 |
shirleymckie.myfastforum.org To allow readers to post comments on current issues related to the Shirley McKie case
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
scotkaz

Joined: 28 Aug 2008 Posts: 527
|
Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:37 pm Post subject: Victim of longest miscarriage of justice fined |
|
|
Victim of longest miscarriage of justice fined for dressing as police officer
By Jaya Narain
Stephen Downing was found guilty today of wearing police clothing in public
A man who wrongly spent 27 years behind bars in the longest miscarriage of justice in British legal history was today found guilty of dressing up like a policeman.
Stephen Downing was jailed for killing Wendy Sewell in 1973 in the notorious 'Bakewell Tart' murder case.
He was eventually freed after his conviction was quashed in 2001 but today he was back in court for wearing police clothing.
The court heard he had bought ex-police jackets on the internet, visited eBay sites that sell handcuffs and police hats and badges.
He was picked up by police after staff at a local Aldi store refused to sell him four cans of shandy because they believed he was a policeman.
Downing was dressed in an ex-police issue jacket, dark trousers and black boots, Buxton Magistrates' Court, in Derbyshire, was told.
The police fleece jacket he was wearing had been bought online and featured the distinctive checked, reflective strip and a badge saying Derbyshire Constabulary ARV (Armed Response Vehicle).
The court heard Downing had worn it before and previously been mistaken for a policeman when he was stopped by a member of the public about a malfunctioning traffic light.
Today Downing told the court: 'I did not go out to deceive anybody. I have no control over what other people may or may not think.'
He claimed he wore the jacket to advertise his freelance photography firm, Photografix, whose name was stitched on to two large patches.
'It's hard-wearing, weather-proof and durable. I thought it would be ideal for business purposes. I wanted to advertise my company.'
The court heard that when interviewed Downing said he collected badges and wore the police one out of respect.
He said: 'It's a hobby of mine. I have a collection of 50 or 60. I considered it discreet. If I thought I was offending anyone I would remove it.'
Downing was found guilty by magistrates and fined £437 and ordered to pay £625 costs. The court also ordered the police jacket be destroyed.
Chairman of the bench David Dusgate told Downing: 'You admit you had been stopped by one or two police men about your clothing.
'Although it carried the 'Photografix' emblem on it, you were wearing a pin badge. We believe that this badge and the reflective stripes would be likely to deceive members of the public into believing you were a member of the police service.'
In 1974 Stephen Downing was convicted of murdering 34-year-old legal secretary, Wendy Sewell, in the cemetery in Bakewell in the Peak District.
Mr Downing, 17, was employed by the council as a cemetery groundskeeper but had a reading age of 11.
He initially confessed to a sex attack on her but later retracted this, claiming he was pressurised by police.
The notorious murder became known as the 'Bakewell Tart' case because of Mrs Sewell's promiscuous reputation.
He walked free in 2002 after serving 27 years in prison when the Appeal Court ruled his conviction was unsafe as he was not told he was under arrest or that he had the right to a solicitor when he made his confession.
Sources close to the investigation said new evidence from forensic scientists still pointed to Mr Downing being the prime suspect and police say they are not looking for anyone else in connection with the murder.
He is believed to have received around £750,000 compensation after he was wrongly convicted of the murder.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/a...ined-dressing-like-policeman.html
_________________ Great Spirit, grant that I may not criticize my neighbor until I have walked a mile in his moccasins." - Old Native American Indian Prayer that my dad taught me.
Last edited by scotkaz on Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:10 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Angeline
Joined: 02 Oct 2008 Posts: 148
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This saddens me as much as it disgusts me. Since when was wearing a jacket with "a distinctive, reflective checked band" an offence, for God's sake? Also, he "visited sites featuring...." - so what? I've visited sites featuring all sorts of things, sometimes just out of curiosity, sometimes because a friend has said "have you seen such and such" and sometimes as part of my research. It doesn't mean I have any dark intentions.
How many real cops do you see walking around with a "Photographix" emblem on their uniforms. In fact, why aren't the various "security" personnel, who have nothing to do with the police, or, indeed, council employees, who also wear very distinctive clothing, similar to police clothing, all being charged, and their jackets destroyed??
But the worst bit of this coverage is the last bit - quote- "Sources close to the investigation say new evidence from forensic scientists still pointed to Mr Downing being the prime suspect and police say they are not looking for anyone else in connection with the murder."
This is complete bull, the same approach taken in every single case of wrongful conviction. Firstly, if there was any reliable "evidence" that could stand up in court, they would use it. Since we no longer have double jeopardy, there's nothing to stop them. Where is this "new evidence" - where did it come from, and under what circumstances was it produced? The article is completely silent on these questions. Secondly, why aren't the police looking for anyone else. Since the conviction was overturned, they still have an unsolved murder on their books. It's just the police's way of saying, "we know it was him," even when, after 27 years, they were shown not to have anything like enough evidence to convict. Why can't they just admit they got it wrong, and get on with the job they're supposed to be doing - finding out who did murder this woman? Innocent until proven guilty? I think not. Presumed guilty from the off, and still considered guilty even after the courts can no longer support what is clearly and obviously a wrongful conviction. The press who report in this manner should be ashamed - they provide the mouthpiece for this self-justifying police prejudice.
_________________ As long as one heart still holds on, then hope will never really be gone |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|