Author Topic: mathew hamlen  (Read 158 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13990
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
mathew hamlen
« on: September 22, 2018, 04:56:PM »

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10661
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2018, 08:47:PM »
https://matthewhamlenisinnocent.wordpress.com/
I've listened to the above podcasts and whilst I respect Sandra Lean and acknowledge the meticulous research which must have gone into this case I still probably would have convicted him on the DNA evidence provided by the Prosecution. The way they and Police behaved though reprehensible at times doesn't shock me in 2018, though the lack of an outright denial of whether he had sex with the victim I'm afraid does. I can't see any substantive link between this case and Stephen Farrow, who knew his victim and took valuables from the scene, whereas Georgina Edmonds had her jewellery and money left intact.  https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/14265690.matthew-hamlen-said-he-could-not-be-sure-if-he-had-sex-with-georgina-edmonds/?ref=ar

I think what Sandra might be alleging is that the son had some involvement in the murder, though again I don't know what evidence is out there apart from his strange behaviour at the scene and his sister possibly doubting the Police's version of events.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2018, 08:48:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 619
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2018, 09:01:AM »
One of the biggest problems with our justice system at the minute is the way DNA evidence is being misused to convince juries - the fact that there is a Select Committee gathering evidence about the failings of forensic evidence as it's used in our courts demonstrates the extent of the problem.

The claim that Matthew Hamlen "could not say 100% that he did not have sex with the victim" was the result of police manipulation (the nature of police interrogations is designed to elicit specific answers, not necessarily the truth).

Matthew could not remember where he was on the day the murder happened (it was two years earlier). The interrogating officers kept insisting that he couldn't be sure of anything if he couldn't remember the day (which, of course, is true of all of us). From there, they then suggested he "could not be sure" he didn't have sex with the victim. Matthew replied that he was "as sure as it was possible to be" that he had never had sex with an old lady - any old lady - ever. The police then introduced the subject of percentages of certainty. By then, there was no way Matthew could say 100%, because they had already made it clear they would not accept absolute certainty about anything, on the basis that Matthew could not remember the day.

What makes all of this so much worse is that there was no suggestion, or evidence, that Mrs Edmonds was sexually assaulted - there was no evidence of sexual activity whatsoever.

The DNA used to convict Matthew was so-called "touch DNA" - the big problem with this is that items of Matthew's were transported in the same bag as items from Mrs Edmonds (including the blouse on which the DNA was "found"). The slide from which the DNA was extracted was in a bag that had been slit and re-sealed by an unknown person at an unknown time and had been removed from secure storage for 5 days - there is no record of where it was during those 5 days. The DNA that was finally used to convict wasn't "found" until 6 years after the murder. The possibility of contamination is enormous.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 619
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2018, 09:13:AM »
Sorry, I meant to say, I'm not alleging anything about the son - I told the story of the events as they happened so that people could make up their own minds about how the investigation was conducted. The 999 call has raised many questions

https://matthewhamlenisinnocent.wordpress.com/2016/11/28/the-emergency-phone-call/


Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10661
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2018, 12:39:PM »
One of the biggest problems with our justice system at the minute is the way DNA evidence is being misused to convince juries - the fact that there is a Select Committee gathering evidence about the failings of forensic evidence as it's used in our courts demonstrates the extent of the problem.

The claim that Matthew Hamlen "could not say 100% that he did not have sex with the victim" was the result of police manipulation (the nature of police interrogations is designed to elicit specific answers, not necessarily the truth).

Matthew could not remember where he was on the day the murder happened (it was two years earlier). The interrogating officers kept insisting that he couldn't be sure of anything if he couldn't remember the day (which, of course, is true of all of us). From there, they then suggested he "could not be sure" he didn't have sex with the victim. Matthew replied that he was "as sure as it was possible to be" that he had never had sex with an old lady - any old lady - ever. The police then introduced the subject of percentages of certainty. By then, there was no way Matthew could say 100%, because they had already made it clear they would not accept absolute certainty about anything, on the basis that Matthew could not remember the day.

What makes all of this so much worse is that there was no suggestion, or evidence, that Mrs Edmonds was sexually assaulted - there was no evidence of sexual activity whatsoever.

The DNA used to convict Matthew was so-called "touch DNA" - the big problem with this is that items of Matthew's were transported in the same bag as items from Mrs Edmonds (including the blouse on which the DNA was "found"). The slide from which the DNA was extracted was in a bag that had been slit and re-sealed by an unknown person at an unknown time and had been removed from secure storage for 5 days - there is no record of where it was during those 5 days. The DNA that was finally used to convict wasn't "found" until 6 years after the murder. The possibility of contamination is enormous.

The suspicion must remain that Hamlen thought Police could place him at the scene and was hedging his bets to cover himself against a murder charge.  There was surely no reason to pick up a rolling pin had he been on the premises with the intention of a quick entrance and exit for burglary. We are told in the Sun newspaper of 20 March 2017 that Hamlem had a history of domestic violence and cocaine use. It seems strange that DNA was found both on the rolling pin and on the blouse. As far as forensic examination was concerned there's always the possibility of contamination, but the exhibits were placed in sealed plastic bags even if the outer bag had been slit.


An alternative explanation is that another suspect (in the Crimewatch video) was stalking the house and committed the murder, with Hamlen the same day entering the premises to steal her handbag and mobile telephone. It's stated that there was a hostel for offenders in close proximity to the Kingfisher Lodge. It's not clear who ATM man is and I wasn't clear how the Defence worked out his height. The video wasn't shown at the first trial.

Sandra did you say the Crimewatch video was inaccurate? I understand you're not implicating the son, and I learned from the Russ Faria case that it's best not to judge how individuals react to a particular stressful situation. https://youtu.be/5luEqyXgAe0
« Last Edit: September 23, 2018, 01:08:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 619
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2018, 02:28:PM »
The suspicion must remain that Hamlen thought Police could place him at the scene and was hedging his bets to cover himself against a murder charge.
Or, alternatively, that the police interrogation forced him down a route where a definitive answer would not be accepted - it's a very common practice.

Quote
There was surely no reason to pick up a rolling pin had he been on the premises with the intention of a quick entrance and exit for burglary.

If a burglar entered Mrs Edmonds' cottage that afternoon intending a quick entry and exit and was disturbed, I agree, there would have been no reason to pick up the rolling pin. She was a frail old lady - bludgeoning her with a rolling pin to "make an escape" seems like a massive over-reaction in this scenario. However, there is nothing to connect Matthew Hamlen to the cottage, the rolling pin or any suggestion that he committed a burglary - that day or any other.

Quote
We are told in the Sun newspaper of 20 March 2017 that Hamlem had a history of domestic violence and cocaine use.

We were told in the Sun newspaper that the Liverpool fans were to blame for Hillsborough. Matthew used cocaine recreationally -like a large proportion of our legal profession. There was one incident in which Matthew and his partner got into a fight - to my knowledge, no charges were ever brought - hardly a "history of domestic abuse"


Quote
It seems strange that DNA was found both on the rolling pin and on the blouse. As far as forensic examination was concerned there's always the possibility of contamination, but the exhibits were placed in sealed plastic bags even if the outer bag had been slit.

I would have expected DNA to be found on both, since the rolling pin was the murder weapon and the blouse was worn by Mrs Edmonds. The DNA on the rolling pin was never proven to be Matthew's - the profile was from a mixed sample - if the male markers from that sample all came from one individual, then that individual was definitely not Matthew. The bag containing the slide was removed from secure storage for 5 days and no-one knows where it was. The slide was also slit through all layers - again, with no explanation. One difficulty with touch DNA is the high possibility of particles from outside packaging being transferred to articles inside that packaging - there are a number of studies highlighting this. That certain packages were sealed is no protection in those circumstances.

Quote
An alternative explanation is that another suspect (in the Crimewatch video) was stalking the house and committed the murder, with Hamlen the same day entering the premises to steal her handbag and mobile telephone.

That's the first time I've seen such a suggestion and. I have to say, it doesn't make a lot of sense. What would be the motivation for the stalker murdering Mrs Edmonds? And why would Matthew steal the handbag when there was cash in clear view and the phone, which was worthless?

Quote
It's stated that there was a hostel for offenders in close proximity to the Kingfisher Lodge. It's not clear who ATM man is and I wasn't clear how the Defence worked out his height. The video wasn't shown at the first trial.

It's not known who ATM man is and it wasn't the defence who worked out his height, it was the police. They brought in an expert to calculate his height based on the height of the ATM, the bricks in the wall and the size of his feet by measuring the paving stones.  She concluded he was between 5'11 and 6'2 - he had to be at the taller end of this scale because the height to the base of his neck was 5'6" plus or minus half an inch. If he was 5' 11", that leaves only 5.5" for his neck and head!

There was a hostel for rehabilitating offenders close to Fig Tree Cottage.

Quote
Sandra did you say the Crimewatch video was inaccurate? I understand you're not implicating the son, and I learned from the Russ Faria case that it's best not to judge how individuals react to a particular stressful situation. https://youtu.be/5luEqyXgAe0

Yes, because it was. The Crimewatch video had the son meeting the Estate Manager at the door of the cottage, trying the door and finding it to be locked, then the son going around the back to climb in the window. The truth of the matter is that the son was already climbing, or had already climbed, through  the window in the couple of minutes it took the Estate Manager to get there. What reason would there have been for the son to go around the back and climb in the window when the Estate Manager had a key? The Crimewatch video even has the Estate Manager saying "I'll try to open up here" (with the key) to which the son replies "I'll try round the back" - why would he not just wait until the door was opened with the key?

