King of Hits.co.uk - Your Views Messageboard

IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Home

Forums

	Messageboards	Categories Show latest posts

Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register. Lost Password?

Messageboards

King of Hits

Your Views Messageboard

Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"

Name:

Subject:

Boardcode:

Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons





More Smilies

[b]JK2006 wrote:[/b]
[quote]I think it should have been - four of the six charges had the dates changed at the trial, after we proved them wrong. But I was given no time - not a single second - to find new evidence for the later time frames.
I think that was a disgrace. But I was told by my (expensive) lawyers it was "standard judicial behaviour".
But one of the "new dates" for one of the charges in London (for which I was found guilty) was on "a day between the 6th day of September 1985 and the 9th day of September 1985".
After my release from prison I investigated my movements. There was - is - proof that on the 6th, after attending a Bruce Springsteen concert in New York, I had lunch with my American accountant (signed letter). On the 7th I went to a new film, Back To The Future, with BBC employee Ursula Kenny. On the 8th I was at the US Open Mens Tennis Final (more proof). And on the 9th I flew back to London (ticket stub; passport stamp) on PanAm Clipper Class. To renew my US visa, which I did on the 10th.
So I could not have committed the crime in London on those new dates. I was in America - or crossing the Atlantic.
Yet the CCRC rejected my request for this to be considered by the Court of Appeal.
Beyond belief. But at least I wasn't a sub post master.[/quote]

Enter code here

Topic History of: My 2001 wongful conviction quashed
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)

Author	Message
Downing Street Cat	So unless you owned a TARDIS you couldn't possibly have committed the 'offences' in London on given dates. Unjust is an under statement. I really do pray that you find justice before long.
JK2006	The CCRC justification for refusing to allow my appeal to be heard 20 years ago was "WHEN it happened doesn't matter - it's WHETHER it happened that counts". In a case involving the age of consent? Bonkers!
JK2006	Read the post Mart - SHOULD be acquitted of all - the first 5 currently still stand though the dozens of others failed.
Green Man	I want to know why the courts are scared of journos, they are just pen pushers with narcissistic personalities.
Martin Hutchinson	Does this mean that you are legally cleared of ALL alleged offences?