Author Topic: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber  (Read 21482 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Myster

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #285 on: January 13, 2020, 07:09:43 PM »
Another podcaster jumping on the Bamber tumbril, telling us nothing we don't already know...

https://audioboom.com/posts/7475684-s05e02-the-white-house-farm-murders

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_mYW3l-kvM

Offline Caroline

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #286 on: January 13, 2020, 08:06:40 PM »
Another podcaster jumping on the Bamber tumbril, telling us nothing we don't already know...

https://audioboom.com/posts/7475684-s05e02-the-white-house-farm-murders

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_mYW3l-kvM

It's the bloke from Murder By The Sea.

Offline Myster

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #287 on: January 13, 2020, 08:25:17 PM »
It's the bloke from Murder By The Sea.
Very slipshod... "Nicholas and David (sic) shot in their beds... three shots to one and two to the other (sic again)" and that awful squeaky woman's voice, not to mention those noisy irritating adverts which burst in when you least expect them.

Offline Caroline

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #288 on: January 14, 2020, 01:46:09 AM »
Very slipshod... "Nicholas and David (sic) shot in their beds... three shots to one and two to the other (sic again)" and that awful squeaky woman's voice, not to mention those noisy irritating adverts which burst in when you least expect them.

Wow! Pretty bad research! Unforgivable really!

Offline Nicholas

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #289 on: January 14, 2020, 03:32:54 PM »
Julie Mugford appears to have had a trauma bond with Bamber.

If you listen to her interview here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k96gmbXLoMw @ around 16.30 she says from around Christmas 84 Bamber had talked about poisoning his family and of burning the house down. She goes on to say ‘He used to say things to shock people” these ‘off hand comments’ were narcissistic Bambers psychologically abusive personality traits which Julie Mugford appears to have ‘brushed off’

Trauma bonds and cognitive dissonance tend to override the type of logic needed to get out of a toxic relationship”

https://www.quora.com/Can-cognitive-dissonance-and-trauma-bonding-work-together-to-make-it-difficult-for-a-victim-to-leave-their-narcissistic-abuser

Julie Mugford was in a relationship with a pathological individual; these types of relationships differ from relationships with non pathological individuals

There’s no mention here https://jeremybamber.org/julie-mugford/ of Jeremy Bambers comments to JM about his plans to poison his family or burn WHF down but the CT are presenting clear evidence of Bambers psychological abuse of JM.

Aggression and compliance
‘Emotional abuse is a complex experience. The victim may alternate between passivity and aggression. Sometimes the victim expresses anger and hostility toward other people because of the pent-up anger of having to live with an abusive person and other times he or she may be docile and compliant. This cycle of diametrically opposite behavior can be rapid and seemingly illogical to everyone.

Sometimes the abused victim takes all the negative energy that surrounds him or her and either explodes, becoming aggressive towards others, or implodes and becomes deeply depressed and withdrawn.

The internal turmoil within the victim can lead to out-of-character emotional expressions. Some victims of emotional abuse are very bothered by how they have changed for the worse as a result of being around their abusive partner.

https://www.gosmartlife.com/emotional-abuse-in-marriage/what-emotional-can-do-to-a-person
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #290 on: January 14, 2020, 05:59:38 PM »
Julie Mugford appears to have had a trauma bond with Bamber.

If you listen to her interview here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k96gmbXLoMw @ around 16.30 she says from around Christmas 84 Bamber had talked about poisoning his family and of burning the house down. She goes on to say ‘He used to say things to shock people”

When JM was asked why she didn’t go to the police before, she explains how the police thought it was murder/suicide and she didn’t think people would believe her.

NGB made a post recently on the Bamber forum regarding JM and the possibility of her having been arrested?

There’s no evidence to suggest she was* but in the Simon Hall case, it didn’t become clear to me that Jamie Barker had also been arrested and questioned under caution by Suffolk police and considered a possible suspect until around the time of the Zenith burglary discovery in 2012/13. It was following this that I recognised Simon Hall and all his previous legal representatives had never requested full disclosure on this fact - either pre-trial nor in the years that followed.

