I can speak with authority regarding the impact any police message log, or document can have on the outcome of a case. This is because, in July 1986, but for the discovery of a surveillance log and its contents, dated, Wednesday, the 22nd January, 1986, Stipendiary Magistrate, 'Ron, Barry would not have been compelled to throw the dishonest police/prosecution case against me out of court. In that log, were two key messages, both timed, one 5.55pm, the other 6.30pm, that same date. I know I have touched upon these elsewhere but I wanted to create a separate thread, and link it to four messages that Essex police passed in the so called Bamber case. In that case, log entries timed at 7.36am, 7.37am, 7.38am and 8.10am, become pivotal...
In my case, only by chance did my solicitor manage to extract from a Detective Inspector during cross examination, that there existed this surveillance record. Lets set the facts out correctly, the police and the CPS did not volunteer these message logs, their existence came about purely as a result of skilful questioning and or by pure chance...
In the Bamber case, again, there was no disclosure by the police or the CPS...
In my case, the contents of the two time entries (5.55pm and 6.30pm) proved sufficient, to compel the court to throw the case out. Not because the identification was of poor quality, but because everyone in that courtroom knew that cops and the CPS had run a crooked case. The identification evidence being relied upon was fundamentally flawed because DS Shepherd and DC Caulfield could not have bee covertly concealed inside an observation van at 5.20pm, on Wednesday, the 22nd January, 1986, because it was confirmed that the said observation van was still securely parked up in the police compound at Barnsley Town police station at that time, several miles distant away. Both DS Shepherd and DC Caulfield made witness statements in this case, claiming that at 5.20pm, that particular date, both of them were side by side in that observation van when the observed a stolen motor vehicle being driven by a person who they claimed was me pull up outside target premises. The contents of the two timed messages (5.55pm and 6.30pm) however, proved beyond possibility that neiner of them could have been inside that van, at that time, because that observation van had not been there when they said it was. If the observation van wasn't there, at 5.20pm, that date, then neither could both Shepherd and Caulfield have been inside it outside the target premises. Both of them could not even have seen the stolen car which both stated they had seen from their vantage point of being inside that van, parked up in the street outside the target premises. They could not have seen the driver of such a vehicle at that stage, because the observation van was not there at 5.20pm, the two police officers were not there at 5.20pm, the stolen vehicle was not there at 5.20pm, and I was certainly not there at that time to enable the cops to see me driving the stolen vehicle at that time...
Not only did these two bent cops make false witness statements saying things which could not possibly have been true. But at the same Committal proceedings, both police officers took an oath and testified giving the same fabricated evidence to the court, both during examination in chief, and in cross examination. Now, for the purpose of avoiding any doubt, I am sure that everyone will agree that this evidence as introduced as it was in witness statement form, and testimony in court, was what one would call powerful evidence. So powerful was this evidence that I had been incarcerated for five and a half months on remand denied my entitlement to freedoms and liberty. But the case turned dramatically, when Detective Inspector Henshaw testified and was being cross examined by my solicitor, Peter Babb (Graysons solicitors, Sheffield). It transpired that there existed a police log, with timed entries, and messages alongside. Why had we not been told this prior to the court case getting under way? Why no disclosure? Two timed police messages sprung out as key evidence from these logs, (5.55pm and 6.30pm), the first was an instruction from Inspector Henshaw for two officers to go back to Barnsley Town police station and collect the observation van which was parked up and secure in the police compound by that (5.55pm) stage, and to bring it back to Worsborough, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, and to park it in the street outside the target premises. The second message (6.30pm) simply confirmed the time when the observation van had been parked up in the street as instructed. It took about 35 minutes from sending cops for the observation van, to it being parked up in the street...
Of course, we now know that Detective Seargent Shepherd, and Dectective Constable Caulfield, could not possibly have been sat inside that observation van at 5.20pm, outside the target premises. They could not possibly have seen any stolen car being driven by me outside the target premises from their vantage point inside that observation van...
Anyway, case got thrown out of court. No cops got prosecuted, or disciplined. The CPS Prosecutor in court that day (July 1986) was Colin Jackson (Same prosecutor who helped put the later cases against me, again using fabricated identification / recognition evidence)...
To date, I have never been compensated financially for this miscarriage of justice, despite the fact that three decades+ later I am still traumatised by it...
Now, onto Jeremy Bambers case, and his miscarriage of justice...
