FabSwingers.com forum: barry george... no compo

By *ovingit2012 OP Man
over a year ago

Dudley

Reading the news today i hear barry george who was acquitted of murder and served 8 years as an inocent man will not be recieving compensation... is that right?? 8 years of his life... wrongly accused how can a justice system as sposed to be "the fairest in the world" fail an innocent man,

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

Miscarriage of justice cases are rife with cases like this and worse.

You lose your job, very often your home and family and a lot of people never believe you are innocent. There is no public support once you are released and if you don't have any support it can take time to find the charities that do support people in this situation.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Reading the news today i hear barry george who was acquitted of murder and served 8 years as an inocent man will not be recieving compensation... is that right?? 8 years of his life... wrongly accused how can a justice system as sposed to be "the fairest in the world" fail an innocent man, "

It seems he wasn't innocent enough to get compensation.

The law changed in 2011 regarding compensation and he had to provide evidence that under no set of circumstances could he have been convicted of Dando's murder. The appeal judges ruled he couldn't provide such evidence.

How the fuck can you prove you didn't do something we you genuinely didn't do it - there would be no evidence of you being at the scene if you wasn't at the scene, would there.

Shocking.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

It seems he wasn't innocent enough to get compensation.

How the fuck can you prove you didn't do something we you genuinely didn't do it - there would be no evidence of you being at the scene if you wasn't at the scene, would there.

Shocking. "

The change that means anyone can be re-tried if new evidence is found makes it so much easier to say that no compensation should be paid in nearly all cases.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yronMan
over a year ago

grangemouth

It seems he wasn't innocent enough to get compensation.

How the fuck can you prove you didn't do something we you genuinely didn't do it - there would be no evidence of you being at the scene if you wasn't at the scene, would there.

Shocking.

The change that means anyone can be re-tried if new evidence is found makes it so much easier to say that no compensation should be paid in nearly all cases."

So basically someone who's innocent can go to prison, be released and then someone else says it's him and they're back to square one?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

It seems he wasn't innocent enough to get compensation.

How the fuck can you prove you didn't do something we you genuinely didn't do it - there would be no evidence of you being at the scene if you wasn't at the scene, would there.

Shocking.

The change that means anyone can be re-tried if new evidence is found makes it so much easier to say that no compensation should be paid in nearly all cases.

So basically someone who's innocent can go to prison, be released and then someone else says it's him and they're back to square one?"

not quite that i think..

more like if someone is tried and found not guilty and acquitted then if there is new evidence at a later date then that may open the case again...?

i think..

if you serve a sentence i think thats it..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yronMan
over a year ago

grangemouth

It does sound a bit worrying though.

I know that Colin Stagg got a lot of compensation, but in his case he was hounded by newspapers (particularly the News of the Screws and the Express) for years and had been rendered pretty much unemployable, but to think that others could be put through the wringer like that is worrying to me.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If he didnt do it, who did? He was the only suspect.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

"If he didnt do it, who did? He was the only suspect."

The Serbian Secret Police

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"If he didnt do it, who did? He was the only suspect."

That's a dangerous way of solving crimes.

"well, you're the closest, you're guilty. Send him down."

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"If he didnt do it, who did? He was the only suspect."

That is exactly what people say when others are released too. The miscarriage of justice ball just keeps rolling.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The serbian secret police? err stay away from the drugs .....

But really who did do it? No one else in the frame at all, he stalked her and was convicted ... now de convicted probably due to someone not signing a bit of paper properly or due to someone touching some evidence ... and you think he deserves compensation out of my pocket??? dont think so!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yronMan
over a year ago

grangemouth

"The serbian secret police? err stay away from the drugs .....

There was evidence that the Serbians wanted to take revenge on the UK for the bombing of their capital city. It petered out when the Serbians refused to cooperate with the investigation.

Barry George was retried and found not guilty due the witnesses who placed him at the scene were unable to identify him as well as the fact that there were witnesses who placed him elsewhere within London at the time: This coupled with what looked like contaminated forensic evidence was why he was found not guilty.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

So it was a cock up. Doesnt mean he didnt do it. Who else was in the frame?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"So it was a cock up. Doesnt mean he didnt do it. Who else was in the frame?"

If we do it your way, everyone else in Britain. I'm in the clear because I was at school. Where were you?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yronMan
over a year ago

grangemouth

"So it was a cock up. Doesnt mean he didnt do it. Who else was in the frame?"

No it means he couldn't have done it because he was somewhere else when the murder was committed.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

"The serbian secret police? err stay away from the drugs .....

If you bothered to look into things before making stupid comments about drugs.....Dando had been involved in two major television pieces about the plight of Kosovar Albanians and the fact that Bosnian Serbs had massacred thousands of them.

At the time of the BBC broadcast there were condemnations from Serbia and Dando's face was plastered all over Serbian newspapers.

