Wrongful convictions
Discussion
If someone is convicted or a crime and jailed, but then subsequently new information comes to light, the conviction overturned and they are released, what happens?
Do they get compensated for the time they were in jail? Do they get help starting again?
In some cases there may be negligence or wrong-doing in the original conviction, but not always, as the conviction may have been beyond reasonable doubt based on the available evidence at the time.
Do they get compensated for the time they were in jail? Do they get help starting again?
In some cases there may be negligence or wrong-doing in the original conviction, but not always, as the conviction may have been beyond reasonable doubt based on the available evidence at the time.
Thanks BV that is interesting. So the chap who posted then deleted should have just filled in the form!
The limitations are quite low "The total amount of compensation payable under section 133 for a person's loss of earnings or earnings capacity in respect of any one year must not exceed the earnings compensation limit.
That limit is an amount equal to 1.5 times the median annual gross earnings according to the latest figures published by the Office of National Statistics at the time of the assessment."
I guess if there has been negligence or malfeasance then further action could be taken by civil means.
Idle musing only, no other DOI.
The limitations are quite low "The total amount of compensation payable under section 133 for a person's loss of earnings or earnings capacity in respect of any one year must not exceed the earnings compensation limit.
That limit is an amount equal to 1.5 times the median annual gross earnings according to the latest figures published by the Office of National Statistics at the time of the assessment."
I guess if there has been negligence or malfeasance then further action could be taken by civil means.
Idle musing only, no other DOI.
knk said:
If someone is convicted or a crime and jailed, but then subsequently new information comes to light , the conviction overturned and they are released, what happens?
As in that sort of new evidence ?http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/21/forensi...
I have followed the Michael Stone/Levi Bellfield situation for a little while now after reading some fairly compelling stuff. However, I’m not a legal expert and fully accept that what I see as compelling might be pure speculation. It would be interesting to see what happens. Shame it doesn’t reverse what happened to the victims though.
Breadvan72 said:
Or the smellier alternative is that you would be Andy Dufresne - who crawled through a river of s
t and came out clean on the other side...Breadvan72 said:
Their conviction wasn't quashed though. Plus im not old enough to have robbed the bank of hanoi.
In the infamous Stefan Kiszko case, Kiszko was awarded £500,000 for 16 years' wrongful (and entirely preventable) incarceration - sadly, he didn't live long enough to receive a single penny.
David Waddington, on the other hand was richly compensated with being appointed Home Secretary and then a Life Peerage.
A truly terrible case, which showed the doltish thuggery of the police and the bewigged ineptitude of the judiciary in stark relief.
David Waddington, on the other hand was richly compensated with being appointed Home Secretary and then a Life Peerage.
A truly terrible case, which showed the doltish thuggery of the police and the bewigged ineptitude of the judiciary in stark relief.
I know someone who was jailed for stealing from the elderly person she was caring for. Always protesting her innocence, unsurprisingly many people were less than sympathetic. On her release she discovered evidence that allowed her to appeal her conviction successfully. She now has a nice flat and shiny new car from the compo, and has her good name back, but I know that no amount of money will really compensate her for losing a couple of years of her liberty.
From page 64 of the July 2011 thread entitled 'News of the World':
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
Oakey said:
Interesting little tidbit I came across whilst reading up on another subject. Just how deep does the rabit hole go;
ETA: Also, from Michael Gillards The Untouchables, a list of the so called bent coppers;
Untouchables the book by Michael Gillard and Laurie Flynn mentions a chap called Ira Thomas who was wrongly convicted. He received a pay out. From memory he was inside for 8 years but don't quote me. Seems a police officer involved in his case was also involved in the Barry George case. Google said:
Reporters demand probe after Guardian 'betrayal'
06 July 2001
Two award-winning journalists who believe they have been "betrayed" by The Guardian over an investigation into police corruption are calling for an inquiry into a letter sent to the newspaper's editor, Alan Rusbridger, by a senior Metropolitan Police officer.
Michael Gillard and Laurie Flynn want the Police Complaints Authority to find out why a letter, containing what they believe are serious allegations against them and demanding details of their investigation sources, was sent by Commander Andy Hayman to Rusbridger last August.
That letter, published for the first time in Press Gazette today, was never shown to either Gillard or Flynn by Guardian management, leading the journalists to believe they had been severely let down by the paper.
The Guardian says the letter remained, forgotten, in its files until early this year. In the letter, Hayman told Rusbridger he believed that Flynn and Gillard "may be at risk, perhaps unwittingly" of assisting a private investigator, Jonathan Rees, in "unethically or unlawfully seeking his acquittal to the serious charges he will be required to answer" in a forthcoming trial for Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Public Justice.
He asked the editor for details of all contact between Rees and the two journalists or other members of Guardian staff. He also offered Rusbridger a confidential briefing.
Gillard denies the pair - whose freelance contracts with the paper have now ended - planned to publish anything about Rees, who was subsequently convicted of the conspiracy charge. He believes there is a link between the Hayman letter and the newspaper dropping their lengthy investigations into a police anti-corruption unit - the so-called Untouchables.
Writing in Press Gazette, Gillard says The Guardian's treatment of their investigation and the manner in which it dealt with the letter is "disturbing for a newspaper that markets itself as a sleazebuster and champion of ethical journalism". He also believes that the problem in investigating police corruption may be more widespread. The Guardian, he suggests, is "not alone in this betrayal of core journalistic principles".
However, Rusbridger insists there is no connection between the letter and the dropping of the investigations - a decision which he says had been taken before the letter arrived and was based on internal and external legal advice.
Hayman's letter arrived when Rusbridger was on holiday and was dealt with by his deputy, Paul Johnson, who "placed it in his files and did not reply to it, since by that stage Michael and Laurie had been told that we felt that we had got as far as we could with their theories on police corruption", Rusbridger told Press Gazette.
He did not become aware of the letter until late January, after Gillard and Flynn, convinced of its existence, prompted him to check the files.
"It contained no serious allegations about Michael and Laurie and was in no sense an attempt to place The Guardian under any pressure," Rusbridger said. "No briefings between any Scotland Yard officer and any executive of The Guardian on or off the record occurred after the letter was received. There was not any contact so there was no pressure.
"The Guardian invested a large amount of time, money and the best legal resources we could find to back Laurie and Michael in their investigation into alleged police corruption. Our unequivocal and unanimous legal advice at the end of the day was that we could not defend the allegations that they were seeking to make."
Some familiar names in there.06 July 2001
Two award-winning journalists who believe they have been "betrayed" by The Guardian over an investigation into police corruption are calling for an inquiry into a letter sent to the newspaper's editor, Alan Rusbridger, by a senior Metropolitan Police officer.
Michael Gillard and Laurie Flynn want the Police Complaints Authority to find out why a letter, containing what they believe are serious allegations against them and demanding details of their investigation sources, was sent by Commander Andy Hayman to Rusbridger last August.
That letter, published for the first time in Press Gazette today, was never shown to either Gillard or Flynn by Guardian management, leading the journalists to believe they had been severely let down by the paper.
The Guardian says the letter remained, forgotten, in its files until early this year. In the letter, Hayman told Rusbridger he believed that Flynn and Gillard "may be at risk, perhaps unwittingly" of assisting a private investigator, Jonathan Rees, in "unethically or unlawfully seeking his acquittal to the serious charges he will be required to answer" in a forthcoming trial for Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Public Justice.
He asked the editor for details of all contact between Rees and the two journalists or other members of Guardian staff. He also offered Rusbridger a confidential briefing.
Gillard denies the pair - whose freelance contracts with the paper have now ended - planned to publish anything about Rees, who was subsequently convicted of the conspiracy charge. He believes there is a link between the Hayman letter and the newspaper dropping their lengthy investigations into a police anti-corruption unit - the so-called Untouchables.
Writing in Press Gazette, Gillard says The Guardian's treatment of their investigation and the manner in which it dealt with the letter is "disturbing for a newspaper that markets itself as a sleazebuster and champion of ethical journalism". He also believes that the problem in investigating police corruption may be more widespread. The Guardian, he suggests, is "not alone in this betrayal of core journalistic principles".
However, Rusbridger insists there is no connection between the letter and the dropping of the investigations - a decision which he says had been taken before the letter arrived and was based on internal and external legal advice.
Hayman's letter arrived when Rusbridger was on holiday and was dealt with by his deputy, Paul Johnson, who "placed it in his files and did not reply to it, since by that stage Michael and Laurie had been told that we felt that we had got as far as we could with their theories on police corruption", Rusbridger told Press Gazette.
He did not become aware of the letter until late January, after Gillard and Flynn, convinced of its existence, prompted him to check the files.
"It contained no serious allegations about Michael and Laurie and was in no sense an attempt to place The Guardian under any pressure," Rusbridger said. "No briefings between any Scotland Yard officer and any executive of The Guardian on or off the record occurred after the letter was received. There was not any contact so there was no pressure.
"The Guardian invested a large amount of time, money and the best legal resources we could find to back Laurie and Michael in their investigation into alleged police corruption. Our unequivocal and unanimous legal advice at the end of the day was that we could not defend the allegations that they were seeking to make."
ETA: Also, from Michael Gillards The Untouchables, a list of the so called bent coppers;
The Untouchables said:
THE UNTOUCHABLES
Paul Condon Commissioner (1993-2000)
John Stevens Commissioner (2000-2005); Deputy Commissioner (1998-2000)
Brian Hayes Deputy Commissioner (1993-1998)
Ian Blair Commissioner (2005- ); Deputy Commissioner (2000~-2005)
Dave Veness Assistant Commissioner
lan Johnston Assistant Commissioner
Mike Todd Assistant Commissioner
John Grieve Deputy Assistant Commissioner
Roy Clark Deputy Assistant Commissioner
Bill Griffiths Deputy Assistant Commissioner
Roger Gaspar Detective chief superintendent (Ghost Squad)
Dave Bailey Detective superintendent (Ghost Squad)
Dave Woods Detective chief inspector (Ghost Squad)
Andy Hayman Commander (CIB3/ClBlC 1999-2002)
Graham James Commander (Discipline & Complaints)
Ian Quinn Commander (CIB2)
Ian Russell Commander (replaced Quinn)
Dave Wood Detective chief superintendent (CIB3, replaced Gaspar)
Chris Jarratt Detective superintendent (CIBlC, replaced Woods)
Brian Moore Detective superintendent (ClB3 Operation Ethiopia)
John Coles Detective superintendent (CIB3 Operation Cornwall)
John Yates Detective superintendent (ClB3 Operation Russia)
Barry Norman Detective superintendent (CIB3 Operation Helios)
Martin Bridger Detective chief inspector (CIB3 Operation Ethiopia)
Bob Berger Detective chief inspector (CIBIC)
Chris McHaffey Detective chief inspector (CIB3)
Jill McTigue Detective chief inspector (CIB3)
Dave Pennant Detective chief inspector (CIB3)
Simon Cousins Detective chief inspector (CIB3 Witness Protection Unit)
Shaun Sawyer Detective chief Superintendent, (replaced Hayman)
Bob Quick Detective chief superintendent (CIB3, replaced Wood)
Barbara Wilding Deputy Assistant Commissioner (replaced Sawyer 2004)
Steve Roberts Deputy Assistant Commissioner (replaced Wilding 2004)
David Zinzan Detective Superintendent (IDG, formerly CIBIC)
Tony Fuller Detective Superintendent (IDG, replaced Zinzan)
Steve Foster Detective chief inspector (IDG)
Maxine de Brunner Detective Superintendent (ACG, formerly CIB3)
Jack Kelly Detective Inspector
Steve Bazzoni Detective Inspector
Adrian Harper Detective Inspector
Maggie Palmer Detective Inspector
Peter Ward Detective Inspector
Mark Holmes Detective Inspector
Paul Condon Commissioner (1993-2000)
John Stevens Commissioner (2000-2005); Deputy Commissioner (1998-2000)
Brian Hayes Deputy Commissioner (1993-1998)
Ian Blair Commissioner (2005- ); Deputy Commissioner (2000~-2005)
Dave Veness Assistant Commissioner
lan Johnston Assistant Commissioner
Mike Todd Assistant Commissioner
John Grieve Deputy Assistant Commissioner
Roy Clark Deputy Assistant Commissioner
Bill Griffiths Deputy Assistant Commissioner
Roger Gaspar Detective chief superintendent (Ghost Squad)
Dave Bailey Detective superintendent (Ghost Squad)
Dave Woods Detective chief inspector (Ghost Squad)
Andy Hayman Commander (CIB3/ClBlC 1999-2002)
Graham James Commander (Discipline & Complaints)
Ian Quinn Commander (CIB2)
Ian Russell Commander (replaced Quinn)
Dave Wood Detective chief superintendent (CIB3, replaced Gaspar)
Chris Jarratt Detective superintendent (CIBlC, replaced Woods)
Brian Moore Detective superintendent (ClB3 Operation Ethiopia)
John Coles Detective superintendent (CIB3 Operation Cornwall)
John Yates Detective superintendent (ClB3 Operation Russia)
Barry Norman Detective superintendent (CIB3 Operation Helios)
Martin Bridger Detective chief inspector (CIB3 Operation Ethiopia)
Bob Berger Detective chief inspector (CIBIC)
Chris McHaffey Detective chief inspector (CIB3)
Jill McTigue Detective chief inspector (CIB3)
Dave Pennant Detective chief inspector (CIB3)
Simon Cousins Detective chief inspector (CIB3 Witness Protection Unit)
Shaun Sawyer Detective chief Superintendent, (replaced Hayman)
Bob Quick Detective chief superintendent (CIB3, replaced Wood)
Barbara Wilding Deputy Assistant Commissioner (replaced Sawyer 2004)
Steve Roberts Deputy Assistant Commissioner (replaced Wilding 2004)
David Zinzan Detective Superintendent (IDG, formerly CIBIC)
Tony Fuller Detective Superintendent (IDG, replaced Zinzan)
Steve Foster Detective chief inspector (IDG)
Maxine de Brunner Detective Superintendent (ACG, formerly CIB3)
Jack Kelly Detective Inspector
Steve Bazzoni Detective Inspector
Adrian Harper Detective Inspector
Maggie Palmer Detective Inspector
Peter Ward Detective Inspector
Mark Holmes Detective Inspector
Edited by Oakey on Thursday 14th July 18:13
carinaman said:
Untouchables the book by Michael Gillard and Laurie Flynn mentions a chap called Ira Thomas who was wrongly convicted. He received a pay out. From memory he was inside for 8 years but don't quote me. Seems a police officer involved in his case was also involved in the Barry George case.
