A time to take stock....

[Stephanie]

She then writes:

"A fair number of innocence projects nationally will soon be reaching a crossroads/brick wall stage, after several years of frustrated operation. They will move from the honeymoon period towards despair and helplessness, feeling overwhelmed, realising that upping gear to ‘crusade mode’ is not what they signed up for. So when something happens like the Simon Hall confession, this has the potential to justify and accelerate plans for exodus. Those of us who have invested thousands of hours of our time will naturally feel (at best) disappointment at our cause being undermined by the confession, setting back casework by years, precious time that could have been spent on genuine cases. But how can a worthy case be differentiated from one that will eventually throw up evidence of guilt? The short answer is that it can’t¸ and we shouldn’t beat ourselves up about it. Perhaps guilty prisoners do see universities as a haven for keen young things over whose eyes the wool can easily be pulled: after all, they have nothing to lose (apart from the progression problems of prisoners maintaining innocence, which is another harrowing story). But to say that the BBC and Bristol University were ‘hoodwinked’ is unfairly disparaging. There are many reasons why people maintain innocence, and the Simon Hall confession could have happened to any of us."

What has Julie Price learned about the SH case/confession? Nothing! I've never spoken to her!
All she has done is assumed and jumped to her own conclusions. Meaning the same mistakes will be made over and over again.

My opinion is, she also used the confession to get her and her team some much needed publicity and to vent some of her frustrations....

[Stephanie]

Here's another paragraph from her piece;

"Wider problems and pressure
There were also difficulties behind the scenes, about which outside observers could only speculate. After the failed appeal, it seemed that Simon Hall had ‘sacked’ his legal team in favour of innocence project representation. If this were true, it would have been an uncomfortable development in the eyes of those of us who consider that the relationship between the practising legal profession and universities is core to the sustainability of innocence projects."

[Stephanie]

Here's another paragraph from her piece;

"Wider problems and pressure
There were also difficulties behind the scenes, about which outside observers could only speculate. After the failed appeal, it seemed that Simon Hall had ‘sacked’ his legal team in favour of innocence project representation. If this were true, it would have been an uncomfortable development in the eyes of those of us who consider that the relationship between the practising legal profession and universities is core to the sustainability of innocence projects."

Ms Price talks of 'outside observers' speculating and then speculates herself. 

She has missed the point entirely, as many have done. SH was guilty. He was deceiving us all. No one is immune to this, even Ms Price.

She only refers to one case also, there are numerous cases out there where the convicted have sacked numerous legal teams, some preferring to represent themselves.

IMO Her article is bias, full of holes, extremely misleading and suggests a personal agenda.

[Stephanie]

Here's another paragraph from her piece;

"Wider problems and pressure
There were also difficulties behind the scenes, about which outside observers could only speculate. After the failed appeal, it seemed that Simon Hall had ‘sacked’ his legal team in favour of innocence project representation. If this were true, it would have been an uncomfortable development in the eyes of those of us who consider that the relationship between the practising legal profession and universities is core to the sustainability of innocence projects."

Ms Price has also failed to recognise that within the practising legal profession, there are also bad apples with their own personal agendas. Just like there is in most professions.

[Stephanie]

Ms Price has also failed to recognise that within the practising legal profession, there are also bad apples with their own personal agendas. Just like there is in most professions.

NO ONE is immune to being conned!

[Stephanie]

On 10th Dec 2013 a poster made the following statement -

"No idea. Doubtful though. Simon was always a jack I lad and getting in trouble. It doesn't fit.
I mentioned it previously because I wondered who started it. Since speaking to the family I know he has lied to everyone, especially the wife.
Simon caused a lot of trouble for the family with drugs and money issues. Communication broke down and simon stopped writing and doing anything. No wonder really as he couldn't cope. I saw him once and he was not the guy I remember at school.
The family didn't do anything bad as I can see, they tried but it's a tough situation imho. When the wife came on the scene she lied and I heard stole money from them and even rang Simons estranged family. Not very good behaviour but I think she knew it all along."



I do hope said poster can prove their malicious and libellous allegations of me having lied and having stolen money!!

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4548.msg205456.html#msg205456

[Stephanie]

"Now that Simon Hall has apparently taken his own life it is perhaps pertinent to view his “confession” in this new light. I am sure that some will say that his suicide is a certain sign of his anguish over his guilt. I say that, on the contrary, his death may have been through pure despair.
That despair most likely stemmed from the failure of his final appeal.Where was he to go from there? No more new evidence to rely on…the end of the road.
His confession was more than likely sparked by the inevitable realisation that those who are deemed IDOM are unlikely to ever be considered for parole. I don’t need to spell out the treatment IDOM prisoners face compared to those who realise their guilty status and play the game to prepare them for release.
I am not concerned by the kerfuffle over his so called confession. The bald facts of the case are that the conviction of Simon Hall was a miscarriage of justice. There was and still isn’t any evidence on which he should have been convicted. The DPP agreed, yet the court of appeal in 2011 disgracefully usurped the role of the jury by not ordering at the very least a re-trial.
Any notions that some may hold that British justice is something to behold with respect are being naive in the extreme. If British justice was ever a shining beacon of hope for the many then it has been extinguished for a long long time.
Bar the confession, there are echo’s here of Gordon Park and the lady in the lake case.
In addition, as shown in the Victor Nealon case, our whole CJS is in crisis and the CCRC is as culpable as any public body in the prolonging of injustice."

http://thejusticegap.com/2013/09/simon-hall-confession-a-time-to-take-stock/

The above was written by someone called Steve Sinclair.

