Author Topic: Jeremy's complaint about the 2002 appeal (written in 2003)  (Read 351 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7455
This is interesting -

"Mr Jeremy Bamber
L12373
C Wing
HMP Whitemoor
Longhill Road
MARCH
Cambs.
PE15 OPR

Monday 13th January 2003

Lord Irvine – Lord High Chancellor

Official complaint re case no. 20011745 S1

R v Jeremy Nevill Bamber

I wish to make an official complaint about the three judges Lord Justice Kay, Mr Justice Wright and Mr Justice Henriques who heard my appeal against conviction between the 17th October and 1st November 2002. This complaint is not motivated by the outcome of the appeal but one that would have been made in any event.

It is my understanding that I am entitled to have expected a fair and unbiased hearing of my appeal. The public should also have been assured that such a high profile case received a scrupulously fair and well balanced hearing. On both counts at the end of the appeal everyone should have been completely satisfied that justice had been done and seen to have been done fairly, justly and above all honestly.

My complaint is that this was not so, justice was not done, it was not seen to be done, it was not fair, not just and above all was wholly dishonest. It was clear to all in court 9 that from the very start Lord Justice Kay, Mr Justice Wright and Mr Justice Henriques had made up their minds I was guilty and that my appeal must fail. It would have been impossible for them to reach this conclusion having only spent a week reading the papers on this case, papers that ran to many tens of thousands of pages where the truth lay in the whole picture.

On the first day of the appeal Lord Justice Kay constantly interrupted my QC Michael Turner, he was appallingly rude in his manner. He would make obscure comments on the argument being made in an attempt to disrupt the flow of my counsel’s oratory. He acted like a typical bully, abusing his position in court knowing that he could, as if playing to the audience, a court packed with journalists, that he was king of the castle and he could act, say and do whatever he liked. Mr Justice Wright and Mr Justice Henriques joined in with this abuse of my counsel, taking their lead from Lord Justice Kay.

At the end of the first day of my appeal in conference with counsel I expressed grave concerns about my chances of having a fair hearing before these particular judges. It was abundantly clear that their minds were completely made up as to my guilt and that whatever argument raised to the contrary by my counsel was to be ridiculed and undermined by the judges by whatever technique available to them. This led my QC Michael Turner to advise me in conference the following day that we should amend the way we ran the appeal as it was obvious to all that we would not be permitted to examine the witnesses in the way necessary to prove the corruption we alleged at the outset. I agreed to this change of approach but believe we were bullied into it by Lord Justice Kay, who later criticized us in his judgement for not establishing the corruption originally alleged, yet we could not establish it without cross examining the police witnesses, witnesses whom Lord Justice Kay refused us permission to examine.

There is also a specific complaint against Mr Justice Wright who was seen by all in court 9 to fall asleep repeatedly on the afternoon of the first day. This was commented on by my counsel and reported on by the media and others in court and was wholly unacceptable behaviour for a judge hearing such a case.

The abuse of power displayed by the judges during my appeal got so bad that at one point I stopped proceedings to complain to my counsel about their behaviour. The difficulty was, according to counsel, that there was nothing that could be done about it. Lord Justice Kay ended up apologizing to my counsel for his and his colleague’s behaviour and during the last few days of the appeal acted properly and fairly but by then the damage to my case had already been done.

I do not know what remedy is available to me regarding this matter. Ideally I would like you to set aside the decision of this court and allow me to have fresh hearing before an unbiased bench. If this is not possible then please advise me as to the remedies open to me to rectify matters. Justice was not done nor was it seen to be done, Lord Justice Kay, Mr Justice Wright and Mr Justice Henriques have brought shame on the appellate court by their flagrant abuse of power and it is only right that they are answerable for their actions.

I have sent copies of this letter to Lord Justice Kay, Michael Turner QC, Mr Ewen Smith and look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely"

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 41154
Re: Jeremy's complaint about the 2002 appeal (written in 2003)
« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2019, 08:44:PM »
Shocking !!

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7455
Re: Jeremy's complaint about the 2002 appeal (written in 2003)
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2019, 09:47:PM »
Shocking !!

I am not surprised. Having read the shorthand transcript of the whole hearing. I got this impression while reading it.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11326
Re: Jeremy's complaint about the 2002 appeal (written in 2003)
« Reply #3 on: August 16, 2019, 09:55:AM »
I don't recall Jeremy having insisted he shot rabbits on the Tuesday evening, nor that there had been any animal blood contact with a gun with silencer fitted on any recent previous occasion. https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/blood-2002-appeal

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7455
Re: Jeremy's complaint about the 2002 appeal (written in 2003)
« Reply #4 on: August 16, 2019, 10:40:AM »
I don't recall Jeremy having insisted he shot rabbits on the Tuesday evening, nor that there had been any animal blood contact with a gun with silencer fitted on any recent previous occasion. https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/blood-2002-appeal

That article is not accurate nor is it relevant to the topic.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11326
Re: Jeremy's complaint about the 2002 appeal (written in 2003)
« Reply #5 on: August 16, 2019, 11:22:AM »
Well it's on the Official Site; don't shoot the messenger (so to speak..)
« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 11:23:AM by Steve_uk »

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7455
Re: Jeremy's complaint about the 2002 appeal (written in 2003)
« Reply #6 on: August 16, 2019, 11:44:AM »
Well it's on the Official Site; don't shoot the messenger (so to speak..)

That does not make them immune to misunderstanding or misconceiving. (we are all guilty of that)

After all this is the de-facto Official Forum.


Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 25003
Re: Jeremy's complaint about the 2002 appeal (written in 2003)
« Reply #7 on: August 16, 2019, 11:47:AM »
I always think it's helpful to post links to quoted texts or at least mention where they were obtained if no links are available.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7455
Re: Jeremy's complaint about the 2002 appeal (written in 2003)
« Reply #8 on: August 21, 2019, 02:58:PM »
NGB, you have in past made your own criticisms of how the three appeal judges handled the 2002 appeal. What made you arrive at those conclusions?