shirleymckie.myfastforum.org

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

I was honoured and privileged with an invitation to attend the launch of the Innocent Project Scotland today with my Wife and Scotkaz.

Michael Naughton from Bristol University launched the Innocent Project for Scotland at Glasgow Caledonian University.
This is a first in Scotland though has been ongoing in England since 2004.

He said that Edinburgh and Dundee Uni's have also showed interest in starting up these projects where students take on cases Pro-Bono in their spare time and it gives them a hands on approach and live cases to work on intead of boring old books which the students can benefit greatly from.

I wish the projects every success

The launch went without a hitch until after Robin Johnston from SCCRC spoke and took questions.

I had many many questions going through my head regarding the incompetence of SCCRC, I was lost for choice, I knew I was only to have one question so picked it with great scrutiny.

Since he mentioned the Lockerbie case in great detail going into the grounds and explaining they were afraid of no-one and used their first ground for this reasoning:

We have referred this case saying "Any Jury" properly directed could not have reached the verdict they did in the Lockerbie case.

He highlighted the Jury in Megrahi's case was Three Judges therefore this proved they were not afraid to tackle the Courts, Great one would think, until :

Big Wullie asked him:

Why have they spent £1.8 Million investigating Megrahi's case and Two Bob on mine.

I told him that the expert opinion they sought in Megrahi's case was from an expert who now backs me yet in my case they never asked the same expert for his opinion yet I was convicted solely on 2 Positive Identifications, Could he explain why expert opinions are sought in some cases and not others.

Dumbfounded was Mr Johnston he could not answer my question and sought to rely on It is an offence for the commission's members to talk about individual cases, Bear in mind he had just spoken about Megrahi's case in great detail highlighting his grounds.

I gave him express permission to speak about my own case, He still refused to answer but he did say that Megrahi's case was certainly more important than mine and then went on to say Megrahi's case certainly Dwarfed mine.

So there we have it folks SCCRC treat cases differently, they do not give every case the same high standard of probity they profess, The more political pressure the more they probe.

Mr Johnston actually suggested in front of the whole audience that If the same expert that they have used for Megrahi's case backs me now then I should launch another appeal to them (SCCRC) I declined citing the oppression I have recieved from them twice but who knows.

Does anyone agree with Johnston that I should give them another chance to refer my case or should I just continue with my appeal to Nobile Officium ?

John McManus made a good speech, Hats off to him he had the guts also to have a go at SCCRC to which Robin Johnston took offence.

He mentioned a few cases and one in particular close to my heart, Wullie Gage's case.

Wullie Gage has been awaiting the SCCRC opinion in his case, on whether they will refer it back to appeal or not, Three years have passed now and he is still waiting to see if they will reverse their earlier decision not to refer.

His Family was also at the launch and he too has the same expert backing him that SCCRC used in Megrahi's case but the SCCRC have initially said in his case that they did not know what the Jury could have extracted if anything from this experts opinion and they did not know if his evidence would be admissible.

Why then have SCCRC referred the case of Megrahi on this very same experts opinion ?

Of course the test for admissible expert evidence was Campbell & Steele and in that case we all know the result, "Professor Gudjonson's evidence was allowed by our courts"

Besides this argument why then would SCCRC use the very same expert to refer the case of Megrahi and not seek his opinion in our cases.

The expert in question also gave an interview to frontline Scotland in Gage's case and still SCCRC never sought his expert opinion.

Yes SCCRC employ double standards : They employ a Law for the Rich and another for the poor.

Mr Johnston made it abundantly clear at the launch that the Gages and Becks cases where Dwarfed (Johnston's Words) by Megrahi's and Megrahi's was treated with the utmost importance

Why then have SCCRC referred the case of Megrahi on this very same experts opinion.

Lets hope the students when they take on these cases they treat them all the same and give SCCRC a right red face with some cases which SCCRC have already refused to refer, which I have no doubt will come before these students.

As the Launch drew to a close we sought Mr Johnston for confirmation on a number of issues and during these debates it emerged from Mr Johnston that the Police had contacted him trying to Solicit a complaint from him in regards to there being a photo of him on the blog of Big Wullie.

He said he did not feel threatened by it so did not lodge a complaint.

So it has emerged now the truth of why the police arrested me over the blog and their ulterior motives, They are poaching complaints, Anyone know if this is legal ?

I will certainly be watching my back from now on if this is the way our Police are acting and will be making a complaint Via My MSP to Strathclyde Police.

Watch this space

Lydia · Joined: 06 Nov 2008 Posts: 82

Hi Big Willie,

Because I am so new to the forum I am finding it a little difficult to navigate round the site,(I am crap at it anyway) could you direct me to your story.
_________________
We are the parents in Scotland denied justice for our children who had illegal post mortem's or had organs removed illegally at post mortem.

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

Hi Lydia

First of all please let me welcome you to the forum.

Iain has been so kind to let me document my case on his site here:

http://shirleymckie.com/documents/CaseBeck.pdf

And indeed helped me shorten it to 2 pages in a brief outline of it.

