UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Off Topic and General Discussions => Off topic, general discussions and the Wide Awake Club. => Topic started by: jixy on February 28, 2017, 12:10:49 PM
-
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/02/rough-justice-who-looking-out-wrongfully-convicted
A piece by Duncan Campbell. Some cases have been more publicised that others
19
-
I agree Jixy there are many miscarriage of justice cases that don't receive the press coverage of others as in the article you listed the Emma Bates case stands out a mile as do a few others I know about but because they never caught the imagination of the nation or the press .
In the United States, a prisoner who wants to contact a journalist has an automatic right to do so, making investigative reporting much easier should that be a legal right in this country ? .
-
good point..
On the case I am working on there was a ban put in place with regards speaking to any media, having a photo published on social media etc
-
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/02/rough-justice-who-looking-out-wrongfully-convicted
A piece by Duncan Campbell. Some cases have been more publicised that others
Very interesting article---I will have to read the book. I understand that it features the cases of Glyn Razzell and Gordon Park, both of whom I believe were innocent. I hadn't heard of some of the others. I remember Jonathan King as a singer, but hadn't realised he had been accused of anything.
-
The Nicholas Cases
Quoting the inscription on the UK Supreme Court: “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”, Woffinden counters that, historically, since no justice system, even the British, could be entirely perfect, “the occasional error was the price paid by some unfortunate, in order that the integrity of the system could be maintained.” He stresses that recent reform should have been of the trial process rather than the appeals process, with the damage already done.
http://www.insidetime.org/the-nicholas-cases-casualties-of-justice/
-
good point..
On the case I am working on there was a ban put in place with regards speaking to any media, having a photo published on social media etc
Can you say anything about the case???
-
The case has been discussed before but the minute contact with the media was instigated the prison banned it instantly
Strangely though, questions were put and received but only when the reply was posted did they stop it
We got round it by using tippex on the name replacing it with mine and sending it to me. Which I found a bit strange because it was clear the intentions were to pass it on regardless and I did!
There was also a mention of a lie detector test and I spoke to a top man in his field. The prison have done quite a few so im not sure how they work out the rules
Sorry about the 4th edit of this post, my laptop keeps switching off mid sentence! maybe im not meant to talk about it afterall
-
The case has been discussed before but the minute contact with the media was instigated the prison banned it instantly
Strangely though, questions were put and received but only when the reply was posted did they stop it
We got round it by using tippex on the name replacing it with mine and sending it to me. Which I found a bit strange because it was clear the intentions were to pass it on regardless and I did!
There was also a mention of a lie detector test and I spoke to a top man in his field. The prison have done quite a few so i'm not sure how they work out the rules
Sorry about the 4th edit of this post, my laptop keeps switching off mid sentence! maybe im not meant to talk about it afterall
The lie detector test is an absolute joke.... What is the point of it... It cannot be used in a court of law and that should tell anyone how inacurate the information from them is...
People respond in different ways, doesn't mean they are lying or telling the truth... A bit like how people handle grief... we are all individual and it's not possible to cover all the angles of how people respond....
Glad you managed to get your letter through.. It's a terrible state of affairs if people cannot correspond, I can understand that they would maybe read the content, doesn't mean it shouldn't be sent or received...
What happened to basic human rights?? Our system seems at odds with itself... We claim to have the best justice in the world, but we fall far short of being the best....
Is this person managing contact with anyone????
Hope you manage to carry on with your contact with them...Jixy ?{)(**
-
The lie detector was going to be used more to confirm to the supporters of the case and to move on to the next part... appealing to the public for new info
Whatever the outcome of the challenge some definitely got away with murder! that is clear to see. Even me and you would agree on that one! ?{)(**
-
The lie detector was going to be used more to confirm to the supporters of the case and to move on to the next part... appealing to the public for new info
Whatever the outcome of the challenge some definitely got away with murder! that is clear to see. Even me and you would agree on that one! ?{)(**
what type of case is it Jixy? Murder??
-
yes sadly an horrific murder. I can see how someone could have been convicted but how others got away with it I will never know.
Many have been wrongly convicted under Joint Enterprise this is the total opposite
-
I guess I shouldn't comment further when no one knows what I am talking about. Did you look into any of the other cases in the article
Emma Bates is a really interesting case and was good to see the comments about it
-
yes sadly an horrific murder. I can see how someone could have been convicted but how others got away with it I will never know.
Many have been wrongly convicted under Joint Enterprise this is the total opposite
The reason I asked whether it was murder, i was wondering how you would go about appealing for information from the public, that was all... i'm not trying to get you to divulge anything you can't... 8)-)))
It was an extremely interesting article..... Very sad... there has been plenty of miscarriages of justice in this country as well as others.. And the time it takes just to get someone to look... is forever...
Coupled with the fact that many people don't believe the prisoner in the first place, it's a huge uphill struggle...
-
We were advised that it could be a good idea to put an appeal out for witnesses who saw the murderer arriving and leaving the scene
Some parts of the story make sense and others dont. As Daisy is finding out with Mark's case.
The tricky part in this case is that the part that makes at least one person look guilty is the very part they wont budge on and are adamant they are being truthful which in itself it hard
I dont mind answering its just a bit strange for anyone reading when they dont know the case
-
We were advised that it could be a good idea to put an appeal out for witnesses who saw the murderer arriving and leaving the scene
Some parts of the story make sense and others dont. As Daisy is finding out with Mark's case.
The tricky part in this case is that the part that makes at least one person look guilty is the very part they wont budge on and are adamant they are being truthful which in itself it hard
I dont mind answering its just a bit strange for anyone reading when they dont know the case
Things don't always make sense when there are gaps.. And I'm sure you're aware that situations can be read differently by different people...
Are there any camera's in the vicinity??
As for one person appearing truthful and them not budging... Is it like with a lot of cases, they're just happy someones paying for it...
Is there anyway you can find discrepancies in this truthful persons statement/version of events???
Also it's not always a case that someone is lying... if they believe what they say is true, then they are not telling a lie.. But they may be mistaken in what they believe... (or is it the truthful person could be the guilty party??)
Can you question the truthful person????
Or have you seen the truthful persons statement and gone over it with a fine tooth comb??? maybe a nit comb will let something loose...
When I've looked at the case you know I'm interested in... I've always wished i had all the information spread out on the floor so I could get a jolly good look at it... and compare what i know side by side... I find visulizing the material better... I'd have so many piles....lol
Shame I can't look at what your talking about... I'm sure I could find something....lol 8)--))
Edit:... think I've slightly misread it jixy....
Things that appear to make a person guilty are to mainly do with circumstance.... (i'm obviously guessing here because I don't know which case you are refering too..)
For instance... today I was talking with my husband about the OJ Simpson case.... and a lot of the circumstantial evidence pointed to him doing it..... But.. and it's a big But... there is a theory that he was protecting his son Jason...
Now that would add sway to a lot of the circumstantial evidence being weighted at OJ... his Bronco ride.. Jason's reaction when OJ comes into the drive and they are obviously having some sort of exchange.. (But rarely do they show that clip).. OJ's hatred of blood... The glove not fitting... I could go on.. but you get the picture....
Just because something makes someone appear guilty doesn't mean they are... It's trying to see what other context the information you know could be perceived...
For instance they may be protecting someone else.... Are they telling the full story???
Sometimes it will depend on the age of the person.. Young people have loyalties and rarely would tell any authority figure anything...
They also might have been doing something else illegal and didn't want to say at the time...
Also peoples language gets misinterpreted... Accents , slang... what one person means by a word someone else interprets it in a completley different context...
I'll give you an example.... when I was a young girl.. 16 .. saying that I'd been with him, meant that you'd had a dance and he'd given you a kiss at the end of the night...
Now someone who was a lot older than me thought I meant I had slept with this person... I was horrified...lol
But.. I hope you get my drift... sometimes it's language and what people really mean....
Maybe my drivel is of know use.. but as I'm unsure of the context I can only hazzard a guess 8)--))
EDIT.... Another example I remembered of people's interpretation of words is:... I worked with someone who was discribing a disagreement... She said that they were 'kicking off'... And I had seen the same thing...
Kicking off to me meant.. Having a major screamer and threatening behaviour... But to her it was just an argument that meant kicking off.. .. So if we both described this incident to someone ,it could have been interpreted in 2 different ways.. Neither of us would be lying...
-
I am sure you would find some. Yes ive read everything the whole of the trial paperwork photos etc
Other people have been kind enough to read it too and offer advice.
