Michael Shields
Discussion
Michael Shields has beenjailed for 15 years after a Bulgarian court found him guilty of a crime he did not commit.
The 18-year-old was convicted of a charge of attempted murder even though another man confessed to the crime.
The court in Varna refused to accept Graham Sankey's statement that he slammed a paving stone onto waiter Martin Georgiev's head at the resort of Golden Sands in May.
Michael was returning to Liverpool via Bulgaria after attending the European cup Final in Istanbul.
We would urge as many people as possible to sign the petition campaigning for his immediate release as it is clear a tragic miscarriage of justice has taken place. I direct this in particular at the British Government and urge them to continue to lobby their Bulgarian counterparts to secure Michaels' release.
Please please sign this petition for michael and his family. to help free an Innocent man.
http://www.petitiononline.com/shields1/petition.html
[b]This is not intended to start an argument over this, if you want to sign then please do, if you don't then please don't cause a fuss for the ones that do[/b]
The 18-year-old was convicted of a charge of attempted murder even though another man confessed to the crime.
The court in Varna refused to accept Graham Sankey's statement that he slammed a paving stone onto waiter Martin Georgiev's head at the resort of Golden Sands in May.
Michael was returning to Liverpool via Bulgaria after attending the European cup Final in Istanbul.
We would urge as many people as possible to sign the petition campaigning for his immediate release as it is clear a tragic miscarriage of justice has taken place. I direct this in particular at the British Government and urge them to continue to lobby their Bulgarian counterparts to secure Michaels' release.
Please please sign this petition for michael and his family. to help free an Innocent man.
http://www.petitiononline.com/shields1/petition.html
[b]This is not intended to start an argument over this, if you want to sign then please do, if you don't then please don't cause a fuss for the ones that do[/b]
No government will be seen to be interfering in the business of another government or juducial system.
The petition should be directed to Graham Sankey to encourage him to sign a statement in a form that the Bulgarian judiciary would accept. His self interest seems to be stopping him from doing this since he would then most likely face extradition.
The petition should be directed to Graham Sankey to encourage him to sign a statement in a form that the Bulgarian judiciary would accept. His self interest seems to be stopping him from doing this since he would then most likely face extradition.
rsvmilly said:
The petition should be directed to Graham Sankey to encourage him to sign a statement in a form that the Bulgarian judiciary would accept. His self interest seems to be stopping him from doing this since he would then most likely face extradition.
According to his solicitor he has now signed a 'confession'. Granted, though, he didn't do this before the trial started.
bigandclever said:From the news yesterday, the confession is not in a form the Bulgarians would accept. His solicitor then went on to say that it wouldn't be signed/sent on until he could be sure of a fair trial.
The petition should be directed to Graham Sankey to encourage him to sign a statement in a form that the Bulgarian judiciary would accept. His self interest seems to be stopping him from doing this since he would then most likely face extradition.
According to his solicitor he has now signed a 'confession'. Granted, though, he didn't do this before the trial started.
Meanwhile, somebody else is in clink.
(If, as was suggested above, this wasn't some elaborate from of perjury)
minimax said:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/4725245.stm
Is it really? I hadn't noticed it on ITV news 24 this afternoon. perhaps i'll check out the sun in a minute
HTH
rsvmilly said:
anonymous said:[redacted]
Is it really? I hadn't noticed it on ITV news 24 this afternoon. perhaps i'll check out the sun in a minute
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/4725245.stm
HTH
That link still does not explain what evidence the Bulgarians had to convict him.
JagLover said:
minimax said:
anonymous said:[redacted]
Is it really? I hadn't noticed it on ITV news 24 this afternoon. perhaps i'll check out the sun in a minute
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/4725245.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/4725245.stm</a>
HTH
That link still does not explain what evidence the Bulgarians had to convict him.
Yeah they have had plenty of time to fabricate as much as they need.
JagLover said:Blimey. How much info do you want?
minimax said:
anonymous said:[redacted]
Is it really? I hadn't noticed it on ITV news 24 this afternoon. perhaps i'll check out the sun in a minute
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/4725245.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/4725245.stm</a>
HTH
That link still does not explain what evidence the Bulgarians had to convict him.
http://tinyurl.com/9a393
rsvmilly said:
Blimey. How much info do you want?
http://tinyurl.com/9a393
All of the articles say the same thing.
Nowhere does it show what evidence the Bulgarian court had in front of them, such as witness statements etc.
JagLover said:Firstly, my togue was very firmly in my cheek when I replied. You said there was nothing in the news, which there patently was
Blimey. How much info do you want?
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/9a393">http://tinyurl.com/9a393</a>
All of the articles say the same thing.
Nowhere does it show what evidence the Bulgarian court had in front of them, such as witness statements etc.
Secondly, following from what you've said, the reporting seems the same of pretty much any case in the news.
GasBlaster said:
This is a clear case of prejudice.
Against Bulgarians. Their legal system found the man guilty, so who are we to interfere?
I was thinking the same thing.
It is a court in Bulgaria so of course they randomly picked the first British Tourist they saw and flung him in jail
.One of the guys at work is a steward for LFC and was working on the match trip.
According to him, Michael Shields was at his hotel in bed when the police arrived. They told him to put on his white T shirt, which had been identified during the attack. He told them that he didn't own a white T shirt, so they then gave him one and arrested him.
On the plane home, the culprit was shouting his mouth off about what he had done, not knowing that someone else had been arrested. It soon became apparent that he was really to blame and didn't deny it. He only went to the solicitor because he was told what would happen if he didn't. I would think it's the same threats which have now got him to sign the confession.
This is the story as I was told it but I do believe this version.
I was astounded when his solicitor was on TV saying that 'He had been good to come foward and had done enough without signing the original confession! FFS The guy had stoved someones head in with a paving flag and then bragged about it. Anyone knows that evidence which is not signed is inadmissable in court. Why did the solicitor think that an unsigned confession would get Michael out of jail?
There has been an injustice done and the guy should return to Bulgaria to face the music so that Michael can be released.
According to him, Michael Shields was at his hotel in bed when the police arrived. They told him to put on his white T shirt, which had been identified during the attack. He told them that he didn't own a white T shirt, so they then gave him one and arrested him.
On the plane home, the culprit was shouting his mouth off about what he had done, not knowing that someone else had been arrested. It soon became apparent that he was really to blame and didn't deny it. He only went to the solicitor because he was told what would happen if he didn't. I would think it's the same threats which have now got him to sign the confession.
This is the story as I was told it but I do believe this version.
I was astounded when his solicitor was on TV saying that 'He had been good to come foward and had done enough without signing the original confession! FFS The guy had stoved someones head in with a paving flag and then bragged about it. Anyone knows that evidence which is not signed is inadmissable in court. Why did the solicitor think that an unsigned confession would get Michael out of jail?
There has been an injustice done and the guy should return to Bulgaria to face the music so that Michael can be released.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff