The much longer chapter - one of ten on the worst miscarriages of justice in the UK from the past 30 years - goes into far greater detail about many of the flaws in my prosecution. But I have to say, the other nine cases are far more serious - several of the innocent men are still in prison, serving life sentences for crimes they clearly did not commit. Bob's forensic, detailed examination is extraordinary and essential reading for anyone believing that Hillsborough is not the only example of police behaviour.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3567549...alibi-sent-jail.html

Incidentally for anybody wondering why the CCRC (Criminal Case Review Commission) explained why they did not refer my case to the Court of Appeal, they said it is not when something happened but whether which matters. In a case where ONE SECOND was the difference between a serious crime (aged 15) or no crime at all (aged 16).

this business of changing dates of an alleged offense in mid-trial or near the end..basically crafting evidence to suit the claims once that 'evidence' has been shot down is an utter disgrace.

Could not happen in a US court or Australian court for that matter & I doubt anywhere else.

What has happened to British law?

Yes indeed Hedda and it was done again and again in my case; every single time making the dates later (and the false accusers older). I accept the prosecution's right to alter the dates but find it absolutely incredible that I wasn't allowed to find evidence (as I subsequently did after my release) for the other dates. How on earth can that be considered fair? Talk about bringing Justice into disrepute. Likewise, how on earth can accepting one person's word as evidence with no other proof at all - be fair? How can claiming as similar descriptions which are clearly each totally different be fair? There are many aspects I find shocking. How can someone NOT be allowed an appeal when the conviction specifies exact dates which cannot be right - be fair? I quite simply can prove 100% that I was on a different continent on those dates; how can I still be guilty? When there is evidence that a "victim" lied and has admitted they lied - how can it be fair that the appeal is not at least considered? This is why I have said for 16 years - the system is broken. Admittedly a subjective opinion.

My favourite line in the article is "the police... may have inadvertently dropped hints". In a week when we have heard all about the police inadvertently dropping hints about drunken fans pissing on dead bodies and other such horrendous, shocking lies, surely someone, somewhere must be considering doing something about our police behaviour.

JK, delighted to hear that Bob Woffinden has covered your case, and nice to see the write up in the Mail. Well done for sticking to your guns and refusing to shut up! Do you have any remaining chance of getting the original verdict overturned, and is your travel seriously hampered in the meantime?

Put it this way; I'm not holding my breath that British Justice will be mended any time soon. It took the Hillsborough families 27 years to get a fair verdict; I've only been fighting for 16.

Congratulations Mr King....the first time a national newspaper has cast real doubt on your conviction.
A look at some of the comments though mean we have a long way to go to convince the public at large.

'Bunbuns73, Wakefield, United Kingdom, about 13 hours ago
He should take a lie detector test - that would prove his innocence/guilt one way or the other.'

I wonder if a word with 'Jeremy Kyle' would not be an idea? ....quite a scoop.....oh well....just my imagination running wild...a time for celebration..I'd not viewed the site in a while,then this hit me in a net cafe in Kuala Lumpar....best news I read in years.

I begged to take a lie detector test at the time and was told they were totally unreliable and results would not be allowed in court!

I am thrilled about the article and it is better than I had hoped for. However, looking at the mail site, it appears to have been removed..even though the link still works.

Still there Honey - www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3567549...alibi-sent-jail.html

and the index

www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?sel...Phrase=jonathan+king

JK2006 wrote:
Still there Honey - www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3567549...alibi-sent-jail.html

and the index

www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?sel...Phrase=jonathan+king


I really really hope it is just my antique laptop (built by Noah) at fault somehow, but I have had experience before of them hiding stories that dont suit.

know the link works, but when I scroll down in the main website ( www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html )
the story doesn't appear, yet it was featured quite high up earlier.
We need people to stumble across it, not just find it through links.

True but I think (I tend not to be a conspiracy theorist) it is just because Monday's paper gets put together by 8pm the day before.

I found this article incredibly worrying. Not because of your situation but because of what it says about the trial process and courts and judges and juries. How can it be that a judge allows dates to be changed without giving the defendant the time to find a possible alibi? And when after conviction he does find an alibi he is not allowed to appeal.

JK2006 wrote:
I begged to take a lie detector test at the time and was told they were totally unreliable and results would not be allowed in court!

It's not for the court Mr King,it's so Joe Public will be on your side.
Millions would see it on a show like Kyle,and even if not 'court' evidence you would gain momentum for our cause....sitting back and enjoying this article may well be fun,but surely you need to make capital from this?.....and what better way than proving yourself on national TV?

It may not be in good taste,but it would do the job,connect to the working classes,something so far not got near...the very people who need to be converted for us to stand a chance.

JK2006 wrote:
True but I think (I tend not to be a conspiracy theorist) it is just because Monday's paper gets put together by 8pm the day before.

I think you were bumped for the dummy sucking Alsatian.

Yes Honey, that's life! My old acquaintance Andy Warhol gave us 15 minutes of fame. He was wrong. It's fifteen seconds.

Pattaya wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
I begged to take a lie detector test at the time and was told they were totally unreliable and results would not be allowed in court!

It's not for the court Mr King,it's so Joe Public will be on your side.
Millions would see it on a show like Kyle,and even if not 'court' evidence you would gain momentum for our cause....sitting back and enjoying this article may well be fun,but surely you need to make capital from this?.....and what better way than proving yourself on national TV?

It may not be in good taste,but it would do the job,connect to the working classes,something so far not got near...the very people who need to be converted for us to stand a chance.

Totally agree. Look how Harvey Proctor dominated the narrative of his case. Time to take the bull by the horns.