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 619
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #6 on: September 23, 2018, 02:31:PM »
I should have said re ATM man, Matthew's height is 5" 9.75", so he could not have been AT M man

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10661
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2018, 03:26:PM »
I didn't think Hamlen was ATM man on first inspection. But I might have thought if your life was at stake you would piece together your movements for an alibi even if it was two years previously. The Defence can always raise the contamination issue with DNA (they did it with Barry George) but I still don't see how there were two traces of his DNA in the house on the rolling pin and the blouse respectively. https://www.basingstokegazette.co.uk/news/9431961.Statistics_expert_gives_evidence_to_Georgina_Edmonds_murder_trial/
« Last Edit: September 23, 2018, 03:27:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13990
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #8 on: September 23, 2018, 03:50:PM »
ive ot a video speaking somwhere  ill pot you judge from his own story.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 619
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #9 on: September 23, 2018, 04:08:PM »
I didn't think Hamlen was ATM man on first inspection. But I might have thought if your life was at stake you would piece together your movements for an alibi even if it was two years previously. The Defence can always raise the contamination issue with DNA (they did it with Barry George) but I still don't see how there were two traces of his DNA in the house on the rolling pin and the blouse respectively. https://www.basingstokegazette.co.uk/news/9431961.Statistics_expert_gives_evidence_to_Georgina_Edmonds_murder_trial/

There were not two traces of his DNA "in the house" - the DNA on the rolling pin was not proven to have originated from Matthew - the mixed profile contained markers that are not present in his DNA profile. There's also nothing to say the DNA on the blouse got there "in the house," as explained previously.

I don't think it's reasonable to imagine anyone could piece together an explanation of where they were and what they were doing at a specific time on a specific day two years previously. Even though I keep diaries -  have done since 1996 - looking back even just six months, there are days missing and, on the days there are entries, there's nothing to indicate the times I did specific things.

Can anyone reading this forum say, categorically, what they were doing at 16.07 on September 23rd 2016 and how would they find out, if they can't remember?

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10661
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #10 on: September 23, 2018, 05:03:PM »
There were not two traces of his DNA "in the house" - the DNA on the rolling pin was not proven to have originated from Matthew - the mixed profile contained markers that are not present in his DNA profile. There's also nothing to say the DNA on the blouse got there "in the house," as explained previously.

I don't think it's reasonable to imagine anyone could piece together an explanation of where they were and what they were doing at a specific time on a specific day two years previously. Even though I keep diaries -  have done since 1996 - looking back even just six months, there are days missing and, on the days there are entries, there's nothing to indicate the times I did specific things.

Can anyone reading this forum say, categorically, what they were doing at 16.07 on September 23rd 2016 and how would they find out, if they can't remember?
Well he was an electrician so he must have had appointments for that day. If my life depended on it I would make it my business to find out. I suppose as far as the DNA evidence is concerned it's put before a jury and they decide.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 619
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #11 on: September 23, 2018, 05:40:PM »
It's how DNA evidence is put to juries that's the real problem. Claims about match probabilities etc are extremely problematic. For example, the same match probability (or likelihood ratio) calculations for "ordinary" DNA results should not be used for Y-STR results. It's a long and complicated argument, but the bottom line is they are not like for like, so shouldn't be compared as such.

However, there are a number of challenges across the world at the moment demonstrating that claimed match probabilities for Y-STR results are being overstated and, as a result, misleading juries.

Then there's the general public belief that if someone's DNA is found somewhere, then the person must have been there and, in terms of touch DNA, in contact with the item or person from which the DNA was obtained. There have been some fascinating studies of DNA from a person appearing on an item they've never touched and a number of cases where convictions have been overturned because the touch DNA was so unreliable.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 619
Re: mathew hamlen
« Reply #12 on: September 23, 2018, 05:46:PM »
Quote
Well he was an electrician so he must have had appointments for that day. If my life depended on it I would make it my business to find out.

At the time, he was an agency worker and wasn't due to start back until the Monday after the Christmas/New Year break.

How would you go about "finding out" two years later? I'm single and live alone - I know for certain there are many, many days in the last two years where no-one and nothing could verify my whereabouts, since I didn't leave the house, make or receive any calls on my landline (I only use it for the internet connection), didn't send any emails, make any purchases or use any ATM or store card machine. I can go for days without leaving any identifiable "trace" of where I am or what I am doing.