Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: No compensation for Sion Jenkins
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
Chris Retro |
...and in the meantime the press wonder why there so few Primary Schoolteachers
www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/news/m...-detail/article.html |
|
In The Know |
BR wrote:
SION JENKINS was a scapegoat for the SUSSEX POLICE who did not want to investigate the BILLIE JO killing - and because they messed it up they have tried to keep face with this decision.
Do I not remember an investigative documentary some years ago that pointed the finger at a "tramp" who had been seen in the immediate area? |
|
JK2006 |
Essentially the presumption of innocence has been replaced by the presumption of guilt, as I discovered to my cost ten years ago.
Why? Because it's a better story. |
|
BR |
I believe the POLICE have a vendetta against TEACHERS and PRIESTS in particular along with MUSLIMS and WRITERS.
They go soft on Career Criminals and thugs.
SION JENKINS was a scapegoat for the SUSSEX POLICE who did not want to investigate the BILLIE JO killing - and because they messed it up they have tried to keep face with this decision. |
|
Les |
The wording of the ruling/verdict/outcome seems key in current legislation, certainly when viewing compensation
Certainly, this is true in the Bambi/Bamber case.
If the proposed appeal goes ahead, it could open up one of the biggest 'can of worms' in UK legal history - not only from the compensation stance.
If the new verdict is 'not guilty' (as I have always thought it should have been), the lawsuits will reach into the middle of the century - at enormous cost.
A brave jury will be required to confirm the guilty verdict in the light of the apparent new evidence; the most likely outcome is (IMO) a hung jury or some middle course - which may release Bamber, but not allow for claims and/or compensation.
European Courts will enter; perhaps, in any event. That is - if they look at cases c25 years old.
 |
|
|
|