While extremely misleading information like this remains in the public domain, it only goes to serve other guilty prisoners maintaining innocence and causes more harm than good imo.

SH conviction was NOT a miscarriage of justice! His conviction was wrong in that the eventual details he disclosed of his crime and his motives for the crime were not consistent with his eventual conviction and tarif handed down.

Had the police stuck to their original belief that the murder was sexually motivated and carried out their investigations in this belief and presented evidence at trial of this instead of suggesting it was a burglary gone wrong - SH would have received a much higher sentence than he did.

Only the police can answer why they chose to go for the motive of a burglary gone wrong as opposed to their original belief (which turned out to be true) of it having been sexually motivated.

[Stephanie]

And this needs to stop too! http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4548.msg205457.html#msg205457

[Stephanie]

http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/capel_st_mary_simon_hall_s_mother_s_shock_at_his_murder_confession_1_2323767

Mrs Hall said: “I’m absolutely shocked because I know he is innocent and I still believe he is.

“But it’s the system. If he had pleaded guilty in the beginning, he would be home now.

“I know he has been really low and in hospital recently. He’s given up.”

Mrs Hall added: “I believe he feels he can’t take any more after all the fight he has put up and how brave he has been.

“If that’s his decision, that’s his decision but I will never believe that.”

SH's adopted mother visited with him not long before he died and according to SH she did not mention anything about the above and had accepted he was going to HMP Grendon in order to receive therapy..

So whatever her public comments before, she did "believe it" (his confession) by the end of that year.

[Stephanie]

And for those people (including any expert in any field) who have a little knowledge of the SH case and some of the 'antics' which surrounded it by the end of 2012, leading up to the confession... And following...

This also applies -

"Being on the receiving end of a person who lacks empathy shows a reality to the human condition that we don't want to believe exists. Watching people side with the abuser, disbelieve you and even worse, bully and smear you along with the narcissist (or disordered individual) is highly traumatic and isolating. It's within our human nature or socialisation to side with the crowd. The abuser gains momentum by getting to the crowd earlier and then playing up to them which is their perverse talent."


All part of the Narcissists/disordered individuals cycle of abuse - inflicting damage to their target/victims on the sly with preemptive attacks of their integrity while still seducing the target/victim into believing that they (the Narcissist/disordered individual) loves them so completely. It is basically setting them up for the devaluation and discard with the support of minions to back the Narcissist/disordered individual up.

[Stephanie]

Today is the first Anniversary of Simon's funeral. It's amazing how quickly people forget, seemingly only interested if it suits their agenda.

And today is the 2nd Anniversary of his death.

Where are all his 'innocent' supporters now? Why aren't people voicing their opinions and concerns if they genuinely believe he was innocent? Where have all the doubts gone?

Or could it be they are too ashamed to admit they were wrong? They were conned.

Or was it egos at play? Did they already know he was guilty but the shame was too much to bare and openly admit to? Was it easier to blame others? Why did they blame others? What were they motivated by? What was their reasoning?

Why does it still appear questions (and answers) are being ignored?

[Stephanie]

‘Gobsmacked’, some said. Others were ‘Stunned’, writes Julie Price. But whatever the language of choice for miscarriage of justice observers, the common reaction to Simon Hall’s confession last month was: ‘We didn’t see that coming.’

Setting aside any questions (and there are many) as to the circumstances surrounding his confession after maintaining innocence for 12 years, this turn of events will not have helped the cases of genuine victims of wrongful conviction, as suggested in early reactions from the ‘no smoke without fire’ brigade.


Now read the rest of the article - http://thejusticegap.com/2013/09/simon-hall-confession-a-time-to-take-stock/

I do hope Julie Price reads this forum - her article suggest she's does.



"Hall’s case was played out on a very public stage. It was different to most others partly because of the ferocity of the campaign and its soap opera qualities. There were family feuds. One Stephanie (Bon) created a Justice4Simon website, facilitated the involvement of the BBC and worked relentlessly giving vital early support, only to be replaced by another Stephanie, who married Hall in prison. Stephanie Hall argued with many."



Julie please feel free to ask me any questions you may have or PM me if you would prefer.

Ooh and worth looking at the Jeremy Bamber case again too for comparisons - not dissimilar to what you have described imho.

In fact from my experience over the past several years - there appear to be similarities in many other cases - Luke Mitchell's being another such example....

