Barry George loses Dando murder compensation bid.

[h8tax]

rohrl said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

Digga said:

You have to admit though, those Cillit Bang adverts are really fking annoying.

brilliant

And now I'm imagining Cillit Bang being advertised on TV by Barry George. This will amuse me for some time.

For me, Karma Chameleon was a low point, but he seems to have evolved into something of a national treasure...

[anonymous-user]

Dr Jekyll said:

But even if the gun powder wasn't the result of contamination. It simply implied that Barry George had been in contact with ammunition at some time, not that he had shot Jill Dando or anyone else. Incidentally the jacket with the gunpowder in it bore no resemblance to the jacket witnesses saw a suspect wearing at the time. BG did have such a jacket and the prosecution argument was that he had been wearing it to shoot JD, but no gunpowder was found on it.

John McVicar wrote a book explaining why he was convinced Barry George was guilty and in it he remarked that even the prosecution were flabbergasted by the guilty verdict.

The FDR was presented by the prosecution as only being able to come from the same gun that killed Dando. This was based on a fundamentally wrong FSS report. The FSS changed their guidelines to their scientists following this case to no-longer consider one particle significant. The defence expect at the original trial discredited it much in the way it was finally dismissed, but for some reason that didn't seem to matter much.

There's are nearly always evidential inconsistencies around descriptions etc. There aren't often key pieces of bad forensic evidence and incorrect conclusions drawn like there were here.

[Spanglepants]

I thought that but was too lazy to post

Asterix said:

Grumfutock said:

No idea about evidence or not of his guilt/innocence but he does look a wrong 'un!

Wherever he lays his hat...

[carinaman]

£1/2 Million 'learning lessons':

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jill-dando-mu...

[AJS-]

Centurion07 said:

It is an acquittal, but does not prove him innocent, more of a not really enough evidence to confirm guilt beyond reasonable doubt."

Sounds about right to me.

I know it's going back a while, but this does not sound about right at all to me. My understanding of it is that the whole reason for having the principle of innocent until proven guilty is that it's very hard to prove a negative. Not many people could conclusively prove they didn't do something. Barry George had years of his life ruined by this fiasco and was wrongly imprisoned for a crime which he was acquitted of. If that doesn't deserve recompense I don't know what does.