Levi Bellfield statement should be game changer for Michael Stone

[gringo]

https://www.kentonline.co.uk/canterbury/news/kent-police-wont-investigate-bellfields-chillenden-claims-253475/

     Bellfield in a 15 page statement given to his solicitor and passed on the CCRC has contradicted his own alibi for the day of the Chillenden murders and now admits to being in the area on the day of the murders, admitted knowing the area and the lane where the murders took place, having previously visited. He has also admitted owning a beige sapphire which he was driving on the day and flying back from Turkey mid holiday to dispose of the car.
     What is going on in this case that has led to this bizarre development?

[Steve_uk]

https://www.kentonline.co.uk/canterbury/news/kent-police-wont-investigate-bellfields-chillenden-claims-253475/

     Bellfield in a 15 page statement given to his solicitor and passed on the CCRC has contradicted his own alibi for the day of the Chillenden murders and now admits to being in the area on the day of the murders, admitted knowing the area and the lane where the murders took place, having previously visited. He has also admitted owning a beige sapphire which he was driving on the day and flying back from Turkey mid holiday to dispose of the car.
     What is going on in this case that has led to this bizarre development?

It would be a real shock if this were a miscarriage of justice. Both unsavoury characters, but to know Bellfield was in the area that day sends shivers down my spine.

[guest29835]

Perhaps Stone is where he belongs anyway:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Stone_(criminal)#Suspected_1976_murder

Ironically, his birth name was Goodban.

[gringo]

It would be a real shock if this were a miscarriage of justice. Both unsavoury characters, but to know Bellfield was in the area that day sends shivers down my spine.

     I think it is one of the more obvious miscarriages and many already suspect Bellfield as the real perpetrator. The real shock should be that Stone was ever charged, let alone convicted, on such flimsy "evidence" in the first place.
      The allegations in the Wiki article that QC linked to are not backed by anything much at all. I don't doubt that he has/had serious mental health issues and has been convicted previously of violent offences but it is a miscarriage of justice no matter the character of the accused. I went to a couple of the sources in the wiki article which were nothing more than unsubstantiated gossip in some Guardian article.
      If the allegations of killing a police officer had any merit he would have been charged. The fact that he was charged and convicted for the Chillenden murders would seem to suggest that the "evidence" linking him to police officer's murder is even more sparse than that.
      I wonder what it is that has led to Bellfield writing this statement. He denies guilt but admits he lied in his alibi at the time and was in fact around the scene of the murders in a beige sierra which he later had destroyed, flying home especially to do so.
      Why would Kent Police refuse to investigate this? That makes no sense.
      I recall some time back that Michael Stone had requested that Bellfield allow his DNA to be compared to unknown male DNA recovered off exhibits in his case. This was maybe a year or so back. Boot laces and perhaps other exhibits (my memory is sketchy) from the scene contained unidentified male DNA. If Bellfield agrees to this next then Kent Police may have no option.
     
       

[guest29835]

The Wikipedia article includes this, sourced from The Guardian:

Stone later told a psychiatrist that he was responsible for the robbery and murder of Jegou.

That's a bold statement.  I certainly would not be inclined to dismiss that out-of-hand.

I completely agree that Stone's character is irrelevant if he is innocent.  If he didn't do this, or there is even just reasonable doubt about it, then he must be released and compensated, and real culprit must be urgently found.  Campaigners and investigators are absolutely right to push this, if there are problems with the conviction.

However, I can't help but take the view that, even if he didn't do it, his background makes him one of the more unsympathetic victims of a miscarriage of justice.

[gringo]

The Wikipedia articles includes this, sourced from The Guardian:

That's a bold statement.  I certainly would not be inclined to dismiss that out-of-hand.

I completely agree that Stone's character is irrelevant if he is innocent.  If he didn't do this, or there is even just reasonable doubt about it, then he must be released and compensated, and real culprit must be urgently found.  Campaigners and investigators are absolutely right to push this, if there are problems with the conviction.

However, I can't help but take the view that, even if he didn't do it, his background makes him one of the more unsympathetic victims of a miscarriage of justice.

   If true it is a bold statement but it is just hearsay from a journalist at the moment. There are no further corroborating facts. The press demolition of Chris Jeffries always comes to mind whenever I read some hit piece masquerading as journalism on matters such as this. It may be true but all we have is some hack claiming so. Even if it were true that he claimed this to a psychiatrist, it certainly doesn't make the claim true; coming, as it did, from a mentally disturbed young man.
     I don't disagree that he is, or certainly appears to be, one of "the more unsympathetic victims of a MOJ". How much of this is true is probably open to debate.
     Here is one quote from the Guardian article that demonstrates the nature of the article and the lack of curiosity/honesty of the reporter and the staggering lack of awareness of life outside of the tiny bubble they inhabit.
  Two years later, when 22, he stabbed a man called Adrian Cunliffe in the chest, penetrating his lung and narrowly missing an artery, just because he had kicked his door.
      Seriously, "just because he had kicked his door" is so dumb and lacking curiosity that it demonstrates that the writers are doing a hit piece. The statement begs questions and context but none is given.
     Why did he kick the door? how hard, how many times, was he trying to force the door to attack Stone? What happened prior to the door kicking? Was it an escalating incident?
     You will find none of that explored in the Guardian article which reads as if was dictated by the very police that framed him.
     The whole article is just innuendo and rumour mixed with the, without context, facts of his previous convictions.

[Steve_uk]

Leaving the Chillenden murders aside for a moment he's a dangerous guy. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/oct/05/audreygillan.nickhopkins

[nugnug]

just think of all those people who would still be alive if stone had not been fited up. milly dowler for one.

[gringo]

just think of all those people who would still be alive if stone had not been fited up. milly dowler for one.

   Very true Nugs. It was more dangerous to fit up Stone than to catch the actual perpetrator

[gringo]

Leaving the Chillenden murders aside for a moment he's a dangerous guy. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/oct/05/audreygillan.nickhopkins

   The article that you link was precisely the one referred in my previous post, Steve. It may as well have been dictated by the police themselves and is full of innuendo and baseless accusations interspersed with the odd out of context fact.
    It is impossible to argue with Nugs pithy but astute observation that convicting the wrong guy was certainly more dangerous for Milly Dowler and Bellfields other victims post Chillenden.

[guest29835]

   If true it is a bold statement but it is just hearsay from a journalist at the moment.

How do you know that?

[David1819]

I wonder what it is that has led to Bellfield writing this statement. He denies guilt but admits he lied in his alibi at the time and was in fact around the scene of the murders in a beige sierra which he later had destroyed, flying home especially to do so.
       

Assuming Bellfield is guilty of what Stone is convicted of (which I believe he is) Maybe Bellfield wants to help Stone but at the same time not get himself into more trouble?

You may think Bellfield is a psychopath and why would he care. However all of Bellfields crimes are against women indicating a hatred for women. Maybe he has some empathy towards those of his own gender?

Just a thought.

[guest29835]

Assuming Bellfield is guilty of what Stone is convicted of (which I believe he is) Maybe Bellfield wants to help Stone but at the same time not get himself into more trouble?

You may think Bellfield is a psychopath and why would he care. However all of Bellfields crimes are against women indicating a hatred for women. Maybe he has some empathy towards those of his own gender?

Just a thought.

Could be.  And/or could be the projection of a guilty conscience.  Some people deal with guilt by going to ground and saying nothing.  Others by talking.

Or perhaps, if Bellfield is guilty, somewhere inside him he is annoyed that somebody else is being 'credited' with his deeds. 

[David1819]

Or perhaps, if Bellfield is guilty, somewhere inside him he is annoyed that somebody else is being 'credited' with his deeds.

I doubt it. If that was the case why wait this long? Levi Bellfield has actually changed his name to Yusuf Rahim. Its believed that he has superficially converted to Islam in order to get protection from Islamist radicals. Admitting to the murder and attempted murder of two children is not going to do him any favours.

[gringo]

     It appears that a lot has been going on in the background of this case for the last few years. The bootlace that had been "tested to destruction" has now been found and Stone's solicitors have been pushing for it to be tested against Bellfield's DNA.
     https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-57055719

     The Met are also investigating him over unsolved bludgeon cases dating back to 1990.
     I don't think that it is guilty conscience, empathy with Stone over some hatred for women or not receiving "credit" for his crimes that have led to the latest developments as has been suggested. He appears to be more worried that he is about to receive the "credit" for his unaccredited crime spree.
     There is obviously a lot of pressure being applied.
     The recent developments make it all the more baffling that Kent Police are still refusing to investigate, or perhaps make it clear why Kent Police are not re-investigating. Depends on your level of cynicism.
     As Nugs succinctly pointed out earlier, Milly Dowler, would still be alive if Kent Police had done their job properly. Amelie Delagrange who he murdered in 2004 and Marsha McDonnell who he killed in 2003 would still be alive.
     There is also the attempted murder of Kate Sheedy in 2004.
      The jury failed to reach verdicts on further charges of abduction and false imprisonment of Anna-Maria Rennie in 2001 and the attempted murder of Irma Dragoshi in 2003.
      It makes the already weak argument, ie. locking up a dangerous individual (Stone) for something he didn't do because he is dangerous anyway, look as unethical and as stupid as it is.
      By any measure Bellfield is a way more dangerous individual than Stone, by magnitudes.
      Is this the reason that Kent Police are unwilling to investigate the new evidence. All of those known and probably more unknown victims of Bellfield after the time that Kent Police should already have apprehended him.
      There is the also not small matter that Stone would be due a huge pay-out for his wrongful conviction. His conviction would not only be overturned but somebody else (Bellfield) would be convicted. The rules regarding compensation for overturned convictions mean that compensation is not usually paid but I believe that would not be so in this case if Bellfield is ultimately convicted.
      It seems that the shit is moving rapidly towards the fan.