Author Topic: The ITV Drama  (Read 16095 times)

0 Members and 10 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8169
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2430 on: February 13, 2020, 07:51:PM »
There was a bit In the drama which looked a bit odd as if it had been added in . Jones said something like

The blood can not be determined as sheilas
The silencer will be discredited as the jury will say it’s been contaminated
No forensics

So this will all come down to Julie mugfords evidence


That was a bit weird when trying to show what actually happened in the court .

Shocking  :-\

Offline Reader

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2411
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2431 on: February 13, 2020, 08:52:PM »
The actual lines in the drama didn't include "no forensics".

Cook: "But there's still the silencer, the evidence of human blood in it."
Another officer: "Well, no, we can't conclusively prove it was Sheila's blood, and the defence will say it's contaminated."
Stan Jones: "The trial will turn on witness testimony. That's what the jury will remember. That will be what gets them over the line."
Ainsley: "Jeremy can be very convincing, as you found."
Stan Jones: "It will come down to Julie Mugford. That's what will turn it - her word against his."

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43389
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2432 on: February 13, 2020, 09:19:PM »
Then Stan Jones was made to act as though he hadn't known about the £25,000 when it was probably him who'd instigated it to get Julie as a prosecuting witness.
It wouldn't have been the same if he'd been all smiles while giving her a hug as it would have looked like the set-up that it was-------if you get my drift.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21340
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2433 on: February 13, 2020, 09:21:PM »
The OJ case had a mountain of forensic evidence, which included DNA.

However he was acquited partly on the strenght of one witness - Furman.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10307
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2434 on: February 13, 2020, 09:26:PM »
The actual lines in the drama didn't include "no forensics".

Cook: "But there's still the silencer, the evidence of human blood in it."
Another officer: "Well, no, we can't conclusively prove it was Sheila's blood, and the defence will say it's contaminated."
Stan Jones: "The trial will turn on witness testimony. That's what the jury will remember. That will be what gets them over the line."
Ainsley: "Jeremy can be very convincing, as you found."
Stan Jones: "It will come down to Julie Mugford. That's what will turn it - her word against his."



Thanks for the correction .

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10307
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2435 on: February 13, 2020, 09:27:PM »
The actual lines in the drama didn't include "no forensics".

Cook: "But there's still the silencer, the evidence of human blood in it."
Another officer: "Well, no, we can't conclusively prove it was Sheila's blood, and the defence will say it's contaminated."
Stan Jones: "The trial will turn on witness testimony. That's what the jury will remember. That will be what gets them over the line."
Ainsley: "Jeremy can be very convincing, as you found."
Stan Jones: "It will come down to Julie Mugford. That's what will turn it - her word against his."


Still not true though was it . The jury were told that it was sheilas blood

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21340
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2436 on: February 14, 2020, 12:36:AM »
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-35427/DNA-tests-Hanratty-guilty.html&ved=2ahUKEwjNiPPa4s_nAhUvXRUIHVxLB1Q4ChAWMAZ6BAgIEAE&usg=AOvVaw0iU5KIIbxV72VVmMEqdZA2

The COA ordered that Hanratty's body be exhumed for DNA tests. Obviously they looked at Bamber's appeals in great detail before the rejections. The last appeal hearing lasting 12 days.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 12:37:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Reader

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2411
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2437 on: February 14, 2020, 11:49:PM »
Both Hanratty and Bamber were victims of miscarriages of justice.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8169
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2438 on: February 15, 2020, 03:07:AM »
Both Hanratty and Bamber were victims of miscarriages of justice.

As far as I know Hanratty was proven guilty by DNA.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21340
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2439 on: February 15, 2020, 03:38:AM »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8169
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2440 on: February 15, 2020, 02:01:PM »
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://netk.net.au/UK/HanrattyJudgment.asp&ved=2ahUKEwiRkO7Kz9LnAhWOQhUIHRtiCKQQFjABegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw3GbJO64CD7Lm7jJU2syinT

Hanratty's COA report.

DNA confirmed his guilt. The standard claim of contamination was then made by supporters.

If contamination was the case, then you would find both Hanrartty's DNA and the "real killers" DNA also. But they did not.

Steve_uk thinks they planted Hanratty's DNA after they dug him up.  ;D

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12122
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2441 on: February 15, 2020, 05:26:PM »
If contamination was the case, then you would find both Hanrartty's DNA and the "real killers" DNA also. But they did not.

Steve_uk thinks they planted Hanratty's DNA after they dug him up.  ;D
I may have changed my mind since. A very difficult case to fathom.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2020, 06:20:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8169
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2442 on: Yesterday at 06:27 PM »
I may have changed my mind since. A very difficult case to fathom.

Didn’t the victim identify Hanratty as the perpetrator?

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12122
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2443 on: Yesterday at 07:15 PM »
Didn’t the victim identify Hanratty as the perpetrator?
Yes but only on the second identity parade. By that time Hanratty's photograph had appeared in the newspapers and he had bleached his hair, which turned out an orange colour. The implication was that Valerie Storie had been influenced by the newspapers. Her first comment after the attack was that he had light, fairish hair, but at trial for some reason she stated her attacker had brown hair.  However two other witnesses, John Skillet and Edward Blackhall identified Hanratty driving the Morris Minor in London after the attack.

What changed my mind was that Hanratty had enquired about buying a gun, saying he wanted to be a "stick-up man". In this sense it was a huge escalation from his normal criminality, which is why initially, along with his alibi in Rhyl, I expressed doubts about the conviction.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8169
Re: The ITV Drama
« Reply #2444 on: Yesterday at 08:21 PM »
Didn’t the victim identify Hanratty as the perpetrator?

Yes. Valerie Storie identified Hanratty as the perpetrator . The same guy who’s semen was found in her underwear after later DNA tests.   

Only Steve_uk would find this a “difficult case to fathom”  ;D