*Someone would have surely got wind of JM having been arrested, one of her friends around the time for example, and spilled the beans before now?

I found it interesting when NGB raised this on the Bamber board and wondered how long he’d considered this to be a possibility?

I don’t agree and think she went to the police voluntarily


« Last Edit: January 14, 2020, 06:07:12 PM by Nicholas »
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #291 on: January 18, 2020, 09:22:57 PM »
Latest News 19.12.19
Statement regarding the White House Farm ITV drama.
“We first became aware of a planned ITV drama about Jeremy’s case in December 2017, and took immediate steps to offer our assistance by contacting Kim Varvell at Production Company ‘New Pictures’, Commissioning Editor Kevin Lygo at ITV and writer Chris Mrska. We were willing to provide access to brand new forensic reports, our team of scientists, the case material, fresh evidence, and Jeremy and his legal team. Our offers were ignored, and we believe therefore, that the drama can only be based on factually incorrect and very out of date material.
Our campaign is not only about proving Jeremy’s innocence, but protecting the memory of his much-loved family who will undoubtedly have their characters dissected and denigrated in order to make sensationalised television. This will not benefit anyone, least of all Jeremy in his fight for justice, but will simply be a money pot for ITV, reaping in millions of pounds from a family tragedy that is still unresolved.
We need to make it clear that the Jeremy Bamber Campaign, Jeremy, and his legal team, do not endorse this drama.
Mark Newby, Jeremy’s solicitor, has written to ITV requesting that owing to the sensitivity in the current legal approaches that have been made to the High Court that the drama at the very least be postponed. Mr Newby of Quality Solicitors Jordans wrote:
“We have written to the producers of the Drama Series and invited them to postpone the broadcast of this series whilst matters are resolved in the High Court . We have intimated that we are concerned that such a drama series by its nature will place a fictitious narrative in the public domain which may be counter productive to the administration of justice in due course.”
We sincerely hope that in the interests of fairness and justice that ITV accede to this request.
09.12.19
The application for Judicial Review against the Crown Prosecution Service.
On 6 December 2019, Jeremy Bamber’s legal team served a Judicial Review application against the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) following their repeated refusal to disclose key documentation to the defence. The decision to take action followed over three years of discussions between Jeremy’s legal team and various Heads of department at the CPS.
The Judicial Review is specific to two defined areas. 
1.     Directions made by the Court of Appeal in 2001/2002 for full disclosure of police and forensic material that have never been complied with. Partial disclosure was made after the appeal concluded, however PII rules at the time prevented this being disclosed to Jeremy and the campaign team. In 2011 this material was finally disclosed and subsequent analysis resulted in a comprehensive schedule detailing exactly what is missing.   This includes forensic documents, photographs and police/scientist/civilian statements. The directions were presented to the CPS with details of exactly what was still undisclosed, yet disclosure has been refused.
2.     Fresh documentary and scientific evidence was provided to the CPS together with a detailed forensic report which set out how we are able to show conclusively that two silencers were seized from White House Farm, that were both forensically examined, and were both found to have blood and paint contaminates on and in them, in different areas, contaminates which increased over time.
The police data base “Holmes” Box reference numbers were provided for the material, as well as the reasons this evidence is important, including the necessity for the defence to establish a complete chain of evidence for the two silencers, and to enable this material to be submitted to the CCRC in as a complete and substantial application as possible.
The claim is now in the hands of the Administrative Court to consider and we will advise, if appropriate, as and when permission for a hearing is granted.

Statement from Mark Newby, Solicitor representing Jeremy Bamber
Jeremy Bamber: Judicial Review against the Crown Prosecution Service
Posted on December 9, 2019
Today the Guardian Newspaper has published an article which confirms that on Friday 6th December Judicial Review Proceedings were issued against the Crown Prosecution Service over significant non-disclosure we can comment as follows:
We have been engaged in an extensive dialogue with the Crown Prosecution Service for sometime as our investigation in conjunction with the team supporting this case has uncovered what appears to be significant evidence supporting the fact that there has been a miscarriage of justice. However in order that we can progress this case further essential further disclosure is required which has been set out to the Crown Prosecution Service in precise terms.
It is disappointing that the CPS has chosen not to engage with that process and accordingly there is no alternative but to pursue that judicial review , particularly in circumstances where it appears that this may demonstrate that a misleading position was placed before the jury in relation to the forensic evidence .
We do not propose to comment further upon the matter whist judicial review proceedings are underway. We are aware that this case gives rise to huge media interest, but we would recommend caution whilst proceedings are underway in view of the consequences to this litigation and any future appeal.
Read a statement from Jeremy Bamber here
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update: 19.10.19
New evidence further supports Jeremy's 3.36 call to the police made 10 minutes after his father's at 3.26, reported in the Mirror today online, and on the Front page and double page spread of the print edition. To view the evidence found in 2010 on the call logs alongside the lastest evidence click here. There is also a video explaining the issue from 2010 here.
Read the statement from, Jeremy's solicitor, Mark Newby here
This comes after the Guardian reported that the jury did not know that the blood found in the sound moderator, which apparently matched the group of Sheila Caffell, also matched estate beneficiary Robert Boutflour. In 2002, at the last Appeal, it could not be proven that Sheila's DNA was ever in the sound moderator.
Update 03.07.19
Jeremy Bamber's lawyer, Mark Newby, is currently in an ongoing discussion with the CPS regarding the non-disclosure of key evidence. At the time of the trial the Defence did not know that there was more than one sound moderator seized by police. One came from the relatives (later estate beneficiaries) who found the moderator at the house days after the police had finished their work. The other was probably taken by police from the house before the end of their scenes of crime work. It is impossible to tell the difference between them at various times, but disclosed paperwork shows that there were two moderators being examined on the same day, each with different contaminates and having different characteristics. This means that we can be certain there were two.
A new forensic report has been given to the CPS which supports this evidence together with a legal a request for disclosure of all chain of evidence material. The report also brings into question the integrity of the police forensic examinations. These moderators (silencers) were swapped and used interchangeably by police. Furthermore, it is impossible to know which one was examined for the 2002 Appeal in which there was no DNA from Sheila Caffell obtained, but there was DNA from an unidentified male. There is a possibility the DNA came from one of the Bamber estate beneficiaries, Robert Boutflour, who had an identical blood group to Sheila. The trial court was not told about this simple fact, even when the jury asked if Robert Boutflour and the beneficiaries had financial motive to lie.
This issue was recently reported in the Guardian by Eric Allison and Simon Hattenstone.
https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/case

Convicted rapist and murderer Liam Reid argued similar to Bamber and that of his legal team and supporters in 2018

He is arguing that the show could present a "real risk of prejudging matters or issues that are to be imminently before the courts especially in the event that [Reid's] appeals are allowed in whole or part thereby resulting in a retrial".

"I have always maintained my innocence in relation to the Christchurch matter and the Dunedin matter," Reid said in an affidavit.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11989704
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

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

Offline Nicholas

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #293 on: January 21, 2020, 06:52:58 PM »
Jeremy Bamber's chilling cruelty towards animals when he was just a child exposed

When he was still a child, Bamber was often cruel to small defenceless animals.

James' son, Robert, has chilling memories of the young Bamber.

He said: "He could be very cruel to animals and he used to take great delight in throwing stones at waterhen chicks and hitting farm animals with sticks."

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jeremy-bambers-chilling-cruelty-towards-21272154.amp?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar&__twitter_impression=true
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #294 on: February 06, 2020, 11:13:57 AM »
🎀 Michelle Diskin Bates 🎀
@Michelle_Diskin
I won’t back a claim unless I can see the case evidence...there is none linking Robin to his wife’s murder...but much pointing away - towards other hands. The murderer is walking free, and may even have killed again


I cannot get away from the fact that Michelle (nee Diskin) Bates apparent values appear to conflict with her behaviours, which in turn would be suggestive of moral duplicity?

