Jonathan King

JK I think everyone knows you are innocent of the "crimes" you were convicted of.
I look forward to seeing what "The Sun" newspaper puts as their headlines when your conviction is eventually quashed.
JK we all love you, these things are sent to try us.
You are an inspiration to us all.
Good luck from Austria

Certificate of acceptance from the ECHR with details here...

www.kingofhits.co.uk/component/option,co...id,54/?g2_itemId=503

At last there is light at the end of the tunnel:)
Things would never have got this far had you not have kept fighting.Proof you've done the right thing.

Wonders never cease, after a very long battle, there is a light at the end of the tunnel.

Congratulations JK, I appreciate there is still a lot of work to do, but at least you should get a fair hearing.

I imagine their will be a fair amount of compensation, as many of your new ideas have not been allowed to reach TV.

If you are found innocent, then I do wonder what the press headlines will say.

Has this news made any of the tabloids/newspapers, I imagine it wouldn't as they must be squirming.

Best of luck.

Mike

Apologies, I see the story has made the Mail.

Yes it ran in the Mail On Sunday Mike (link in another thread) and there has already been a massive surge of interest.

I'm rather cynical abour fairness and chances. Any sensible person would, I'd have thought, have considered not allowing a defendant any time or facilities to prepare a defence to be unfair but that's what happened and if the entire British judicial system considers it fair, why would Europe be any different?

Hi JK,

After finding this board earlier this year, and posting a few times, I've been very quiet on here for a few months due to a VERY hectic workload.

This is great news- anyone who takes the time and trouble to look into your case (as I have done) will soon realise you are innocent.

JK2006 wrote:

I'm rather cynical abour fairness and chances. Any sensible person would, I'd have thought, have considered not allowing a defendant any time or facilities to prepare a defence to be unfair but that's what happened and if the entire British judicial system considers it fair, why would Europe be any different?

I'm not sure that's necessarily true, JK. There appears to be at least some emphasis on human rights in mainland Europe. The type of clauses UK governments consistently refuse to sign up to for example.

We'll see. Good luck anyway!

I've been on holiday, but was delighted to receive a phone call from my mum last Sunday saying she'd just read of your success in the Daily Mail (she's a big fan btw). So what exactly happens next?

I had dinner last night with a friend who is one of the country's top barristers.

He is convinced the ECHR will find in my favour and has provided me with half a dozen case law examples of previous ECHR decisions on exactly this issue - the changing of dates after the defence has concluded.

They are SO tricky (the police and CPS). The initial dates on the charge I mentioned above were January 1987 - January 1988.

How on earth you can prove you didn't do something in an entire year, God only knows, but I failed to notice the devious fact that the man's birthday was early February - which gave them the "12 or 13" line (used again and again and carried in the tabloids).

When we proved the photo he produced (how did he get it if I never met him?) was taken in May 1989, they changed the dates to May 1989-May 1990.
Not pointing out to the jury that could have made him 16 and a half!

Putting your hand on the knee of a twelve year old is very different from doing it to a 16 year old.

The prosecutor mentioned "12 year olds" dozens of times in his submissions to the jury. Yet, after the dates were finally changed, none were under 14 and most were 15 or 16.

Another charge was hugely based on a mother's diary. The changed dates were when I can now prove I was in America. The CCRC say "dates don't matter". But, as my barrister friend points out - that's what a diary is all about - DATES!

Fingers crossed.

You may be interested in this excerpt from the ECHR handbook specifying that the accused MUST be given the exact details of the DATE and place of the crime on arrest or at least at the START of the procedure.
The end of the trial is NOT the start of the procedure.

It's in French I'm afraid.

Cette disposition vise l

Whatever Jonathan, there will be many people with clammy hands right now, and I havent a clue about the technical details, but all I do know is that your case was a farce from start to finish. It is what inspired me to do the tribute video, as you have been treated appallingly, not only by the judiciary, but the backstabbing media too. Bastards everyone of them! My only prayer is that justice will seen to be done, no matter how long it takes. What a friggin great story yours will turn out to be. And throughout all a man of strength and dignity. Many would have topped themselves under such pressure. I'm not sure I could have coped with it all. Watching, listening, waiting...

Incidentally, that video I did. It culminated in lots of messages of abuse, and many stupidly presumed it was you yourself that put it up. It is why I took it down. An interesting exercise in learning how dumb most people are and how sadly they are influenced by tabloid headlines. In retrospect taking it down was the wrong thing to do perhaps, as it probably signified defeat on my part. However I didn't want to cause you anymore harm. You Tube does have very big eyes and ears. Having said that I should have realised that like everything you would take it all on the chin and remain intact. I apologise.

The trick with You Tube is, Chrissy, you set the comments to "Show only after my approval" and the really brain dead get driven mad with fury that their bile never sees the light of day.

There's a buzz that this will succeed for you JK and much discussion about how you should be treated were it to happen.

Yes it could open a Pandora's Box for the UK system.

only just came across this - amazing news. good luck with it. couldn't believe some of the info. how on earth did they not grant your appeal in the uk courts?