UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Kevin Craigie and the Joint enterprise murder of Kenneth Rothwell in 1990. => Topic started by: Kevin Craigie on May 20, 2012, 09:04:23 PM
-
Kevin Craigie was charged under Joint Enterprise in 1990. A man was repeatedly hit over the head with a piece of wood by the sole culprit. He was there and states that his sole intention was to stay the night and go to work in the morning. The case went to the Old Bailey and lasted three weeks. On the fifth day the Judge invited Craigie to plead guilty to manslaughter in return for an eight year sentence. Craigie claims he refused as he was not guilty. According to Craigie the jury then twice requested to acquit him but were instructed to convict or acquit both defendants. How could they acquit both, knowing he was responsible for his victims death ! They convicted both, and both received a life sentence.
In 1992 Craigie commenced a hunger strike, in order for the establishment to take notice. The appeal was rejected after two weeks in 1992. His co accused Mark Fuller then confessed to his probation officer that he alone did it and he felt guilty that Craigie had received a life sentence. It went to the CCRC, and they then concluded the Probation Officers account was hearsay! They never even interviewed her. Craigie was released in 2003, and together with his Lawyer Malcolm Hannaford prepares for the next round with the CCRC, then the COA. Craigie states that his goal is to get to the ECHR.
-
Yes that was in Liverpool 2010. Emma Bradley is standing next to me. Her husband Robert Bradley is not guilty, serving life under Joint Enterprise. Sinead is next to her, her husband Kevin life under Joint Enterprise
-
I have two Facebook pages as it is limited to 5000. I changed the Justice on Appeal page after I closed down that charity. I had previously agreed to take over from the original M.D. It's reputation was justifiably appalling. Once all the cases were safe, they were either returned to their owners or with their permission forwarded to nominated or suggested Lawyers. This period also demonstrated to me just how vulnerable people are when in despair.
-
Thanks, if you e mail me I shall send you my summary. It is one of the strongest cases, and after reading hundreds I am entitled to say that objectively.
Someone was trying to impersonate me last year, and I expect this was to try and discredit me. Someone, perhaps the same person or persons was also messaging people saying that I was an alcoholic. Well, perhaps I should be after enduring 22 years of hell, but I'm not. I seldom drink alcohol, as it gives me a pounding headache.
I was initially really excited when I met some of these organisations. The reality is rather depressing, and the consequences can and do directly effect not only the person saying they are innocent but their Families and the entire MOJO movement. Iris Bentley, Ludovic Kennedy and Paul Foot used to correspond with me regularly. It is people like them who inspired me and influenced me to take the direction that I have done. They are all gone now, but their legacy has not.
-
Heaven from Hell
By Kevin Craigie, from insidetime issue April 2011
I was convicted under “Joint Enterprise” in 1991, and received a mandatory life sentence. The entire case against me was littered with blatant lies...
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=heaven%20from%20hell%20inside%20time&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CFgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.insidetime.org%2Farticleview.asp%3Fa%3D931%26c%3Dheaven_from_hell&ei=fl25T_GzOqnE0QXd8YHMBw&usg=AFQjCNF9jcelk6bB90xgVvn2kP5BXcuSwA
-
CARRY ON CAMPAIGNING
I have been directly involved in challenging injustice for decades. It’s not exactly something I wanted to do, but felt morally obliged to do, having being unjustly convicted under Joint Enterprise In 1991.
In the 1990’s I frequently corresponded with people like Iris Bentley, Ludovic Kennedy and Paul Foot. These people excelled as ambassadors of the innocent. They were passionate about achieving justice and knew precisely what they were up against. They relentlessly fought for Dereck Bentley, Colin Wallace and The Bridgewater four as they became known, and many more. They educated and influenced Politicians , media and the public. All of them were eventually acquitted.
Since 2010, I became involved with a few prominent organisations who claimed to be supporting, advising and even representing those who were alleging they were not guilty.
I initially identified with their objectives which seemed similar to mine. However, my perceptions were to be regrettably altered. I attended their meetings and would listen to them invest an entire morning and afternoon discussing not cases as expected , but who was going to be the “Director” the “Treasurer” the “Public Relations Officer” the “ Voice of the people”. An innocent observer would be forgiven for assuming a new government was being formed as opposed to a pressure group. These squabbles could have been dealt with within an hour. The conversations were then dominated by who was doing what to who, and what other “competitive” organisations were doing.
When I objected to a policy of blending clearly guilty cases in with clearly not guilty cases I was overruled. Once some of the already suspicious families realised their son or daughter who should never have been charged, never mind convicted, was being lumped in with someone who contributed to the crime, they quite rightly abandoned ship. Once again they were on their own. When media interest came, the entire arguments were lost as the “Voice of the people” focused on gangs ! The vast majority of Joint Enterprise cases alleging injustice does not and never has concerned gangs. It concerns blatant corruption by the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service and then the courts who allow it to be accepted as fact. The Home Affairs select Committee then decided that they would hear what one of these organisations had to reveal. Their nominated spokespersons were given a unique opportunity to expose the corruption involved, backed by concrete evidence. They could not even answer the basic questions correctly which had one member of the Committee smirking, and another rolling his eyes north west. They then admitted that they had not even read one case, yet were sitting there in The House of Commons “representing” the innocent. The Chairman looked at them with sympathy and thanked them for their attendance. They then inform people in prison serving life sentences that the mission was a success ! I spent two day’s on my written submission, which was accepted by that very committee. I could not attend, as I was quite ill at the time.
The squabbles continue to such an extent, that they disintegrate and inevitably part company to form other separate organisations claiming to be dedicated to assisting the innocent. The same procedure regarding who plays at who continue. The latest one to come into existence quickly attempts to discredit the other two, while the other two eagerly try to discredit the new one. While all this St Trinian’s mentality is going on, their clients patiently await to hear about any developments in relation to their case. What they don’t know is that “their case” is in a pile under the heap of shoe boxes with all the rest, in one of the hallways. Their guardians are all down the local pub debating who goes on the news next. They claim to be assisting 300 plus cases, yet only ever mention two. The young Mother who was asleep in her bedroom while her drug crazed boyfriend killed his teenage victim is never mentioned never mind represented.
Iris Bentley, Paul Foot and Ludovic Kennedy would no doubt be dumbfounded to witness what shenanigans these people get up to in the name of miscarriages of justice.
Today I concentrate on pursuing my own case and just a handful of others. I don’t need to be an organisation to function as I always have done and shall continue to do. When I think back on my experiences with these groups it reminds me of the old black and white carry on films. Hattie Jacques , Charles Hawtry and Kenneth Williams would have played some of these carachters brilliantly. I suppose I could always approach Elstree studios and enquire if they would be interested in producing “ Carry on campaigning”. It would be up for a BAFTA.
-
They invited me to accept 8 yrs for manslaughter on day five. Without hesitation I refused. AFTER the Jury had twice requested to acquit me and convict him THE JUDGE cleared the Jury to their chambers and said this " I have no option but to now seriously consider acquitting both defendants rather than the possibility of a miscarriage occurring ( Craigies convicted) Go down and have a social enquiry report. The Jury who never heard this, then came back to announce a 10/2 verdict. Another five minutes and another injustice would have happened....the sole culprit would have been exonerated. They call this justice !! Three years laterhe admitted to his Probation Officer that he ALONE was entirely responsible. The Home Office told her to "be quiet and go away"
-
http://www.insidetime.org/articleview.asp?a=1207&c=murder_conspiracy__joint_enterprise
-
The devious reptiles rejected our proposal to summon Barbra Parn to give evidence. they said it would be hearsay. We are now preparing to submit further representations to the CCRC. The law of evidence clearly allows her testimony as it is in the interests of justice. If the CCRC reject, Malcolm Hannaford and Edward Fitzgerald Q.C will pursue a Judicial review. If that is rejected we go to E.C.H.R where we are certain I will be exonerated.
-
From: kevincraigie@hotmail.co.uk
To: enquiries@central.crowncourt.gsi.gov
Subject: FW: Transcripts
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:34:16 +0100
From: kevincraigie@hotmail.co.uk
To: enquiries@central.crowncourt.gsi.gov.com
Subject: Transcripts
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:33:05 +0100
Dear Sir/Madam,
Further to our conversation earlier today concerning the case of R V Fuller & Craigie 1991. I am hoping to locate and acquire the sections
Jury's 14 questions to the Judge and his response.
The Judge stating in court that he was now seriously considering acquitting both defendants rather than the possibility of the defendant Craigie suffering a possible miscarriage of justice.
The Judges remarks when sending both defendants to see the Probation Officer as he was contemplating acquittal
Yours
Kevin Craigie
Case 5th March - 23rd March 1991
-
The Jury twice sent Judge Brian Capstick notes requesting to acquit me and convict the sole perpetrator. They were read out in court. We are now in the process of obtaining those notes from the court reporters.
-
Not only did he insist on the Jury convicting both or neither
On day five of the Pantomime he invited me to plead guilty to "manslaughter" in return for 8 years. Without hesitation I rejected his invitation.
-
Not only did he insist on the Jury convicting both or neither, he offered me 8yrs manslaughter on day five of the pantomime in return for 8 years. Without hesitation I rejected his invitation.
I have only read a smidgeon about your case Kevin but the conduct of the judge is appaling to say the least. When I have read all of it I will come back with some queries. 8((()*/
-
Your welcome to ask questions and I shall respond.
As from tomorrow I will not be able to post as much as I would like as I am returning to work. Giving people the advice they need and legal representation. The following week, I start another job assisting the homeless to get back on track. My time will be in demand, but I shall still be around in the evenings when I can.
-
Your welcome to ask questions and I shall respond.
As from tomorrow I will not be able to post as much as I would like as I am returning to work. Giving people the advice they need and legal representation. The following week, I start another job assisting the homeless to get back on track. My time will be in demand, but I shall still be around in the evenings when I can.
Look Kevin, people are asking questions but they aren't getting many answers? Isn't this what you wanted Kevin? EXPOSURE??
Though I doubt this was the sort you had in mind my little rodent troll.