Discussion:
Now; the police even refuse to apologise for lying in court.
Add Reply
Keema's Nan
2020-01-13 10:37:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Police have refused to apologise to a man wrongly jailed for 25 years because
officers lied at his trial, even after the now-retired appeal court judge who
quashed the conviction told the Guardian that the force should say sorry.

Cheshire police said that while they were “concerned” at the wrongful
jailing of Paul Blackburn, who was convicted as a teenager in 1978 for the
attempted murder and sexual assault of a young boy, no apology was needed as
procedures at the time of the investigation were “very different”.

Blackburn, then in a reform school in Warrington, Cheshire, was arrested
shortly after he turned 15. The only notable evidence against him was a
confession he signed after four hours of questioning by two senior officers,
with no parent or lawyer present.

The appeal court, which quashed the conviction in 2005
(https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/may/25/ukcrime), two years after
Blackburn was released on license, said the police claim he wrote the
confession unaided “can now be seen to have been untrue” after linguistic
analysis showed it was littered with police jargon almost certainly unknown
to a poorly-educated teenager.The ruling
(http://netk.net.au/UK/Blackburn.pdf)said this cast doubt on other police
claims.

The Guardian covered Blackburn’s case for its Justice on Trial series
(https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jun/09/paul-blackburn-wrongly-
convicted)in 2009. Infollow-up interviews recorded for the Today in Focus
podcast
(https://www.theguardian.com/news/audio/2020/jan/13/why-did-paul-blackburn-
spend-25-years-jail-for-crime-didnt-commit), the lead appeal court judge, Sir
David Keene, recalled it as “a shocking case”.

Keene, who is now retired and thus able to speak publicly for the first time,
said the evidence about Blackburn’s confession was “manifestly absurd”
and that the police should apologise.

“In the light of the findings of our court about the way in which some of
the officers of that force had lied at trial, leading to a wrongful
conviction, I would have thought it would have been appropriate for them to
apologise,” he said.

When asked about Keene’s view, assistant chief constable Matt Burton said
the Cheshire police would not do so, despite accepting the appeal court
decisions. Burton said the force was “satisfied that we do not need to
reopen the investigation”, an apparent intimation they still believe
Blackburn was responsible.

“An independent investigation into the conduct of the officers involved in
this case was also undertaken in 1996 which concluded that there was no
evidence of any misconduct nor was there any evidence to pursue criminal
proceedings against the officers concerned,” Burton said.

“This case was investigated more than 40 years ago, at a time when the
procedures and rules around the questioning of suspects and the submission of
evidence were very different to that of today.”

Blackburn’s ordeal in more than a dozen prisons over his sentence was made
even worse by his refusal to accept the protection offered to sex offenders
because he maintained his innocence.

Over his first 15 years in jail, Blackburn said, he endured “beatings on a
daily basis, abuse on a daily basis, spit on a daily basis”, adding: “The
first time I was placed on report officially by a prison officer, was for
refusing a direct order to mop my own blood up off the floor.”

Blackburn was later assisted by older, more educated prisoners, who helped
him push for an appeal. While he has worked since his release to highlight
other miscarriages of justice, Blackburn has described how he still struggles
to cope with the trauma of his experiences in prison.

“I still get quite distressed, on a daily basis, replaying things over and
over again,” he said. “You’re standing there doing the ironing, and all
of a sudden your in Full Sutton [jail], in the punishment block. Different
things will set me off – uniforms, keys, all this sort of thing.”

Some semblance of stability has been brought by marriage, and by compensation
Blackburn was awarded after the appeal – though changes to the system made
under the 2010 coalition government means it would be unlikely he would be
awarded this now.
Andrew "Andrzej" Baron
2020-01-13 10:42:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
Police have refused to apologise to a man wrongly jailed for 25 years because
officers lied at his trial, even after the now-retired appeal court judge who
quashed the conviction told the Guardian that the force should say sorry.
BOO-HOO-HOO... complain to MI5! LOMPO!
Tall Henry
2020-01-13 10:44:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andrew "Andrzej" Baron
BOO-HOO-HOO... complain to MI5! LOMPO!
This is a thread for HUMANS only, Andrzej. No sub-humans allowed,
and even if they were, you would not qualify, as you're a SUB-LOUSE.

