Media reports provided on this forum are for information only.
Endorsement of such material is neither intended nor implied.
* Posters are asked to keep to thread topics where possible
* Libellous or defamatory material will be removed on sight
* Abuse will not be tolerated. Break the rules expect a ban!
Contact > admin@miscarriageofjustice.co
Praia da Luz - Live webcams
Recent Posts
What on earth does all this supposedly prove or disprove?If I had a dog (especially one being trained in tracking) who put her paws up on the wall, I would want to see what was on the other side of it. YMMV.
AlasI counted five paragraphs, not one of which dealt with the procedural problems of F and W's testimony, let alone any other problems with it. Alas, indeed.
BTW a dog finding a body would have been its handler taken the dog over the wall, leading them to where the body was.You have every right to your opinion. If another commenter were to say that your statement was not merely wrong, but worthy of a Billy Madison award, that opinion would also be within his or her right. Neither view aligns exactly with my thoughts.
Donald Finlay was the defence barrister wasn’t he? So of course he would say that wouldn’t he?Are you saying that he was incorrect? if so, please explain.
Most folk who have analysed this case objectively would be utterly astonished if he never did it - that's why he is where he is, has had his numerous appeals rejected and why he'll most likely remain where he is indefinitely.David Wilson, who was a prison governor, thinks otherwise regarding LM. As for the number of appeals, that is a meaningless metric. Todd Willingham lost at least ten appeals, yet in the reality-based community, there is a strong consensus that there was no evidence of arson in his case.
Different case, different set of circumstances, not comparable clearly.Exactly how are they different? Are you saying that it was not ok for the witnesses to have seen Kirk Bloodsworth's picture, but it was ok for witnesses to see LM's"? If so, why?
Hmmm can I just point out that if we haven’t seen JuJ’s testimony we can’t know that the cancellation by JuJ was a lie.Why are you perpetuating these stories if you don’t have the slightest idea what claims her original statements or her court testimony contained then?
Like the rest of us you do not have the slightest idea what claims JuJ’s original statements or her court testimony contained. Of course we do know for certain that you have no proof of several ‘facts’ you’ve relied on.
Seriously indeed - Pulling up yet another lie to boot in an attempt to give weight to air. JuJ's testimony has been read by no one, it has never been transcribed. Exposure of yet another lie from SL & her alias. Inference that some claimed cancellation had the mother lie (nothing to do with the trial of course), with added "of her sons whereabouts" so building on an already existent lie anyway. This claimed cancellation, some tiny excerpt used with zero context as per. What has SL been proven to do? Add her own, building up those lies. Just like her alias did there, again. What has she also been discovered to have been doing? Making up s**t claiming it was said in statements. - There is no credibility in proven liars scraping to claim someone else did. Kindred spirits who care not a jot for the truth.
His mother is his alibi? Seriously?? And yet you set a very much higher bar for alibis in the other case you follow….
As did Andrew Malkinson’s sister even when he was innocent. Your point?You didn’t say it explicitly but your sly implication was clear to anyone with half a braincell. And thank god for Andrew Malkinson’s sister, eh? How many times is that you’ve dragged the poor woman into your posts despite her having absolutely nothing to do with this case?
As to the Jones family I didn’t say that Judith’s lies led to Jodi’s death but it did show her to be less than an honest individual. She obviously was prepared to lie when needed.
On the flip side many legal experts believe that Luke was not given a fair trial.
