kevin nunn

[lookout]

Why on earth wasn't it possible to find this evidence 22 years ago ?

[nugnug]

thats a bit of a mstory it was known at the time that there was sperm found on the body and it dident belong to kevin nunn.

[nugnug]

latest news.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EZmcGYTOG_I

[nugnug]

http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_14027762164256&key=190cd6dc27c66f8edf4cd0d943583f3b&libId=e4f99ed2-629f-4771-b92b-9dda4b596e11&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fshirleymckie.myfastforum.org%2FSupreme_Court_Miscarriage_of_Justice_Test_Case_about1642.html&v=1&out=http%3A%2F%2Fsupremecourt.uk%2Fcases%2Fcase_2012_0175.html&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fshirleymckie.myfastforum.org%2Fforum1.php&title=shirleymckie.myfastforum.org%20%3A%3A%20Supreme%20Court%20Miscarriage%20of%20Justice%20Test%20Case&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fsupremecourt.uk%2Fcases%2Fcase_2012_0175.html

[guest154]

Reed is a good judge, he's very hardline though.

[Stephanie]

Reed is a good judge, he's very hardline though.

Says 'Mat' with all his knowledge with the CCRC and being in the know..... Lol... (Mums the word hey  ) lol

[nugnug]

justice is supporting the case.

http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_14027817323146&key=190cd6dc27c66f8edf4cd0d943583f3b&libId=ff2a7d8f-29a5-4978-88f3-34715d2b53cb&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fshirleymckie.myfastforum.org%2FSupreme_Court_Miscarriage_of_Justice_Test_Case_about1642.html&v=1&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.justice.org.uk%2Fpages%2Fnunn-v-chief-constable-of-suffolk-constabulary.html&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fshirleymckie.myfastforum.org%2Fforum1.php&title=shirleymckie.myfastforum.org%20%3A%3A%20Supreme%20Court%20Miscarriage%20of%20Justice%20Test%20Case&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.justice.org.uk%2Fpages%2Fn...able-of-suffolk-constabulary.html

[nugnug]

good and bad news.

http://www.supremecourt.uk/decided-cases/docs/UKSC_2012_0175_Judgment.pdf

[guest154]

Where's the good news there?

[nugnug]

bad news for him but it has left the door open for other such cases.

[Jan]

it takes a while to read but is it saying in his particular case the dna testing on the sperm would not make any difference anyway because they always knew it probably was not his and could have come from transference.

But in another case they may have released the evidence?

However what if it  had belonged to someone she knew well - and not just from someone who happened to use the male changing rooms - would that have not been relevant?


Sorry I do skim read sometimes so I could have misunderstood?

[nugnug]

they accepted the principle was based on wich is at least something.

to my mind the innocent transfer thing is riddiclus.

but as the jury fell for it. thats not matter for the appeal court.

[nugnug]

http://insidetime.org/the-case-of-kevin-nunn-6/

[Patti]

Mmmmmmmm I noticed that she had sperm on her legs, but whose? I also read where the defence are trying to get Suffolk police to release information....

Surely they can tell who the sperm belonged too....now?

Which is what I said in 2012....3 years later one has to question why it takes so long.

[nugnug]

i think the problem is a lot of dna evedence was brought up his trail by the defence but the jury convicted him any the prosecutors explanation of why someone else dna was there is implausible but the jury still belived it.