Now... bugger off!
A. Filip
2020-01-13 12:54:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tall Henry
Post by Andrew "Andrzej" Baron
BOO-HOO-HOO... complain to MI5! LOMPO!
This is a thread for HUMANS only, Andrzej. No sub-humans allowed,
and even if they were, you would not qualify, as you're a SUB-LOUSE.
Now... bugger off!
Could you publicly extend your list of sub-humans?
--
A. Filip
| Practice yourself what you preach. (Titus Maccius Plautus)
Tall Henry
2020-01-13 13:12:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by A. Filip
Post by Tall Henry
This is a thread for HUMANS only, Andrzej. No sub-humans allowed,
and even if they were, you would not qualify, as you're a SUB-LOUSE.
Now... bugger off!
Could you publicly extend your list of sub-humans?
Not really. BTW, currently the sub-human list is empty, and there
is just a single entry in the sub-LOUSE list -- sick old nazoid
pedo Andrew "Andrzej" Baron, aka "Connoisseur de merde", "shick old
yidoid pedo", "Grikbassturder", "Cernal Corn", "Professeur de merde",
etc. (also forging as "RJ11", "Loose Cannon" and more). If you're an
old-timer here, you may recall his previous reincarnations, "The
Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe" (aka "Revd pedo"), "nice goy", and the
more recent "Shitsack Moishe Goldbergsky". This is, of course, just
a partial list.

Now, if the dirty nazoid pedo will advance to the rank of sub-HUMAN,
I will be happy to update the lists. Of course, if (finally!) the
angry Israelis who are trying to find him will succeed, both lists
will be empty.

Best wishes, the real "RJ11".
Keema's Nan
2020-01-13 11:54:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andrew "Andrzej" Baron
Post by Keema's Nan
Police have refused to apologise to a man wrongly jailed for 25 years because
officers lied at his trial, even after the now-retired appeal court judge who
quashed the conviction told the Guardian that the force should say sorry.
BOO-HOO-HOO... complain to MI5! LOMPO!
I would have thought any intelligent response would have included the fact
that lying in court was a criminal offence and the perpetrators ought to be
arrested.

But then my big mistake was presuming you had a small amount of intelligence.
G***@skata.co.uk
2020-01-13 14:44:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 11:54:46 +0000, Keema's Nan
<fluhs jew smut/lies/shite>
Post by Keema's Nan
I would have thought any intelligent response would have included the fact
that lying in court was a criminal offence and the perpetrators ought to be
arrested.
I would have thought it was obvious that this was jew paedophile
Baruch 'Barry' Shein excreting yet more jew shite from std.com.
Post by Keema's Nan
But then my big mistake was presuming you had a small amount of intelligence.
And replying to a jew forger.
Tall Henry
2020-01-13 15:09:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by G***@skata.co.uk
And replying to a jew forger.
No one believes you, old nazoid pedo.
Peeler
2020-01-13 17:58:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 06:44:51 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
Post by G***@skata.co.uk
<fluhs jew smut/lies/shite>
Flushing your OWN shit finally, you forging, impersonating and nym-shifting
dreckserb?
--
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"That [referring to the term "consenting adults"] is just an outdated legal
construct. Are you telling me that a 13-year old who spends 15 hours a day
on Facebook is incapable of consent?"
MID: <Og0VE.1298131$***@usenetxs.com>
abelard
2020-01-13 10:44:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 10:37:36 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Police have refused to apologise to a man wrongly jailed for 25 years because
officers lied at his trial, even after the now-retired appeal court judge who
quashed the conviction told the Guardian that the force should say sorry.
Cheshire police said that while they were “concerned” at the wrongful
jailing of Paul Blackburn, who was convicted as a teenager in 1978 for the
attempted murder and sexual assault of a young boy, no apology was needed as
procedures at the time of the investigation were “very different”.
Blackburn, then in a reform school in Warrington, Cheshire, was arrested
shortly after he turned 15. The only notable evidence against him was a
confession he signed after four hours of questioning by two senior officers,
with no parent or lawyer present.
The appeal court, which quashed the conviction in 2005
(https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/may/25/ukcrime), two years after
Blackburn was released on license, said the police claim he wrote the
confession unaided “can now be seen to have been untrue” after linguistic
analysis showed it was littered with police jargon almost certainly unknown
to a poorly-educated teenager.The ruling
(http://netk.net.au/UK/Blackburn.pdf)said this cast doubt on other police
claims.
The Guardian covered Blackburn’s case for its Justice on Trial series
(https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jun/09/paul-blackburn-wrongly-
convicted)in 2009. Infollow-up interviews recorded for the Today in Focus
podcast
(https://www.theguardian.com/news/audio/2020/jan/13/why-did-paul-blackburn-
spend-25-years-jail-for-crime-didnt-commit), the lead appeal court judge, Sir
David Keene, recalled it as “a shocking case”.
Keene, who is now retired and thus able to speak publicly for the first time,
said the evidence about Blackburn’s confession was “manifestly absurd”
and that the police should apologise.
“In the light of the findings of our court about the way in which some of
the officers of that force had lied at trial, leading to a wrongful
conviction, I would have thought it would have been appropriate for them to
apologise,” he said.
When asked about Keene’s view, assistant chief constable Matt Burton said
the Cheshire police would not do so, despite accepting the appeal court
decisions. Burton said the force was “satisfied that we do not need to
reopen the investigation”, an apparent intimation they still believe
Blackburn was responsible.
“An independent investigation into the conduct of the officers involved in
this case was also undertaken in 1996 which concluded that there was no
evidence of any misconduct nor was there any evidence to pursue criminal
proceedings against the officers concerned,” Burton said.
“This case was investigated more than 40 years ago, at a time when the
procedures and rules around the questioning of suspects and the submission of
evidence were very different to that of today.”
Blackburn’s ordeal in more than a dozen prisons over his sentence was made
even worse by his refusal to accept the protection offered to sex offenders
because he maintained his innocence.
Over his first 15 years in jail, Blackburn said, he endured “beatings on a
daily basis, abuse on a daily basis, spit on a daily basis”, adding: “The
first time I was placed on report officially by a prison officer, was for
refusing a direct order to mop my own blood up off the floor.”
Blackburn was later assisted by older, more educated prisoners, who helped
him push for an appeal. While he has worked since his release to highlight
other miscarriages of justice, Blackburn has described how he still struggles
to cope with the trauma of his experiences in prison.
“I still get quite distressed, on a daily basis, replaying things over and
over again,” he said. “You’re standing there doing the ironing, and all
of a sudden your in Full Sutton [jail], in the punishment block. Different
things will set me off – uniforms, keys, all this sort of thing.”
Some semblance of stability has been brought by marriage, and by compensation
Blackburn was awarded after the appeal – though changes to the system made
under the 2010 coalition government means it would be unlikely he would be
awarded this now.
i'm told by the pc socialists that it would be 'unfair' to
hold other cultures to your 'progressive' cultural standards
--
www.abelard.org
Ned Latham
2020-01-13 10:50:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Keema's Nan wrote:

----snip----
"In the light of the findings of our court about the way in which some
of the officers of that force had lied at trial, leading to a wrongful
conviction, I would have thought it would have been appropriate for them
to apologise", he said.
What crap. They shouldn't be apologising: they should be on charges of
perjury, assault and perverting the course of justicxe.

----snip----
Keema's Nan
2020-01-13 11:57:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ned Latham
----snip----
"In the light of the findings of our court about the way in which some
of the officers of that force had lied at trial, leading to a wrongful
conviction, I would have thought it would have been appropriate for them
to apologise", he said.
What crap. They shouldn't be apologising: they should be on charges of
perjury, assault and perverting the course of justicxe.
----snip----
That is probably why no one will apologise.

Although a judge from the local lodge would get them off anyway - so what’s
the point?
Ned Latham
2020-01-13 12:38:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
----snip----
"In the light of the findings of our court about the way in which
some of the officers of that force had lied at trial, leading to
a wrongful conviction, I would have thought it would have been
appropriate for them to apologise", he said.
What crap. They shouldn't be apologising: they should be on charges
of perjury, assault and perverting the course of justicxe.
That is probably why no one will apologise.
Although a judge from the local lodge would get them off anyway - so
what's the point?
If they were charged every time they offended, the corrupt process would
begin to beome uintenable.
Keema's Nan
2020-01-13 13:06:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ned Latham
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
----snip----
"In the light of the findings of our court about the way in which
some of the officers of that force had lied at trial, leading to
a wrongful conviction, I would have thought it would have been
appropriate for them to apologise", he said.
What crap. They shouldn't be apologising: they should be on charges
of perjury, assault and perverting the course of justicxe.
That is probably why no one will apologise.
Although a judge from the local lodge would get them off anyway - so
what's the point?
If they were charged every time they offended, the corrupt process would
begin to beome uintenable.
Is that the latest lame excuse for why the police should be above the law?

Oh well, at least we plebs know the truth.
Ned Latham
2020-01-13 13:37:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
----snip----
"In the light of the findings of our court about the way in which
some of the officers of that force had lied at trial, leading to
a wrongful conviction, I would have thought it would have been
appropriate for them to apologise", he said.
What crap. They shouldn't be apologising: they should be on charges
of perjury, assault and perverting the course of justicxe.
That is probably why no one will apologise.
Although a judge from the local lodge would get them off anyway - so
what's the point?
If they were charged every time they offended, the corrupt process would
begin to beome untenable.
Is that the latest lame excuse for why the police should be above the law?
Exactly the opposite. You should learn to follow a line of thought.
Keema's Nan
2020-01-13 13:58:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ned Latham
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
----snip----
"In the light of the findings of our court about the way in which
some of the officers of that force had lied at trial, leading to
a wrongful conviction, I would have thought it would have been
appropriate for them to apologise", he said.
What crap. They shouldn't be apologising: they should be on charges
of perjury, assault and perverting the course of justicxe.
That is probably why no one will apologise.
Although a judge from the local lodge would get them off anyway - so
what's the point?
If they were charged every time they offended, the corrupt process would
begin to beome untenable.
Is that the latest lame excuse for why the police should be above the law?
Exactly the opposite. You should learn to follow a line of thought.
My line of thought is that the police are employed to uphold the law, not
offend against it when it suits them.

I can’t imagine what your line of thought might be, and nor do I ever want
to.
Ned Latham
2020-01-13 15:18:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
----snip----
"In the light of the findings of our court about the way in
which some of the officers of that force had lied at trial,
leading to a wrongful conviction, I would have thought it
would have been appropriate for them to apologise", he said.
What crap. They shouldn't be apologising: they should be on
charges of perjury, assault and perverting the course of
justice.
That is probably why no one will apologise.
Although a judge from the local lodge would get them off anyway
so what's the point?
If they were charged every time they offended, the corrupt process
would begin to beome untenable.
Is that the latest lame excuse for why the police should be above the law?
Exactly the opposite. You should learn to follow a line of thought.
My line of thought is that the police are employed to uphold the law, not
offend against it when it suits them.
So's mine, you moron. It was I who said they should be on charges.
Post by Keema's Nan
I can't imagine what your line of thought might be,
No need for imagination, just a modicum of intelligence. You asked what's
the point of prosecuting them and I told you. Dead simple, really.
Post by Keema's Nan
and nor do I ever want to.
What's that? The mating call of the bigot?
Keema's Nan
2020-01-13 16:37:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ned Latham
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Ned Latham
----snip----
"In the light of the findings of our court about the way in
which some of the officers of that force had lied at trial,
leading to a wrongful conviction, I would have thought it
would have been appropriate for them to apologise", he said.
What crap. They shouldn't be apologising: they should be on
charges of perjury, assault and perverting the course of
justice.
That is probably why no one will apologise.
Although a judge from the local lodge would get them off anyway
so what's the point?
If they were charged every time they offended, the corrupt process
would begin to beome untenable.
Is that the latest lame excuse for why the police should be above the law?
Exactly the opposite. You should learn to follow a line of thought.
My line of thought is that the police are employed to uphold the law, not
offend against it when it suits them.
So's mine, you moron. It was I who said they should be on charges.
Post by Keema's Nan
I can't imagine what your line of thought might be,
No need for imagination, just a modicum of intelligence. You asked what's
the point of prosecuting them and I told you. Dead simple, really.
Post by Keema's Nan
and nor do I ever want to.
What's that? The mating call of the bigot?
You want someone to mate with?

Dear oh dear, you are on the wrong forum for that sweetie.
Loading...