Other parts can be found here:

http://williambeck.blogspot.com/

http://bigwulliebeck.wordpress.com/

http://williambeck.wordpress.com/.../likely-judicial-review-of-sccrc/

http://justiceforwulliebeck.webs.com/index.htm.

Thanks ever so much for your interest please enjoy your reading of my case.

Best Wishes

Wullie Beck

Lydia · Joined: 06 Nov 2008 Posts: 82

Quite apart, from the evidence, which is in question, it seems some question would be put on this case by the very fact that you are still fighting all these years later.
Why would a guilty person do this?
You must have spent years in prison for a crime you did not commit.

Prison is not just being shut away from your family I think it is trying to live and survive in a prison community. For a guilty person it is difficult but what they deserve, for an innocent person it must have been torture.

I think I can assume that you and your family went through a terrible time during those years.

Just getting a job after must have been very difficult. Trying then to create a family life must have been very difficult.

I think what most people cannot see is that stains like this on your character is something you live with all your life; it affects your life in so many ways. Trying to tell your children that you are innocent. Trying to tell the parents of your children’s friends that you are innocent. When you visit the school, or want to be involved in their activities.

Wanting a bank account. Everything that normal life is about.

Forms that every other person fills in without thinking when they score through the part that asks if you have any criminal convictions.

Keep fighting Willie you deserve this stain removed. Don't though ever allow these people to change your character and make you bitter, if you do they will have won.

God Bless
_________________
We are the parents in Scotland denied justice for our children who had illegal post mortem's or had organs removed illegally at post mortem.

scotkaz · Joined: 28 Aug 2008 Posts: 527

Wullie

Yes indeed it was a pleasure to be at the launch.

Everyone was so nice and really wanted to know about cases and how things work.

Michael Naughton explained things so very well to the students and also to us in the audience.

John McManus did very well indeed. I think he named every case in Scotland which was amusing me no end. John got very animated in his speech and I think Robin Johnston from SCCRC did not like it much Razz

Mr Johnstone came across as a very arrogant and rude man. The auditorium was packed and he did not speak very loudly. I was sitting at the front and had problems hearing him. When a man from the very back asked if he could speak up, his response was "Move down to the front".
He made no attempt to speak louder, in fact it was as if he went out of his way to speak as low as possible.

When Wullie Beck asked his question, he tried to dismiss him by saying he could not talk about his case in public. Wullie told him he gave him persmission to talk about anything to do with his case as he has nothing to hide. Mr Johnstone declined the offer.

I felt that Wullie was told in not so many words that his case really was not that important.
It was an uncomfortable time for Mr Johnstone I think. He was way out of his depth. He told Wullie he disagreed with him on something and people behind us all began saying well we agree with him. Wullie definitley touched some raw nerves and the students and other audience members could see what Johnstone was doing and they were supporting Wullie.
Wullie persisted and finally Johnstone told him to speak to him after the talk.

In the "private" talk with Johnstone, which was done in front of me, Wullie's wife, John McManus was there, Willie Gage's girlfriend and father, it became crystal clear to me and the others that Mr Johnstone did not think Wullie's case was that important to him. Where he denied while talking in front of everyone that he knew much about Wullie's case, he semed to regain his memory some in private.

Johnstone repeatedly began saying that Wullie should submit his case once more to the SCCRC. If I thought for a second he would do the proper investigation that should have been done long ago, I would tell Wullie to go for it but I am unsure, since the attitude was that it was not high up on his list of things to do.

Wullie pronounced a name wrong and Mr Johnstone felt the need to correct him publicly on the pronunciation of the name even though it was clear to everyone that he knew who Wullie meant.

The Gage family asked questions too. Three times they asked the same question and three times they where ignored. Mr Johnstone said he did not know much about the Gage case, so I gave him a copy of Willie Gage's book which he did take.

Mr Johnstone did not like being face to face with real live people. He seems more comfortable with case numbers and paper work and I think the students learned a few very valuable lessons from what happened.

They now know the attitude they face in trying to get cases into the SCCRC.
They also seen first hand how a live in person miscarriage of justice victim was treated publicly.

They paid attention when Wullie was speaking and to how he was being replied to.

I hope the lesson Mr Johnstone learned was that his case numbers and paperwork do have names and lives that they are trying to get on with in the shadow of just terrible injustice.

So much went on that I cannot get it all in here Smile

We managed to get over 100 of Willie Gage's books passed out to Students and lawyers
_________________
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.

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

John McManus Of MOJO accused SCCRC of actually deciding their cases on the evidence of the Crown.

Robin Johnston when he spoke took offence to this he said.

So Mr Johnston here is conclusive proof of one case where you (SCCRC) actually only interviewed the Lawyer Involved:

The only Witness interviewed was Solicitor J.H.Hamilton.

How many other times has this been done ?

And by the way SCCRC took 3 years to give Ed Milne a decision.

Thank God we now have the Innocent Network who will investigate more thoroughly and not only the Crown case