At the bottom of this blog https://jeremybamber.blogspot.com/2016/08/justice-is-never-served-by-conviction.html

It’s says,

Article in The Justice Gap by Michelle Bates
Posted by Jeremy Bamber at Thursday, August 04, 2016


The article was published 13th Feb 2015 here https://www.thejusticegap.com/innocent-innocent-enough/

At the end of the article Michelle Diskin Bates states,

Surely the state has a moral duty to correct its wrongs and to reinstate that which was wrongly taken away?”

Michelle Diskin Bates should consider her own ‘morals’ before making demands of others.

When does she plan to ‘correct’ her own wrong-doings??

For example,

it’s been pointed out to her numerous times nighttime TV didn’t exist in 1985 yet she chooses to continue to attempt to deceive others. Why? We know she ‘lurks’ on this forum by her own admissions.

(Her ‘Not innocent enough’ petition received a total of 354 signatures https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/not-innocent-enough-unlawful)

People who value morality and make it a part of their identity are less likely to be hypocritical

‘Hypocrites are likely to gain motivation from a desire to look good, more than an internal desire to satisfy personal goals.

‘Narcissists, either by nature or as the result of fame (Infamy), have a greater sense of entitlement and therefore are more likely to excuse themselves for their failings.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201603/5-ways-spot-the-hypocrites-in-your-life

Why is Michelle Diskin Bates choosing to be morally duplicious?

The idea of doubleness is at the core of duplicity. Duplicity comes from a Latin word meaning "double" or "twofold," and its original meaning in English has to do with a kind of deception in which you intentionally hide your true feelings or intentions behind false words or actions. If you are being duplicitous there are two yous: the one you're showing and the one you're hiding. And—key to the idea of duplicity—you're hiding that you in order to make people believe something that's not true.

The word is found in many works of literature, including the Bible:


The integrity of the upright guides them, but the unfaithful are destroyed by their duplicity.
— Proverbs 11:3 (New International Version)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/duplicity

Michelle Diskin Bates on the Bamber case,

‘No, I and the many others do NOT make things up in this case, everything is taken from documents”.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Michelle_Diskin/status/1225160056238460931
« Last Edit: February 06, 2020, 12:28:20 PM by Nicholas »
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #295 on: February 06, 2020, 12:50:31 PM »
Jeremy Bamber lawyers challenge CPS over withheld evidence By Eric Allison and Simon Hattenstone

Lawyers representing Jeremy Bamber, who is serving a whole life sentence for killing his adoptive parents, sister and her six-year-old twin boys in 1985, have launched a high court challenge to the Crown Prosecution Service for its failure to disclose evidence they say would undermine the safety of his conviction.

But a week before the trial, the head of biology at Huntingdon Forensic Science Laboratories wrote to Essex police in a letter seen by the Guardian last year, saying the blood on the silencer “could have come from Sheila Caffell or Robert Boutflour”, another relative. That letter was not disclosed to the defence.

Last year, the Guardian reported on a letter sent to Bamber’s lawyers from the then head of special crime at the CPS on this issue. It stated that while he did not believe there was evidence of a second silencer, if any emerged it “would significantly undermine the case against JB [Jeremy Bamber] and any material supporting such a possibility would plainly be material which casts doubt on the safety of the conviction.”

Earlier this year a peer-reviewed report compiled by Phillip Boyce, a ballistics expert at Forensic Equity Ltd, was sent to the CPS suggesting there had been more than one silencer. Boyce, who has advised governments and the United Nations on ballistics, concluded that, based on differing groove patterns, sizes and exhibit numbers, “at least two sound moderators had been examined in this case”. Boyce believes both silencers contain blood that could belong to either Caffell or Robert Boutflour. The CPS has dismissed his findings, without employing its own expert to study his report, as is the protocol.

Mark Newby, a solicitor advocate from QualitySolicitors Jordans, which represents Bamber, said: “It is disappointing that the CPS has not agreed to provide material that is needed by an independent expert to support the overwhelming inference that a second silencer was examined during the police and forensic science service investigations. We hope that this can quickly be resolved so that the expert can get on with his job and the case can be put back before the court of appeal in order to correct this very grave miscarriage of justice.”
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/08/jeremy-bamber-lawyers-challenge-cps-over-withheld-evidence

How embarrassing

Interesting to see a solicitor, who I presume isn’t involved directly with the case, to be seen to openly support Bamber

dean kingham
@deankingham
A very good 2018 for the @SwainSolicitors prison law team. Highlights include cat a downgrades, convictions quashed, innocent people released by the Parole Board, accused individuals found not guilty. 2019 will be better. I have a feeling Bamber and Stone will have good years.
1:04 AM · Jan 1, 2019·Twitter for iPhone

https://mobile.twitter.com/deankingham/status/1079906216472653824

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

I’ve already made it clear I don’t know about this case.” (1:25 PM · Dec 9, 2019)

Does he know the ins and outs of the Bamber case or is he ‘blindly supporting’ the campaign?

Well known to Parole Board members, Dean is highly experienced in challenging prison authorities. His reputation of being fearless in arguments to the board has led to him to represent some of the most high profile prisoners. Dean is passionate about miscarriages of Justice and is committed to assisting prisoners who maintain their innocence. He writes articles for organisations assisting those whom maintain their innocence.
https://www.associationofprisonlawyers.co.uk/employees/dean-kingham/

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/

Dean Kingham, Head of Prison Law, Public Law and Crime, Swain & Co. Parole Board Lead for the Association of Prison Lawyers (APL):
“Swain and Co specialise in dealing with prisoners stuck in the system, high profile, and complex cases. We instruct psychologists regularly and require forensic psychologists at the forefront of their profession. We have always found Tully Forensic Psychology to be leaders in the world of forensic psychology. The team is lead by Dr Ruth Tully, whom has developed psychological research applicable to prisoners and rehabilitation. The reports are of great assistance to us in arguing that prisoners should move through the system, progress to open conditions, or be released. The team often face very probing questions from The Parole Board and are able to explain and develop the evidence within their reports extremely well. We have found the assessments and reports to be key components in arguing clients’ applications to The Parole Board. They are leaders in the world of forensic psychology.