For there to be untouchables in the police there needs to be untouchables higher up as well. All the way up.In days of yore, there was a certain degree of conspiracy between the police and legal bods with how certain defendants were treated. A rather excellent and well reviewed book on Kindle goes over a case where there was insufficient evidence for a conviction but the person was charged anyway. The uniformed PC in the case threw a bit of a strop so a detective PC was drafted in to prosecute the case. There was no CPS in those days.
The defence lawyer and the detective were in a sort of club and in the police waiting room chatted about what penalty would be suitable.
There was little doubt that the defendant had committed the offence charged, but there was no concrete evidence. A good arrest, though I say it myself, but the chap wasn't identified. On the advice of his brief he pleaded guilty and the mitigation was not challenged by the officer prosecuting the case.
There is little doubt that some magistrates, even the stipendiary type, were complicit in corruption, convicted out of their own mouths at times.
Things changed in the early 80s with a concentrated effort to rid the Met and City police of corrupt officers. They weren't charged, apart from one who'd lost the plot, but allowed to resign or be cast sick. It was difficult to get anyone to go against an individual as they and their families would be in danger. One dead straight PC left the City and joined Hants, being posted to the Isle of Wight, ironically where there were hundreds of big time criminals, in order to put off those who'd threatened him and/or his family as any attacker would be on an island with limited routes for escape. That's no life for a keen copper. The crime returns for the division for one day amounted to three pints of milk and a cockerel. A number of others also ran away to other forces.
Some of those who resigned immediately took up well paid and responsible jobs on the same patch where they would be privy to all sorts of confidential information re high value property. Got to laugh.
No briefs or magistrates were dealt with, even with a requirement to resign.
Much of the corruption was what was, euphemistically, called 'noble cause corruption', where the officer would know that the offender was guilty but there wasn't sufficient evidence. A bit like honour killings of course. No nobility, no honour.
However, what if, for instance, you were running an ID parade for a terrible crime, one that made you sick when you read the circumstances of the case, which you had to do to frame a proper question to the witnesses, and the brief casually told you beforehand that if the offender was picked out he'd cough to that one and another. The reason for the information was that the brief wanted the SIO to speed matters up as he had a night out planned.
On your head is the fact that if the person is not picked out he would be released and almost certainly offend again. Another vulnerable victim would be terrorised, subjected to prolonged torture and, after being brutally abused, would be killed. If you went via the law, what does it say about one's morals? It is enough to send you a little mad whichever you choose.
The chap was not picked out but the SIO found a technicality which allowed him to delay the release. The person was later convicted, on only one crime, and was unable to continue his offending. There's no relief for the conflicted officer of course.
Corruption is endemic in public and life and business. You have only to read Private Eye to accept that. There is also a lot of legal behaviour which is highly immoral which those with authority protect and support. Everyone trusts a doctor yet the biggest serial killer in England had what sort of job? It is, unfortunately, everywhere.
There's little doubt that there was a political conspiracy to cover up Cyril Smith's offending, and from high up. PCs who tried to stand up against it were threatened with dismissal and more than one had their career stopped.
Psycho Warren said:
I always wonder with these kind of things if you are remanded or convicted and you escape and are subsequently found innocent, will you still be prosecuted for escaping custody as that is a separate offence? Or would it "not be in the public interest".
A prosecution is unlikely, although much might depend on the circumstances of the turnover of the decision and the method of escape.
Derek Smith said:
carinaman said:
Untouchables the book by Michael Gillard and Laurie Flynn mentions a chap called Ira Thomas who was wrongly convicted. He received a pay out. From memory he was inside for 8 years but don't quote me. Seems a police officer involved in his case was also involved in the Barry George case.
For there to be untouchables in the police there needs to be untouchables higher up as well. All the way up. At least Ira Thomas got out. And the book linked his conviction to that of Barry George.
Edited by carinaman on Thursday 30th November 21:18
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff