Author Topic: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn  (Read 5983 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Re: Re: Sandra Leans book
« Reply #30 on: January 10, 2017, 05:14:PM »
why has buddy got to answer qustions about his posts exactly what gives you the right cross examine other posters about everything the say and i might a qustion about why your changing the subject on a thread you started in the first place.

Why do you feel as though you are under cross examination? I'm not cross examining anyone. I've asked a valid question. Why is Sandra Lean blatantly avoiding answering my question. What is she hiding?

Is she still going around telling people Simon Hall is innocent? Are you?
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Sandra Leans book
« Reply #31 on: January 10, 2017, 05:25:PM »
who created the website that made all sorts of cliams provliaming that simon hall couldent have done it becouse of fornsic evdence that other people were in the house it wasnt sandra lean created that site.

the elphant on the room you called it at the time now were all those clliams false or true.

Which website are you referring to, there were several. I cannot remember how many in total. SH's brother had a page back in/around 2002/03. Then at some point SB had another site, then his parents.

The first website SH had when I became involved was run by Billy Middleton on his wrongly accused person site.

There were indeed many claims made about his innocence but ultimately they all stemmed from SH.

Maybe I should post the jist of the claims from Sandra's book on this thread, then you'll be able to see what was being said way before my involvement. And again, the case was referred to as the elephant in the room long before I ever referred to it as such.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2017, 05:41:PM by Stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #32 on: January 10, 2017, 06:01:PM »
Ah, good, I was hoping this would come around again. Stephanie thinks I was “blatantly avoiding” her questions. In fact, the thread had spiralled off in several different directions – I was just waiting until my response made logical sense. So, not hiding anything either.

Stephanie also thinks No Smoke should have been withdrawn or revised. I understand Stephanie’s right to feel that way. While she is also entitled to ask questions, I am under no obligation to answer them. However, on this occasion, I choose to address a couple of matters raised by Stephanie for the benefit of others who may be interested.
 
I spoke with many people (including others whose cases were mentioned or discussed) about the question of withdrawing the book. Not one of them wanted the book withdrawn. There were discussions about possible revisions which would, of necessity, have taken a great deal of time and effort - time and effort that I was not capable of devoting to the matter at that time.

If it helps, I can give a synopsis of what the revision to the Simon Hall chapter in No Smoke would have comprised, and why:

“In August 2013, it was reported that Simon Hall had confessed to the murder, in what many considered questionable circumstances, after ten years of maintaining his innocence. Some observers (including Simon's family) expressed concerns about Simon's mental health immediately prior to, and at the time of, the confession (a suicide attempt in the months before, for example.)

The confession and the circumstances in which it was made, have never been made public. There were other suicide attempts, the last being in February 2014, when he was found dead in his cell. The confession, whether reliable or not, does not alter the fact that the case on which the conviction was founded was extremely weak, and fell far below the standards most of us would expect when a life sentence is the potential outcome of proceedings.

There can be no doubt that the confession shocked those fighting claimed cases of Miscarriage of Justice, and raised serious questions about whether those fights should continue. However, where the fight is based on the evidence of the case as used at trial and in subsequent appeal proceedings, and that evidence is not robust enough to justify the convictions obtained, then the fight must continue, in the name of true justice.

We will never know if Simon Hall’s confession was genuine, or the confused utterings of a crumbling sanity. The decision about whether to take up, or continue to carry, the baton for claimed Miscarriages of Justice is a matter for the person deciding to do so, and their own conscience.


You see, to this day, we have only Stephanie’s word about the circumstances leading up to the confession, the circumstances of the confession itself, the state of Simon’s mental and emotional well-being (or otherwise), the content of the confession etc. We have no information about how the confession was given or accepted (it was reported at the inquest that he “told his wife” who then “told him to tell the prison.” I have no idea if that is true or not – it was reported in the media, after all.) I’m not inclined to simply take Stephanie’s word (or anyone else’s for that matter) at face value.
But, of course, that is my opinion, one I’m perfectly entitled to hold.

And so, I would simply revise the book to reflect the known facts, as they currently stand.


Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #33 on: January 10, 2017, 06:25:PM »
Ah, good, I was hoping this would come around again. Stephanie thinks I was “blatantly avoiding” her questions. In fact, the thread had spiralled off in several different directions – I was just waiting until my response made logical sense. So, not hiding anything either.

Stephanie also thinks No Smoke should have been withdrawn or revised.

What do you mean "ah good I was hoping this would come round again? It hasn't been going round. One thread, one topic entitled "Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn

And what do you mean by you were just waiting until your response made logical sense? See you are already posting in riddles. Do you mean you have several responses to my question or did you mean you needed time to think about your logical response before you responded? Or does this statement have another connotation altogether.

Following SH's confession you said you would be withdrawing your book. So let's back track a little before we get ahead of ourselves. It was YOU who said YOU would be withdrawing your book. I said nothing.

The reason I decided to start a thread in order to ask you directly is because it is quite apparent you have decided to do nothing about what YOU said you had intended on doing and you appear to be burying your head in the sand.

I want an open and honest debate about this Sandra, as it's been a long time coming. So let's lay some ground rules shall we.

I would appreciate it if you would show me the courtesy of being honest and not attempt to confuse matters within your first couple of sentences.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2017, 06:50:PM by Stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #34 on: January 10, 2017, 07:07:PM »
You see, to this day, we have only Stephanie’s word about the circumstances leading up to the confession, the circumstances of the confession itself, the state of Simon’s mental and emotional well-being (or otherwise), the content of the confession etc. We have no information about how the confession was given or accepted (it was reported at the inquest that he “told his wife” who then “told him to tell the prison.” I have no idea if that is true or not – it was reported in the media, after all.)

"On 23 July 2013 Simon Hall confessed to the murder of Joan Albert to a mental health nurse, after saying he needed to speak with her urgently.

Jurors at Norfolk Coroner's Court have heard that Hall was a user of the former legal high Spice, a strong substance smoked by some inmates.

He was reviewed throughout August 2013. On 8 September he overdosed again.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-norfolk-36460579

And are you suggesting all those witnesses who gave evidence to Her Majesty's Coroner lied?

So you followed the Inquest but are choosing to cherry pick, as usual Sandra  ::) not a good start so far is it!
« Last Edit: January 10, 2017, 07:19:PM by Stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #35 on: January 10, 2017, 08:26:PM »
Speaking about the moment Hall told her of his guilt Mrs Hall said: “He confessed to me on the telephone on July 23 (2013) and I advised him to tell the prison.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/widow_of_suffolk_murderer_simon_hall_speaks_out_at_first_day_of_norfolk_inquest_1_4575518

Media wars are not my thing. Misinformation is not my thing. Have at it, Stephanie.

When I revise No Smoke, the quote I posted earlier, give or take, will be the revision for Simon's case. Take it or leave it!


Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #36 on: January 10, 2017, 09:15:PM »
Sandra you have been given the opportunity to set the record straight but it appears you are choosing to continue with this disingenuous stance, suggesting your reputation is far more important to you than any social justice or political issues, as you claimed on here recently.

“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #37 on: January 10, 2017, 09:27:PM »
Speaking about the moment Hall told her of his guilt Mrs Hall said: “He confessed to me on the telephone on July 23 (2013) and I advised him to tell the prison.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/widow_of_suffolk_murderer_simon_hall_speaks_out_at_first_day_of_norfolk_inquest_1_4575518

Media wars are not my thing.


Please point me to the media wars you refer in relation to Simon Hall's Inquest. There weren't any!
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #38 on: January 10, 2017, 10:28:PM »
for the benefit of others who may be interested.

It's important the facts are established before we go any further, as I want others to be able to make an informed decision when considering their options.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/No-Smoke-Shocking-British-Justice/dp/184685704X

I didn't get involved with Simon until after your book had been published, therefore all of the information contained in your book on his case had not come from me. I take it you were told of Simon's previous suicide attempts immediately following his conviction. And if you saw his case papers you would have been aware of his suicide ideations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicidal_ideation whilst on remand awaiting trial. I know you were aware of his previous self harming from his time in a YOI as you knew his wrists bore the scars.

Surely the synopsis of the revision for your book should also contain a reference to the Zenith burglary omission along with all the other details that came to your attention in the time leading up to the confession. By leaving these facts out you are again misleading your readers.

Stephanie Bon aka Steffie was heading up the campaign at that time, as her review on your book confirms:


5.0 out of 5 starsJustice 4 Simon, Justice for all
By S. M. Bon on 27 Jun. 2007

Format: Paperback

Miscarriages of justice are happening all around us, everyday, it's fact!!

For anyone who finds themselves in this situation, you are not alone and THERE IS HELP OUT THERE.

Sandra Lean eloquently explores various areas of the legal system and details a few cases amongst so many others.

The current British legal system does not allow people to maintain their innocence without paying the price:- bullying and abuse, "psychological reports" claiming an "in denial" attitude and refusal to admit guilt therefore take responsibility for their actions ending ultimately with no chances of parole.

Many innocent victims have completed their sentences and still await to be released.

There are many organisations such as Innocent, Mojo, The Innocent Network and more who are there to support families as well as advise them in fighting miscarriages of justice. Many Lawyers have also dedicated their careers into overturning wrongful conviction of the innocent.

DON'T make the mistake of thinking that you can rely on the system to put things right, you will be waiting a very long time.

Thank you Sandra for your hard work.

Steffie @ Justice 4 Simon

« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 12:08:AM by Stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #39 on: January 10, 2017, 11:25:PM »
Misinformation is not my thing.

Are you sure about that Sandra? I don't agree with you! However, you chose to not attend Simon Hall's inquest nor indeed did any of the Hall family. His brother (who represented himself and apparently his parents) had made himself an interested person (IP) in the proceedings and as an IP he made several submissions to HMC. I'll come back to these.

However on the day the Inquest began, HMC informed the court that Shaun Hall would not be attending the proceedings. Had you or the Hall family bothered to turn up you would have had the opportunity to hear all the evidence presented. And had Shaun Hall bothered to attend as an IP, he would have had the opportunity to cross examine witnesses; including me.


"Simon Hall was referred to Dr William Long, a senior forensic psychologist with the Prison Service, on the day the confession was made.

Dr Long told the inquest Hall had spent 10 years in prison "as a man who hadn't done what he was accused of, so his risks had changed.

"He had killed a much older woman and he told me there were some sexual aspects.

"He had changed from resisting his conviction to a man that admitted he was seriously violent." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-norfolk-36460579
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 12:24:AM by Stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #40 on: January 11, 2017, 06:44:AM »
Dr William Long, who said his role was to assess any risk posed by Simon Hall to others, described him as "a very articulate man; good-humoured."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-suffolk-36462066

So, his role was not to examine the confession, or any of the circumstances that led to it - his role was to take it as accurate and figure out if that meant Simon posed a risk to others. Did anyone, anywhere, ever assess the possible impacts of Simon's mental health on the making of the confession? Were the details of the confession checked against all of the known information? Were there any aspects of the confession that didn't match the known information, or that didn't fit logically with what was claimed? Did anyone bother to check?

In January 2013, Simon Hall said he didn't need counselling for mental health issues and would talk to his wife if needed, the jury heard.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-suffolk-36462066

A month later, he overdosed. Three months later,

Steven Garner said Simon Hall triggered the prison monitoring system again between 28 March and 2 April 2013, due to comments to a nurse that he "wanted to scream all the time" and was "going crazy".
Hall was part of that review, saying that he did not want to self-harm and was frustrated he had been lying to his wife over the last 18 months.

So between January and July, Simon's behaviour triggered "reviews" but, it seems, because he was "articulate and good humoured"  the state of his clearly deteriorating mental health was not formally addressed? By 2nd April, he told a nurse he had been "lying to his wife," but he didn't confess then? In fact, he doesn't appear to have said what it was he was lying about - he had already said he was "going crazy" - is it safe to conclude that the lying to which he referred was about his guilt? Or was it something else that was making him crazy, perhaps making him believe he had done things he hadn't?

Before Stephanie jumps to conclusions, I'm asking questions, not stating facts. These are questions, I believe, that need clarifying before the confession is accepted at face value; a man who, after ten years of proclaiming innocence says he is "going crazy" and then confesses is, I think, an interesting set of circumstances which warrants further investigation.

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #41 on: January 11, 2017, 06:50:AM »
You see, to this day, we have only Stephanie’s word
Who is this we again you will need to expand. Are you referring to you and Nugnug?
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #42 on: January 11, 2017, 06:53:AM »
Quote
Following SH's confession you said you would be withdrawing your book. So let's back track a little before we get ahead of ourselves. It was YOU who said YOU would be withdrawing your book. I said nothing

No, I said I was considering withdrawing my book:

email of 18th August 2013: I'm sorry this is the standpoint you are taking, and sorrier still that you have chosen to respond in the manner you have. As a matter of courtesty, I mentioned the decision about No Smoke, as six other families are immediately affected by the reports of Simon's confession, and it may be in their interests to simply withdraw the book from circulation altogether.

I then contacted those involved, and, as previously stated, they did not want the book withdrawn.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #43 on: January 11, 2017, 06:54:AM »
Who is this we again you will need to expand. Are you referring to you and Nugnug?

Those of us, and there are many, who have questions about the circumstances of the confession and the confession itself. do you think people don't talk about this elsewhere?

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
Re: Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn
« Reply #44 on: January 11, 2017, 06:57:AM »
Quote
However, you chose to not attend Simon Hall's inquest

I was working full time by then. I cannot have leave between May and August. Not really a choice, was it?