Was the CCRC correct in referring the case to the COA in 2002 ?

[Adam]

The relatives do not believe so. The COA was quite dismissive of the appeal the CCRC had passed to them

In such a high profile case, perhaps it made the CCRC think twice when looking at the 2012 appeal. Deciding not refer it to the COA.

From the Guardian:

Jeremy Bamber is to remain in prison for life after three court of appeal judges yesterday dismissed his bid for freedom and stressed they had no doubt about the safety of his original conviction.

The killer, described by the judge at his 1986 trial as "evil almost beyond belief", had argued there were 15 grounds for appealing against his conviction for the murders of five members of his adoptive family - including new scientific evidence.

But Lord Justice Kay, sitting with Mr Justice Wright and Mr Justice Henriques, threw out each of these in a 522-point judgment, and went as far as they could in stressing his guilt. "We do not doubt the safety of the verdicts and we have recorded in our judgment the fact that the more we examined the detail of the case the more likely we thought it to be that the jury were right", they said in a summary at the court of appeal, in London.

The ruling - at which Bamber did not appear - was greeted with relief by the remaining members of his family, including his cousins Anne Eaton and David Boutflour.

In a statement read out by Anne's husband Peter, who still lives at the scene of the murders, in Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex, they questioned why the criminal cases review commission (CCRC), which examines possible miscarriages of justice, had permitted the appeal, and added: "We hope the younger generation of our family are allowed to live free from the intrusions we have had to endure."

[scipio_usmc]

While some say there is no such thing as a stupid question I disagree.

When the COA rejects all the claims in an appeal it means the CCRC wrongly thought the COA would find the argument convincing.  So by definition when they reject an appeal it means the CCRC was wrong. 

[Adam]

I must admit the 2002 appeal was very weak.

The CCRC clearly made a mistake in passing it to the COA and may have got their knuckles wrapped for doing so.

This did Jeremy no favours in 2012, with the CCRC more cautious over whether to pass it to the COA.

[Adam]

I never knew the relatives had criticised the CCRC for referring the case to the COA.

The CCRC doing this is something that Jeremy and his supporters can latch onto. Saying the CCRC thought he had provided proof of innocence and it is the COA that are wrong. Not surprised the relatives were upset.

However the CCRC refer lots of cases to the COA. And the CCRC do make mistakes.

[lookout]

The relatives kicked off when Jeremys' prison category was changed,so as a consequence,they won over that too by complaining to EP,who used their fluence.

[guest154]

The CCRC were wrong to refer the case. I think they did it as a final nail in the coffin for Bamber rather than because the appeal was worthy, hence why the judges tore apart the appeal.

[Adam]

Has the COA ever been so damning on an application ?

They knew it was a high profile case, but still had the confidence to say what they said. Probably because they assess appeals all the time. They know what ones are weak and strong.