https://tullyforensicpsychology.com/testimonials/

“On Monday 10th December, I attended the House of Commons at the Progressing Prisoners Maintaining Innocence (PPMI) Annual Lecture, ‘Is the Parole Process Fit for Purpose? Releasing Safe Individuals Promptly.’ This event was attended by guest speakers, Dean Kingham, Head of Prison and Public Law at Swain & Co, Ruth Tully, forensic psychologist from Tully Forensic Psychology and two ex-prisoners, Chris and Cookie.
It was a thought-provoking evening and it was great to meet so many passionate people who work helping those wrongly convicted, and as well many inspiring families who have been gravely affected by miscarriages of justice.
Dean Kingham was the first to answer the ever-important question, ‘Is the Parole Process Fit for Purpose?’ Dean was instructed by Mr Worboys in the Judicial Review, is in front of the parole board daily at oral hearings, and has been involved in many poignant cases in the past few years, namely The Queen (on the Application of Wakenshaw) v The Secretary of State for Justice, where the High Court made a declaration that the Justice Minister had interfered with the independence of the parole board.   This is a clear example of how the Justice Minister has no respect for constitutional values that are deep rooted in this society, namely the doctrine of the separation of powers and Dicey’s Rule of Law.
Dean stated in reply to the question,
“It is not about whether the parole board is fit for purpose for those maintaining innocence, the question is whether the Secretary of State for Justice is fit for purpose.”
Dean exclaimed that although we are not where we would ideally like to be with the parole board and how it effects those who maintain innocence, improvements have been made and the parole system is better than it used to be, in that the likes of HORIZON and KAIZEN are now offered as offending behaviour courses, where one will not have to discuss the index offence. Ultimately however, the problems of the system seem to always fall back into the Justice Minister’s hands, and problems with parole are the same. When one is recommended for open conditions by the parole board, the Secretary of State inevitably has the final decision, which in a case we worked on recently was turned on us negatively.
Dean spoke at length about the troubles with progressing those who are category A, and the issues with the category A team in that they essentially penalise those who maintain innocence. Dean also discussed the major cuts on probation and the effect that this has had on the parole process itself, and moreover discussing that HMPPS in its entirety completely misunderstand maintaining innocence. Often it is naturally assumed that maintaining innocence equates to risk, but it has been evidenced that maintaining innocence is often a protective factor.
It was also mentioned that despite the slight dip in release rates post-Worboys, release rates have in fact gone up, and the number of oral hearing have rocketed, given the rulings in Osborn, Booth and Reilly. Only today did we at Swain and Co get a release decision for someone maintaining innocence.
On a final note, Dean mentioned the cost of keeping people incarcerated… £40,000-£60,000 per year, and £70,000 for those in the high secure estate. Thus, he detailed how necessary it was to progress those in prison to be able to have their risk managed in the community, and moreover the importance of progressing prisoners maintaining innocence.
Following on from Dean, Ruth Tully, a forensic psychologist of Tully Forensic Psychology, discussed the linked with psychology and progressing prisoners maintaining innocence. Ruth is an independent psychologist who often creates psychological reports of offenders who go in front of the parole board, at the instruction of solicitors representing them. An independent psychological assessment is an assessment by a psychologist who is independent of the system that detains them, and an assessment which is conducted by those who will present their truthful professional opinion of the offender.
Ruth depicted an often-common situation in which a prisoner may have had a very bad experience of prison psychology, and how that will often affect their engagement with psychology in general. Ruth clearly stated that the relationship between denial and increased risk is objectively unclear, and that denial doesn’t necessarily increase risk - the research is inconclusive overall.  Ruth also spoke at length at about enabling a good rapport with offenders to be able to complete a full assessment of them, and this involves progressing those who maintain innocence, who often do not want to discuss the index offence they maintain they have never committed. Psychology often involves discussing the index offence, but an understanding of their stance and their view that they have never been involved in that, will improve the quality of report writing.
Offending behaviour courses are often ‘sold’ as being the only way to reduce risk in many prisons, however, Ruth discussed that offending behaviour work is not the only pathway to progression and thus a reduced risk of serious harm.
The event then heard from Chris, who was released 6 weeks ago after spending 20 years incarcerated for Joint Enterprise. The injustice of Joint Enterprise is well known, from the old case of Derek Bentley to the most recent case of Laura Mitchell and is brought to public knowledge and fought against daily by the wonderful grassroots campaign that is JENGbA.[/i]
Read more here: https://www.swainandco.com/prison-law/progressing-prisoners-maintaining-innocence-annual-lecture-10th-december-2018-at-the-house-of-commons/

He uses a number of studies he has on denial/maintaining innocence, age on risk and the limitations to assessment such as the Risk Matrix 2000.

Dean is passionate about miscarriages of Justice and is committed to assisting prisoners who maintain their innocence. He writes articles for organisations assisting those whom maintain their innocence. Dean was asked to attend the Innocence Network UK 2011 annual meeting entitled, Investigating a claim of Innocence:  Going beyond a desktop review and be a guest speaker.
https://www.swainandco.com/team-view/dean-kingham/
« Last Edit: February 06, 2020, 04:03:21 PM by Nicholas »
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #296 on: February 06, 2020, 03:37:06 PM »
Jeremy Bamber lawyers challenge CPS over withheld evidence By Eric Allison and Simon Hattenstone

Lawyers representing Jeremy Bamber, who is serving a whole life sentence for killing his adoptive parents, sister and her six-year-old twin boys in 1985, have launched a high court challenge to the Crown Prosecution Service for its failure to disclose evidence they say would undermine the safety of his conviction.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/08/jeremy-bamber-lawyers-challenge-cps-over-withheld-evidence

In January 2018 the Independent published an article on the Worboys case, the header read,

John Worboys: Black cab rapist's victims to launch own legal challenge to stop release after Government drops efforts

Matt Stanbury, a barrister specialising in prison law, cautioned that it will be difficult for any party to bring a judicial review without being able to see the reasons for the Parole Board’s decision.

Under current rules, which could be changed, it is not able to disclose any of the evidence used or testimony from a hearing where Worboys was interviewed.

“The worry on the part of those who appear at parole hearings regularly is that the intense scrutiny of this decision will make the board more cautious in the future, and that it may be less willing to release people who might otherwise have been given a chance,”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/john-worboys-latest-updates-prison-release-black-cab-rapists-judicial-review-legal-challenge-victims-a8168656.html

but in March 2018 the Judicial Review succeeded

JUDICIAL REVIEW CHALLENGE TO WORBOYS RELEASE SUCCEEDS – CASE REMITTED TO PAROLE BOARD FOR FRESH DECISION. PAROLE BOARD RULE 25 ULTRA VIRES
https://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/judgments/judicial-review-challenge-worboys-release-succeeds-case-remitted-parole-board-fresh-decision-parole-board-rule-25-ultra-vires/

Matt Stanbury
Re: Charles Branson now known as Charles Salvador

Britain’s most notorious prisoner launches legal challenge to have parole hearing held in public

The challenge is being brought by the same legal team, Dean Kingham together with barrister Matt Stanbury of Garden Court North, behind the recent challenge over concerns about the independence of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (the Gary Warner case – as reported on the Justice Gap here).

The government counters that open justice requirements are met by the possibility for a parole board to allow for observers and for a summary of a decision to be published. That falls ‘significantly short’ of what would be expected under the principles of open justice, the prisoner’s lawyers argue.

A post-Worboys government review considered the possibility of some hearings being heard in public. It concluded that concerns over public access could ‘compromise the confidence of witnesses and panel members to be as open and candid as a closed hearing allows’ and that safety and privacy concerns might ‘undermine the ability of prisoners to resettle successfully and safely’.
https://www.thejusticegap.com/britains-most-notorious-prisoner-launches-legal-challenge-to-have-parole-hearing-held-in-public/

It appears, unlike in the Worboys case, no barrister - or any other ‘expert’ has been prepared to stick their head above the parapet to give their opinion on the likely outcome of Bamber’s JR

Wonder why?
« Last Edit: February 07, 2020, 12:31:24 AM by Nicholas »
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #297 on: February 06, 2020, 04:57:28 PM »
According to Jon Robins who runs the justice gap, in 2012 he stated,

“The Bamber case has attracted a lot of hours of lawyers’ time and a great deal of that time will be given pro bono. Bamber is the exception to the rule, why? Because he is appealing.

Bamber has been represented by a phalanx of impressive lawyers, from Geoffrey Rivlin QC to Michael Turner QC. Most recently he was represented by Simon McKay, a solicitor advocate, pro bono.

Ever since his first trial he has had followers in two camps: the first, intrigued by him due to his charm and looks, the second because his case is factually and legally interesting.

https://www.thejusticegap.com/wrongly-accused-losing-your-appeal/

Jon Robins also published the following,

Bamber campaign calls on ITV to pull ‘dangerous drama’
According to Bamber’s lawyer, Mark Newby said that they were concerned that that the drama would ‘place a fictional narrative in the public domain at a time when we have a looming High Court Challenge against the CPS’.

But more importantly we’re looking after that to get this case back before the Court of Appeal. Programmes such as this don’t just get aired and disappear they stay in the mind of the public and are available online. The actor playing Bamber in interviews refers to creating him from his imagination yet there is a danger the general public will assimilate the real Jeremy Bamber as being this actor.’
https://www.thejusticegap.com/bamber-campaign-calls-on-itv-to-pull-dangerous-drama/

In other words Mark Newby seems to be suggesting we ‘the general public’ don’t have the ability to separate fact from fiction.

« Last Edit: February 06, 2020, 07:32:56 PM by Nicholas »
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #298 on: February 06, 2020, 10:04:25 PM »
According to Jon Robins who runs the justice gap, in 2012 he stated,

“The Bamber case has attracted a lot of hours of lawyers’ time and a great deal of that time will be given pro bono. Bamber is the exception to the rule, why? Because he is appealing.

Bamber has been represented by a phalanx of impressive lawyers, from Geoffrey Rivlin QC to Michael Turner QC. Most recently he was represented by Simon McKay, a solicitor advocate, pro bono.

Ever since his first trial he has had followers in two camps: the first, intrigued by him due to his charm and looks, the second because his case is factually and legally interesting.

https://www.thejusticegap.com/wrongly-accused-losing-your-appeal/

Jon Robins also published the following,

Notice how Jon Robins has chosen to leave out the infamous Giovanni di Stefano https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21969624 nor has he included how Bamber’s campaign first got off the ground - no mention of Mike Tesco ?

Bamber campaign calls on ITV to pull ‘dangerous drama’
According to Bamber’s lawyer, Mark Newby said that they were concerned that that the drama would ‘place a fictional narrative in the public domain at a time when we have a looming High Court Challenge against the CPS’.

But more importantly we’re looking after that to get this case back before the Court of Appeal. Programmes such as this don’t just get aired and disappear they stay in the mind of the public and are available online. The actor playing Bamber in interviews refers to creating him from his imagination yet there is a danger the general public will assimilate the real Jeremy Bamber as being this actor.’
https://www.thejusticegap.com/bamber-campaign-calls-on-itv-to-pull-dangerous-drama/

In other words Mark Newby seems to be suggesting we ‘the general public’ don’t have the ability to separate fact from fiction.

I have never found Bamber or indeed his case ‘appealing’

‘Factually and legally interesting’ it is not

There are more than ‘two camps’ and one of those includes the majority of the British public who believe Bamber guilty and a psychopath

But you won’t hear a lawyer talk about psychopathy and it’s rare when a journalist calls it like it is as Bob Woffinden did when he referred to Bamber as a psychopath - shame he didn’t recognise it in other cases
« Last Edit: February 11, 2020, 05:56:32 PM by Nicholas »
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: ITV Developing A Series Based On The Case Of Jeremy Bamber
« Reply #299 on: February 07, 2020, 12:33:17 AM »
According to Jon Robins who runs the justice gap, in 2012 he stated,

“The Bamber case has attracted a lot of hours of lawyers’ time and a great deal of that time will be given pro bono. Bamber is the exception to the rule, why? Because he is appealing.

Bamber has been represented by a phalanx of impressive lawyers, from Geoffrey Rivlin QC to Michael Turner QC. Most recently he was represented by Simon McKay, a solicitor advocate, pro bono.

Ever since his first trial he has had followers in two camps: the first, intrigued by him due to his charm and looks, the second because his case is factually and legally interesting.

https://www.thejusticegap.com/wrongly-accused-losing-your-appeal/

Jon Robins also published the following,

Bamber campaign calls on ITV to pull ‘dangerous drama’
According to Bamber’s lawyer, Mark Newby said that they were concerned that that the drama would ‘place a fictional narrative in the public domain at a time when we have a looming High Court Challenge against the CPS’.

But more importantly we’re looking after that to get this case back before the Court of Appeal. Programmes such as this don’t just get aired and disappear they stay in the mind of the public and are available online. The actor playing Bamber in interviews refers to creating him from his imagination yet there is a danger the general public will assimilate the real Jeremy Bamber as being this actor.’
https://www.thejusticegap.com/bamber-campaign-calls-on-itv-to-pull-dangerous-drama/

In other words Mark Newby seems to be suggesting we ‘the general public’ don’t have the ability to separate fact from fiction.

As do Bamber’s years worth of BS; much - courtesy of those he’s ‘conned and groomed’ for these goodness knows how many years (Excluding all those who are of his ilk i.e. Giovanni Di Stefano)

It was Bamber (and his CT) directly or indirectly who put most of the ‘propaganda’ into the public arena in the first place
« Last Edit: February 07, 2020, 12:41:15 AM by Nicholas »
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes