Common ground in cases of Mike Tesko and Hills'brough...

[mike tesko]

South yorkshire police had a policy of altering witness statements in the mid to late 1980's...

[lookout]

So I noticed,Mike.

[mike tesko]

A witness statement includes the following extracted citation:-

"I make this statement of my own free will"...

But sadly, the stark truth of the matter, is that many such witness statements are often made by other people, and altered by other people at a later time - when this occurs how can it be argued that the person in whose name the witness statement has been produced, made it of thier own free will...

Let's approach the matter from the following angle. If you were arrested, charged and standing trial, and you set about making witness statements for defence witnesses, and altering the contents to favor your prospects of securing an acquital, the full weight of the law would bear down on you - you and I would be arrested on the spot, charged with forgery, and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, our feet would not touch the floor, before we got convicted, and we would be sentenced before you could get the words "south yorkshire police are dishonest", out...

[lookout]

Mike,,Essex Police were reknowned for " editing " witness statements,,which when produced changed the whole concept of their evidence. Witnesses weren't aware that this had been done.
DI Ainsley was blaming the DPP,and it was DS Bernard who'd said that the editing had been done by the EP.
Utterly,and absolutely despicable. Is it any wonder that there are so many MOJ's.?
Why won't one of those officers admit defeat.? They must know by now that they're immune from being prosecuted.! That's another story.

[mike tesko]

Mike,,Essex Police were reknowned for " editing " witness statements,,which when produced changed the whole concept of their evidence. Witnesses weren't aware that this had been done.
DI Ainsley was blaming the DPP,and it was DS Bernard who'd said that the editing had been done by the EP.
Utterly,and absolutely despicable. Is it any wonder that there are so many MOJ's.?
Why won't one of those officers admit defeat.? They must know by now that they're immune from being prosecuted.! That's another story.

Hi, Lookout, this is precisely what I am talking about. The police have been putting words into the mouths of witnesses, helping to convict people for a variety of offences, which turn into MOJ's...

[mike tesko]

In many MOj's there is always at least one witness statement which has been tampered with, that usually involves a key piece of evidence that secures a conviction - I can give examples...

[mike tesko]

In many MOj's there is always at least one witness statement which has been tampered with, that usually involves a key piece of evidence that secures a conviction - I can give examples...

CASE (1) - In January 1986, two south yorkshire detectives, DC Robin Caulfield and his side kick, DS Shepherd, made witness statements in which both claimed they had been sat in an observation van at 5.20pm, on the 22nd January, when they claim they saw a man arrive at premises that were under survaliance by the No.3 RCS. Caulfield and Shepherd both claimed in their respective statements that whilst in the observation van at 5.20pm, that same day, they had seen a man in a stolen car who they both identified as being me...

[grahameb]

No disrespect but I think it is completely wrong to make comparisons between how you were treated by South Yorkshire police and the Hillsborough disaster ( please change thread name so you spell it correctly). There are only very tenuous links between the two and in my opinion, making the comparison is disrespectful to the thousands and thousands of people who have been deeply affected by the Hillsborough disaster.

On the contrary I think that the fact that the police can cover up such a large case like Hillsborough is a fair indication as to how much more easy it is for them to cover up where much smaller cases are concerned. In fact because police were guilty on such a large scale must serve as a warning of how corrupt they can be elsewhere. As in the Bamber case, or Mike's case. For we heard all the time from the guilty group that it is so unbelievable that the police could  create such a cover-up for 28 years as in the case of Bamber. But this Hillsborough fiasco goes to show that even though people have known of the cover-up for many years the police can go on denying it to they were blue in the face. The only difference is the scale. But we haven't heard so much from the guilty side of the Bamber case so much now that it has been proved beyond doubt that the police can indeed be so corrupt.

[mike tesko]

CASE (1) - In January 1986, two south yorkshire detectives, DC Robin Caulfield and his side kick, DS Shepherd, made witness statements in which both claimed they had been sat in an observation van at 5.20pm, on the 22nd January, when they claim they saw a man arrive at premises that were under survaliance by the No.3 RCS. Caulfield and Shepherd both claimed in their respective statements that whilst in the observation van at 5.20pm, that same day, they had seen a man in a stolen car who they both identified as being me...

After having been arrested, charged and remanded in custody for nigh on six months, along came the commital proceedings at Barnsley magistrates court in July 1986 - at this time, DI Patrick Aurther Henshaw, head of the RCS operation on 22nd January 1986, was questioned about when exactly the observation van had been summoned to the scene. He referred to logs written up at the scene on the day in question, and rather reluctantly he had to admit to the court that according to timed and signed log messages, he himself had not sent for the observation van until 5.55pm that day. when asked if the two police officers. Caulfield and Shepherd could have been inside that observation van in the street, Henshaw told the court. "No". When asked "why not", he told the court that the observation van had not been put into position in the street until 6.15pm that evening...

[HMEssex]

On the contrary I think that the fact that the police can cover up such a large case like Hillsborough is a fair indication as to how much more easy it is for them to cover up where much smaller cases are concerned. In fact because police were guilty on such a large scale must serve as a warning of how corrupt they can be elsewhere. As in the Bamber case, or Mike's case. For we heard all the time from the guilty group that it is so unbelievable that the police could  create such a cover-up for 28 years as in the case of Bamber. But this Hillsborough fiasco goes to show that even though people have known of the cover-up for many years the police can go on denying it to they were blue in the face. The only difference is the scale. But we haven't heard so much from the guilty side of the Bamber case so much now that it has been proved beyond doubt that the police can indeed be so corrupt.

Excellent post Grahame.

So terrifying too to think of how many people have suffered due to this corruption over the years.

[Roch]

Not wishing to detract from thread but just wanted to say, what an excellent turn out by members on the forum this evening.

[susan]

Hi HMEssex/Grahame

the cover up of Hillsborough was a disgrace which I find difficult to talk about young innocent people lost their lives and their families were insulted on top. I get so angry that is has taken so long for the families to prove the cover up and thank God they had the guts and determination to carry on to get justice for their loved ones.  I find it so difficult to come to terms with the fact that police officers who are paid to protect society can tell lies and are void of feeling for the loss of lives and can only think about their own miserable lives and the lot of them should be jailed.  We have the Birmingham 6 the Guildford 4 the Cardiff 3 (where evidence was destroyed) and I could go on and on and now we have Essex Police who had a very bad track record before the Jeremy Bamber case.  I know we have really good dedicated police officers not all selfish and corrupt.

[grahameb]

We will agree to disagree then.

I'd also use much stronger language than fiasco too.  Try catastrophe, unmitigated disgrace, abhorrent....

There is nothing to disagree with Petey. I was agreeing with you. I was just extending the argument. Because like it or not there are similarities regarding police corruption. Just because people don't "feel" things the same as you doesn't mean they disagree with you.

[grahameb]

Hi HMEssex/Grahame

the cover up of Hillsborough was a disgrace which I find difficult to talk about young innocent people lost their lives and their families were insulted on top. I get so angry that is has taken so long for the families to prove the cover up and thank God they had the guts and determination to carry on to get justice for their loved ones.  I find it so difficult to come to terms with the fact that police officers who are paid to protect society can tell lies and are void of feeling for the loss of lives and can only think about their own miserable lives and the lot of them should be jailed.  We have the Birmingham 6 the Guildford 4 the Cardiff 3 (where evidence was destroyed) and I could go on and on and now we have Essex Police who had a very bad track record before the Jeremy Bamber case.  I know we have really good dedicated police officers not all selfish and corrupt.

Which in none of these things I deny. In fact the great difficulty that these families had in getting the police to admit to such an atrocity and to lies and the corruption in such a big thing as Hillborough is an indication as to how much more difficult Bamber and Mike will find it to prove corruption in their cases. What I have written in either of my posts has in no way detracted from the enormity of the injustice of Hillsborough.

[mertol22]

A witness statement includes the following extracted citation:-

"I make this statement of my own free will"...

But sadly, the stark truth of the matter, is that many such witness statements are often made by other people, and altered by other people at a later time - when this occurs how can it be argued that the person in whose name the witness statement has been produced, made it of thier own free will...

Let's approach the matter from the following angle. If you were arrested, charged and standing trial, and you set about making witness statements for defence witnesses, and altering the contents to favor your prospects of securing an acquital, the full weight of the law would bear down on you - you and I would be arrested on the spot, charged with forgery, and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, our feet would not touch the floor, before we got convicted, and we would be sentenced before you could get the words "south yorkshire police are dishonest", out...

Every force has untrustworthy officers mike some have prior criminal records and are still serving.