-
I am sure you would find some. Yes ive read everything the whole of the trial paperwork photos etc
Other people have been kind enough to read it too and offer advice.
I'm sure I would Jixy.... Sometimes it's the smallest detail that has the biggest impact, and when reading through such huge documents, it's easy to miss it...
Ok... lets go back to what I know.... (even though we don't agree) ?{)(**
It was the innocuous statement that brought my attention to the whole searches... remember, the 2 searches that where about weather... No one took any notice....
So maybe in your case there is a little simple statement that holds the key, sitting there being overlooked because it looks correct... (Doesn't mean it is correct)!!
When we expect something to follow on, we ignore what's really there...
For instance: 2+2 =4
But If I done 2+2=$ ... you'd just assume I pressed the dollar key by accident.. and not take any heed..
But the $ sign could mean something completely different....
I know you have more experience than me in such things... as i have always said I apply common sense....
And it's having that thing that pecks at your head that helps...lol ...
If you believe what you're looking at it correct... the information will be there... It just needs teazing out...
And timelines.... they are most important ... down to the last second, thats why I mention them...
Just because someone is at the scene of a crime doesn't mean they committed it... But you need to put into context what this person is telling you...
And if you can get some people to help... try a reconstruction... See if it's even possible... both ways....
-
Photo's are great.... Have you had them all lined up on the floor....
Again... if you've seen one photo.. you've seen them all....
I'll go back to what we disagree on... the photo's in that scene had changed and I had seen them a thousand times, but it was only suddenly when, I noticed the clock time and the shoes where different...(that's because I was looking at them on my computer)...
I don't know whether or not you have this information in paper form or digital.... If it's digital... I suggest that you print it all off... Have the Photo's in front of you.. you might notice something when they're side by side...
(I'd say the same with the transcripts)... A bit like cash is king.... Paper in front of you works well..
i:e.. has something moved... was something brought into evidence that was not photographed in situ???
You have me intrigued now Jixy 8(0(*
-
yes sadly an horrific murder. I can see how someone could have been convicted but how others got away with it I will never know.
Many have been wrongly convicted under Joint Enterprise this is the total opposite
Is it possible that it was one of the others who where responsible???
-
The case has been discussed before but the minute contact with the media was instigated the prison banned it instantly
Strangely though, questions were put and received but only when the reply was posted did they stop it
We got round it by using tippex on the name replacing it with mine and sending it to me. Which I found a bit strange because it was clear the intentions were to pass it on regardless and I did!
There was also a mention of a lie detector test and I spoke to a top man in his field. The prison have done quite a few so im not sure how they work out the rules
Sorry about the 4th edit of this post, my laptop keeps switching off mid sentence! maybe im not meant to talk about it afterall
Is there anyway you can get someone to visit this person??/maybe they could ask a few questions???
-
I have visited and asked a million questions
-
good point..
On the case I am working on there was a ban put in place with regards speaking to any media, having a photo published on social media etc
Is the ban still in place?
Are you referring to the Eddie Gilfoyle case?
-
Noticed the Rough Justice “If the cap fits” episode from 2002 has been discussed in parliament today by Ipswich MP Sandy Martin - well, Oliver Campbell’s conviction
http://dylmgvbzvz3kh.cloudfront.net/content/vod/5e82fa5e-81b5-4ae4-b583-288353634e7e/Westminster_Hall_17-07-19_09-16-29.mp4
Can view the documentary here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vh8IHChIpAQ
Rough Justice was created by Peter Hill & Martin Young
Presented by:
Martin Young (1982-1986)
David Jessel (1987-1992)
John Ware (1993-1997)
Kirsty Wark (1998-2007)
The last case was:
“The Innocents' Brief (first broadcast 12 April 2007) - reinvestigation of the conviction of Simon Hall for the murder of 79-year-old Joan Albert in Capel St. Mary, Suffolk, December 2001. On 8 August 2013 the BBC reported that Simon Hall had confessed his crime to prison authorities.[11]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rough_Justice_(British_TV_programme)
Glyn Maddocks
@Madocwales
·
2h
(link: https://parliamentlive.tv/Download/Index/bf026c83-025f-4a45-91f3-c428281223df) parliamentlive.tv/Download/Index…
If anyone thinks that the CCRC is an effective to deal with miscarriages of justice, I suggest they listen to today's speech of Sandy Martin MP regarding the conviction of Oliver Campbell
APPG on Miscarriages of Justice
@APPGMJ
A Westminster Hall Debate entitled ‘Review of decision making powers of the Criminal Cases Review Commission’ secured by
@sandyofipswich
is currently taking place in Parliament. Watch live here (link: https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/11ae6a50-4219-4228-9907-25be96d8dcd1) parliamentlive.tv/event/index/11…
-
Noticed the Rough Justice “If the cap fits” episode from 2002 has been discussed in parliament today by Ipswich MP Sandy Martin - well, Oliver Campbell’s conviction
http://dylmgvbzvz3kh.cloudfront.net/content/vod/5e82fa5e-81b5-4ae4-b583-288353634e7e/Westminster_Hall_17-07-19_09-16-29.mp4
Can view the documentary here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vh8IHChIpAQ
Rough Justice was created by Peter Hill & Martin Young
Presented by:
Martin Young (1982-1986)
David Jessel (1987-1992)
John Ware (1993-1997)
Kirsty Wark (1998-2007)
The last case was:
“The Innocents' Brief (first broadcast 12 April 2007) - reinvestigation of the conviction of Simon Hall for the murder of 79-year-old Joan Albert in Capel St. Mary, Suffolk, December 2001. On 8 August 2013 the BBC reported that Simon Hall had confessed his crime to prison authorities.[11]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rough_Justice_(British_TV_programme)
Glyn Maddocks
@Madocwales
·
2h
(link: https://parliamentlive.tv/Download/Index/bf026c83-025f-4a45-91f3-c428281223df) parliamentlive.tv/Download/Index…
If anyone thinks that the CCRC is an effective to deal with miscarriages of justice, I suggest they listen to today's speech of Sandy Martin MP regarding the conviction of Oliver Campbell
APPG on Miscarriages of Justice
@APPGMJ
A Westminster Hall Debate entitled ‘Review of decision making powers of the Criminal Cases Review Commission’ secured by
@sandyofipswich
is currently taking place in Parliament. Watch live here (link: https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/11ae6a50-4219-4228-9907-25be96d8dcd1) parliamentlive.tv/event/index/11…
CCRC
CCRC
@ccrcupdate
·
Jul 25
@ccrcupdate
looked in great depth at this case when we reviewed it. Would be interesting if Mr Campbell and his reps published the
@ccrcupdate
decision doc giving detailed reasons why we could not refer then. People could then evaluate it for themselves.
-
CCRC
CCRC
@ccrcupdate
·
Jul 25
@ccrcupdate
looked in great depth at this case when we reviewed it. Would be interesting if Mr Campbell and his reps published the
@ccrcupdate
decision doc giving detailed reasons why we could not refer then. People could then evaluate it for themselves.
Oliver Campbell has published the CCRC’s statement of reasons here https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cxzwKDBVJC8r9HRv6iMzPe5ooMyicF3L/view
via The Justice Gap https://www.thejusticegap.com/oliver-campbell/
-
Oliver Campbell has published the CCRC’s statement of reasons here https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cxzwKDBVJC8r9HRv6iMzPe5ooMyicF3L/view
via The Justice Gap https://www.thejusticegap.com/oliver-campbell/
According to Jon Robins of The Justice Gap, via twitter he states:
“Oliver Campbell decided to make public reasons why miscarriage of justice watchdog rejected his application following my @BylineTimes report. That rarely happens. I argue it does little to allay concerns & reveals much abt how our justice system fails to get to grips w such cases
Jon Robins on the case of Oliver Campbell and what it reveals about our creaking criminal justice system.
“Whatever view is taken of the CCRC’s final assessment of Oliver Campbell, a thorough investigation took place. A psychologist was instructed to assess Campbell’s neuropsychological functioning, DNA tests were commissioned, investigating police officers were interviewed, and they attempted to track down Samuels. But Glyn Maddocks points out that no one from the CCRC met his client. “As soon as you speak to Oliver, you know he’s no killer,” he said.
https://bylinetimes.com/2019/09/05/the-justice-trap-why-the-miscarriages-of-justice-watchdog-is-in-crisis/