Two weeks before Dando was murdered a prominent Serbian exiled journalist was shot in the head on his London doorstep in identical circumstances.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the problem that the judge identified was that he was wrongly convicted not wrongly.accused. He did turn out to be innocent but the police had reasonable suspicion to arrest and charge him.

The other guy was convicted on dodgy evidence which is why he was entitled to compo.....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ctavius StuntMan
over a year ago

london

i never believed him guilty from day one.

Lone nut job ?

lazy police without a clue

and pressure to find a "patsy."

colin stagg ?

lies in the mainstream media ?

Character assasination ?

RIP innocent untill PROVEN guilty.

Disgraceful.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ctavius StuntMan
over a year ago

london

"The serbian secret police? err stay away from the drugs .....

Errrrr he stalked her how exactly ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ost SockMan
over a year ago

West Wales and Cardiff

Yep - this was a big line of enquiry at the time, especially because it seemed like a professional hit in so many ways.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

It seems he wasn't innocent enough to get compensation.

How the fuck can you prove you didn't do something we you genuinely didn't do it - there would be no evidence of you being at the scene if you wasn't at the scene, would there.

Shocking. "

But there should be evidence that he was somewhere else and doing other things.

If he could account for his whereabouts at the time of the crime he wouldn't have been arrested.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

I think the problem that the judge identified was that he was wrongly convicted not wrongly.accused. He did turn out to be innocent but the police had reasonable suspicion to arrest and charge him.

The other guy was convicted on dodgy evidence which is why he was entitled to compo....."

I think you must be near to the mark. i.e. He wasn't so much proven innocent , just had to be released on a technicality or some such.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"But there should be evidence that he was somewhere else and doing other things.

If he could account for his whereabouts at the time of the crime he wouldn't have been arrested."

Before it even went to trial several people had placed him elsewhere in London on the morning of the murder. The only reason I can prove where I was is because I was at school that day. If it weren't for that, I could have been anywhere and unable to prove it. Does that mean I should have been arrested too?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

"But there should be evidence that he was somewhere else and doing other things.

If he could account for his whereabouts at the time of the crime he wouldn't have been arrested.

If you were elsewhere you would have been able to prove it.

Not knowing is insufficient evidence on which to be arrested. There has to be other factors too.

Who saw him where ?

I've read the phrase ' other people placed him elsewhere in london' a few times now.

It's a bit vague isn't it.

Where in London ? Who with ? Doing what ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

After some appeals or court cases where the convicted or the defendants are found not guilty. Occasionally you hear the expression that the police will not be looking for anyone else in this enquiry. What does this mean to you. It means to me that they are just a smidgeon short of evidence to convict. Could this be one of those cases

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Leave the serbian secret police alone im going there on my holidays in March and I don't want to be locked up !!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yronMan
over a year ago

grangemouth

"But there should be evidence that he was somewhere else and doing other things.

If he could account for his whereabouts at the time of the crime he wouldn't have been arrested.

If you were elsewhere you would have been able to prove it.

Not knowing is insufficient evidence on which to be arrested. There has to be other factors too.

Who saw him where ?

I've read the phrase ' other people placed him elsewhere in london' a few times now.

It's a bit vague isn't it.

Where in London ? Who with ? Doing what ?"

He attended a centre for people with special needs. It was on the opposite side to London to where Jill Dando was killed. Despite this being the case, at the original trial the people who could put him there and provide an alibi weren't called. The person who was seen at the crime scene was also seen heading off in the opposite direction to where the centre Barry George was at. It wasn't "Off on a trchnicality", it was off because the Met screwed Barry George over. And therefore the real killer got away with it.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"If you were elsewhere you would have been able to prove it."

I probably wouldn't. If people verbally verifying my whereabouts doesn't constitute proof, I'd have been able to prove nothing.

"Not knowing is insufficient evidence on which to be arrested. There has to be other factors too."

Like having a recently fired gun in his possession, or CCTV showing him in the area, or his having shown an intention to kill her? Well, none of that applies, so now what?

"Who saw him where ?

I've read the phrase ' other people placed him elsewhere in london' a few times now.

It's a bit vague isn't it.

Where in London ? Who with ? Doing what ?"

Is it important? Far more important, I feel, is nobody positively identified him as being at the scene at the time of the murder.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It seems he wasn't innocent enough to get compensation.

How the fuck can you prove you didn't do something we you genuinely didn't do it - there would be no evidence of you being at the scene if you wasn't at the scene, would there.

Shocking.

But there should be evidence that he was somewhere else and doing other things.

If he could account for his whereabouts at the time of the crime he wouldn't have been arrested."

Ok, so what if someone decided to have a quiet day in, went nowhere and saw nobody. How could he prove he was elsewhere if he's accused of a crime?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread