets and his family just want him home.  Having spent almost a decade in prison for a crime he did not commit, each day he is forced to wait for justice is another day wasted.  A charge bargain would have freed him many years ago on manslaughter, but Mark won’t settle for anything less than the truth.

Mark writes, “Given that my ‘risk’ levels are so low, why is the open prison estate arbitrarily restricted to the last 3 years of a sentence?…  ROTLS (Release On Temporary Licence) would not only enable me to demonstrate in practical terms that I am not a ‘risk’ to anyone, but would alleviate some of the injustice of being wrongly imprisoned  by helping me reconnect with the world.  There is no reason why I ‘need’ to be in closed conditions.  In addition, there is no longer any sentence review for prisoners convicted after 2003 who make ‘exceptional progress.”

For more on Mark’s story, and to get involved, please see: http://freemarkalexander.org
http://www.prisonersmaintaininginnocence.org.uk/case-studies/

The committee which’s makes up PPMI is as follows:

Chair:- John Stokes
Vice-Chair: Dean Kingham (Solicitor, Parole Board Lead for the Society of Prison Lawyers)
Treasurer:- Gerry McFlynn (Irish Commission for Prisoners Overseas)
Secretary:- Sue Stephens
Systemic bias’ for prisoners claiming innocence - J Stokes - Chair PPMI  1st August 2018

“In response to a recent article in Inside Time, Progressing Prisoners Maintaining Innocence (PPMI) has received 145 replies, giving us a more informed picture of the issues faced by prisoners who maintain their innocence. Our correspondents represented a wide range of situations, all security categories and all main types of sentence. Convictions included murder, false imprisonment, GBH, arson, fraud, and conspiracy to supply. Almost two thirds had been convicted of a sexual offence and this reflects a much higher proportion of those maintaining innocence among prisoners with this type of conviction compared to the wider prison population. Stage in sentence ranged from those with many years before tariff expiry or custodial release date, to those expecting release in the near future. Two correspondents were female.

Our findings rely to some extent on our correspondents’ perceptions, but even allowing for this the results indicate a systemic bias, resulting in delays or worse in their progress towards release or, for (non-parole) determinate sentence prisoners, failure to achieve open conditions for the last part of the sentence. These problems are most serious for lifer/IPP sentence prisoners: with half being more than 4 years – in some cases many years – over tariff, while half of those categorised as A-C have already had one or more parole knock-back. All attributed their lack of progress to maintaining innocence.

Many report poor practice by Offender Managers (and Offender Supervisors) with some of these believing, contrary to recent research findings, that maintaining innocence is in itself a risk factor. There were many examples of Offender Managers accusing prisoners of failure to take responsibility for their crime. There were also examples of prisoners being threatened with lack of progress or even with never getting released, if they did not change their position. The continuing use of the misleading term ‘in denial’ was widely reported. Two thirds of our correspondents said they had received negative reports, been threatened with not progressing or been accused of being in denial. They told us about stress, confusion and anger caused by their being repeatedly accused of lying.

More than a third with offending behaviour programmes on their sentence plan are not able to complete them because of maintaining innocence. For these prisoners, progress is likely to be very difficult so long as programmes remain the principal and too often the only way to reduce risk. The problem has been confirmed by a solicitor with extensive experience of representing prisoners before parole boards: “Arguments to parole panels that accredited offending behaviour programmes are not necessary for release/progression have fallen on deaf ears…. In practice, other areas play little part in decision making.” (Dean Kingham, Parole Board Lead for the Association of Prison Lawyers).

On the question of Incentives and Earned Privileges (IEP) levels, the news is better.

A prisoner can be put down to basic where it is judged that they are not fulfilling their Sentence Plan and one third of our correspondents reported that this had occurred at some point in their sentence, but most have been returned to Standard or Enhanced, either because they are low static risk (Risk Matrix 2000 score) and so have had programmes removed from their sentence plan, or because they are able to take the new Horizon and Kaizen programmes which replace the old SOTP (core and extended).

The stories that prisoners have told us reveal failings in the prison service, probation and parole board; on the other hand, there were some reports of Offender Managers and Supervisors being helpful and supportive. This suggests that the problems could be resolved, or at least reduced, if all involved in decisions affecting progression were better informed about maintaining innocence.

PPMI seeks to promote awareness of the problem and to promote constructive changes. Thanks to all who have written to us. We would like to receive information about their experiences from others: please write to us and we will send you a questionnaire – replies will be treated as strictly confidential. The information you provide will help us put forward effective arguments for change.

PPMI, c/o Compass House, 57 Meridian Centre, North Street, Havant, PO9 1UW
https://insidetime.org/systemic-bias-for-prisoners-claiming-innocence/


Systemic Bias Against Prisoners Who Maintain Innocence - 7th Jan 2019

We publish, below, a recent press release from Progressing Prisoners Maintaining Innocence (PPMI), following on a meeting, arranged by them, at the House of Commons on 10 December:

“Some 60 people met at the House of Commons on 10th December to review the problems faced by wrongly convicted prisoners, ex-prisoners maintaining innocence, and their families. Highlight of the meeting was a vigorous discussion about how best to improve the efforts made to recognise their situation in jail, and after release, and how to improve attitudes in the legal profession.

The meeting was attended by solicitors and other legal professionals working in the field, and representatives of groups campaigning for justice for wrongly convicted prisoners, ex-prisoners maintaining innocence and the families of prisoners.   

The meeting opened with four presentations by Dean Kingham (Parole Board lead solicitor for the Association of Prison Lawyers), Dr. Ruth Tully (a forensic psychologist specialising in the field) and two ex-prisoners who had each served a decades-long prison sentence while continuing to maintain innocence.   

A lengthy and robust discussion followed.  The many difficult issues raised included –

·        the patronising indifference of the legal and prison systems to the claims of innocence from convicted prisoners

·        the assumption that every conviction is correct in fact as well as in law

·        the specific penalties inflicted on prisoners for denying guilt, including longer sentences

·        the huge problems prisoners claiming innocence have coping with frustration

·        the need for prison psychologists to accept that some prisoners have been wrongly convicted, and respond accordingly

·        the failure of the system to recognise that there are a significant number of individuals in prison whom are innocent and were wrongly convicted

·        the expensive pointlessness of the CCRC which refuses to investigate possible miscarriages, and claims it cannot do so

·        the dire shortage of legal aid after conviction

·        the failure of the legal system to disclose unused evidence to prisoners.

The meeting concluded that the undeniable evidence of systemic bias against prisoners who maintain innocence needed serious attention at the highest level.

A question posed to Dean Kingham was whether the Parole Board was fit for purpose? He gave a robust talk indicating the faults within our system primarily rest with the Justice Minister, the Ministry of Justice and Parliament. He gave a number of pertinent examples.

Without any specific or justifiable reason, spending years more in prison after expiry of the sentence was vigorously condemned. Furthermore, the consequences of wrongful convictions had proven costly to the public purse, and to the individuals and their families – an aspect of wrongful convictions which ought to concern all tax-payers.

The consensus view of the meeting was the need to address these issues seriously, and at the highest legal and political levels. Such executive action was long overdue.

The meeting was organized by ‘Progressing Prisoners Maintaining Innocence’
https://mojoscotland.org/systemic-bias-against-prisoners-who-maintain-innocence/

« Last Edit: December 14, 2019, 08:30:10 PM by Nicholas »
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes