Mark hasn’t lost his appeal. It hasn’t been heard yet. He has been refused access to a journalist who wanted to make a documentary on his case and interview him in prison. This is what the above refers to.
Thanks Matthew, Daisy.
Mark is making progress on a number of fronts at the moment.
1) He and his family have sought the help of an investigative journalist to follow new leads. The Ministry of Justice refused to allow the journalist access to interview Mark, so Mark has taken them to Court. Following an unsuccessful hearing in March, he is currently appealing this decision to the Civil Appeal Court on the basis that the current policy amounts to a blanket ban. Whilst claiming to allow for exceptions to the rule that communication between journalists and prisoners will normally be sufficient, the Ministry of Justice has never in fact made any such exception in the past 12 years. You can read more about this here:
https://www.freemarkalexander.org/voiceless-inside-miscarriage-of-justice-campaigners-take-ministry-of-justice-to-court-over-podcast-ban/2) Thames Valley Police continue to drip-feed us with fresh disclosures, but are currently refusing to release anything pre-dating 2006, including evidence of threats to Sami, previous root-barrier construction work at the house, and evidence of Sami's fraudulent activities. Mark's lawyers are currently negotiating access with CPS, in an effort to hold them to the terms of disclosure already agreed in September 2018.
3) Analysis of Mark's laptop continues apace. There are over 3.5 million files to trawl through not previously disclosed. The data contains invaluable alibi evidence.
4) In the meantime, Mark is campaigning to have the Court of Appeal's 'safety test' reformed, following recommendations from the Justice Committee in 2015 and the Westminster Commission in 2021, which have never been implemented. You can read more about this ongoing campaign here:
https://www.freemarkalexander.org/secretary-of-state-refers-court-of-appeal-safety-test-to-law-commission/His bleatings of innocence are pretty pathetic really.
With respect to certain members of this forum, John and 'Nicholas', who are acting like playground bullies, Mark's family certainly would not agree with your particular views. Publicly goading Mark's mother seems to me an utterly contemptible way of behaving. It is no way to treat the families of those claiming to have been wrongly convicted. I'm amazed that anyone could fail to see the cracks in this case. That you claim to do so can only be a result of your own obstinacy, stubbornness, and lack of empathy. For some reason you seem to have made your minds up about this tragic case many years ago and have closed your minds to the possibility that your provisional views may have been wrong. This is a great shame.
Following repeated harassment, personal attacks, general hostility, and a failure from the moderators to moderate in a fair and unbiased fashion, we have reluctantly decided to withdraw our support from this forum and do not intend to engage with it any further at this stage.
We originally agreed to participate in this open forum in the hope that it would provide a basis for critical analysis of the issues, provide an opportunity for us to clarify common misconceptions about the case, and potentially open up new insights and avenues of inquiry. Many member contributions have been immensely helpful and insightful, for which we are extremely grateful, but there have been a small minority who have not conducted themselves in the respectful manner we had expected.
We welcome cooler-headed members to continue following Mark's family's campaign and progress at
www.freemarkalexander.org and on social media. We are confident that Mark will be fully exonerated in time.