[Stephanie]

http://www.mojuk.org.uk/Portia/archive%2012/hall.html

Simon Hall's fight for freedom - By Scott Lomax

"During the spring and summer of 2002 detectives in Suffolk were involved in a difficult criminal investigation. Despite several public appeals and studies of CCTV footage showing the front of the home of the elderly murder victim, no evidence identifying the killer was forthcoming. The possibility the murder, which had taken place in December the previous year, was linked to a crime in Anglesey, Wales, had to be looked into. The perpetrator of the horrific Welsh murder, in which an elderly woman had been stabbed and her heart removed, was also at large. At a much later stage this individual would be identified as a vampire fanatic but despite massive inquiries Suffolk Police were no closer to finding their own killer.

However, on 25 July police officers made what they believed to be a major breakthrough when they arrested a local man in what he describes as an ‘SAS style home invasion.’

Writing from his jail cell recently, Simon Hall, who is serving a life sentence for the murder, described his arrest: ‘I can still remember the day when the officers came crashing through my front door, sending glass and wood splinters everywhere. That itself was a shock but not as much as when they told me I was under arrest for murder. The moment is still as surreal now as it was then …’




Following the confession I learned from SH that he'd apparently been waiting for the police to catch up with him since the murder.

He told me he asked police (upon arrest @ Hill House Road) if he could take some cash with him in order to stop off and get a McDonalds on the way to the police station... His words!

Jamie Barker had also been arrested and the pair of them were taken to separate police stations for interview.

Jamie Barkers home, where he was living at the time (His mothers), was also searched, including drains etc. Mr Barker was eventually released without charge and became a witness for the prosecution.

SH acted alone!

[Stephanie]

Paragraph 5 http://www.mojuk.org.uk/Portia/archive%2012/hall.html

"By the time the police charged Simon Hall they had become outwardly convinced that Joan Albert was murdered during a burglary that had gone wrong. There was a forced entry, with a rear window being smashed, but nothing had seemingly been taken despite the killer curiously having stayed at the scene for some time. Medical examination of the body revealed that Joan’s murderer had bizarrely inflicted wounds upon her after a significant period of time had elapsed following her death. An estimate suggested the unnecessary wounds had been inflicted up to half an hour after the crime, showing the killer had spent some time around the body. This, in addition to the location and nature of wounds on the body, has suggested the possibility the murder was in some way sexually motivated, with the murderer gaining sexual gratification from spending time with the corpse. The crime certainly appears to have a far more sinister element than a simple burglary where the perpetrator was disturbed, panicked and killed as a direct result of that panic."



Prior to and following on from the confession made in July 2013, SH disclosed a large amount of information suggesting and stating the murder was indeed sexually motivated, not as his original conviction suggested, that it was a burglary gone wrong.

According to SH, he had used a long metal pole to smash the window in order to gain entry to the property. The pole was found in a neighbours garden. Whilst the police did exhibit this item no forensic tests were carried out on it - according to all disclosed material.

He also disclosed he had not worn gloves and instead said he had "put his socks on his hands."

http://www.mojuk.org.uk/Portia/archive%2012/hall.html

[Stephanie]

"Hall’s mother, Lynne, is adamant she saw Hall arrive at around 06:00. She had woken up and had been unable to sleep. At around 06:00 she had given up trying to sleep and had gone to make a drink. Whilst she was still making the drink, Hall entered. Of course, one could argue she was mistaken or she had reason to protect her son, but would she lie to protect someone who had killed a close friend? Lynne noticed nothing unusual in her son’s manner or appearance. He chatted with his mother and later that day he was ‘his usual smiley entertaining self’ according to friends. This is hardly the demeanour of a man who had killed as a result of a burglary that had gone wrong and who had just killed his mother’s friend."



He disclosed the murder took place around 6am ish. He said he did not sit and have a chat with his mother and instead went straight up to bed as soon as he got in, took the clothes he was wearing off and placed them in the bottom of the wardrobe - where the fibres were found.

He said he had indeed gone into Tesco's Copdock on the Saturday to purchase a new pair of trousers and that it was a 'fluke' the police failed to find this when viewing CCTV.

He said he was wearing a black leather jacket, black trousers, black & red shirt and a pair of black shoes. Not boots, jeans and a jumper.

According to SH he disposed of the clothing on the Monday night. He suggested the clothes remained in the bottom of the wardrobe from the Sunday morning until the Monday. He didn't say where but they may have been disposed of in Colchester, where he said he disposed of some of the items he had stolen from the zenith burglary.



"The prosecution explained this by claiming Hall disposed of the clothing he wore at the time of the murder and even claimed he had bought the clothing from Tesco’s earlier in the day, even though CCTV footage of the supermarket shows Hall was not at the supermarket at any time. It seems strange they would introduce such a theory when there is no evidence at all to substantiate it. There is no evidence to suggest Hall disposed of any clothing. It is simply a convenient explanation from the prosecution who would otherwise have been unable to explain the flaws in their argument."

http://www.mojuk.org.uk/Portia/archive%2012/hall.html