Duncan Campbell is too unassuming in George case
Duncan Campbell in the Guardian, on the Barry George case, entitles his piece "Assume nothing" and it is subtitled "Barry George's acquittal reminds us that the days of miscarriages of justice are far from over".
Duncan Campbell writes "Unlike many previous miscarriage of justice cases, the police did not fabricate evidence or invent confessions".
It may be the case that the police did not this time invent confessions. However, I feel that Duncan Campbell is wrong to assume that the police did not fabricate evidence. Because, quite clearly the police did fabricate evidence, or at least the Forensic Science Service did. Neither the speck of gun powder nor the hair which were claimed to be evidence had any evidential quality whatsoever.
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
3 comments:
It was reported that gunpowder residue in a pocket of Barry's jacket taken from his flat for examination match gunpowder residue in Jill Dand's hair. Could the source have originated from anything other than a firearm, i.e. a firework ? It was also reported that a blue fibre from C& A trousers was found on Jill's coat, matching a pair owned by Barry.
No-one other than Barry knows the truth, but the forensic evidence make conclusions drawn by the police are understandable, don't you think ?
In Madeleine's case, there is not one shred of evidence to support McCanns' plea of abduction. Unlike Jill Dando's case, 88% DNA components in apartment and boot specimens match Madeleine's.
Whilst there may be more than one explanation for the forensics found in Jill Dando's case, they are overwhelming and positive in Madeleine's. A process of elimination from details in PJ's Report confirms the withheld FSS results related to the quantity of corpse hair found in the vehicle boot. The fact that PJ's request for return of the samples after the results were withheld confirms orders to this effect came from 'on high', i.e. British Government. Corpse hair reveals type of medication administered and the likely length of time given to a child.
It was reported that gunpowder residue in a pocket of Barry's jacket taken from his flat for examination match gunpowder residue in Jill Dand's hair. Could the source have originated from anything other than a firearm, i.e. a firework ?
The forensic bods were forced to admit in court that the single particle found in Barry's coat could have come from anywhere, including a firework. This is one of the reasons it was dismissed for the re-trial.
It was also reported that a blue fibre from C& A trousers was found on Jill's coat, matching a pair owned by Barry.
In the original trial, indeed it was. However, it subsequently became known that the fibre was of such a generic nature it could have come from numerous other sources, and was by no means a match in any evidential sense.
Given the police knew this from the outset, no, I don't think there conclusions were understandable. They wanted a patsy, they had a convenient 'simpleton' with a chequerd past and a lifestyle that could be made out in court as 'spooky', and a whole tub load of conjecture. That, in my book, is a stitch up.
harry haddock: I agree it was a stitch up.
Post a Comment