sccrcunjustdecisions.myfastforum.org

Scott Law · Joined: 06 Nov 2007 Posts: 36

Car dealer cleared of raping prostitute
May 16 2008 By Brian Horne

A MOTOR dealer jailed for raping a young mum was cleared yesterday - because a jury were not told the woman was a prostitute.

John McIntear, 57, complained he was a victim of rules aimed at protecting victims of sex crimes when they give evidence in court.

Appeal judges agreed his trial had been unfair and overturned the conviction.

McIntear, of Beith, Ayrshire, was jailed for six years in September 2006.

He remained behind bars until January last year when he was freed on bail to await the outcome of his appeal.

During his trial, the woman said she left a pub near Glasgow Cross in August 2005 and got into McIntear's car, thinking it was a taxi, and asked him to take her home.

He drove her to the Toryglen area where, she claimed, he raped her in the car.

When questioned by police, McIntear said he had paid the woman £20 for sex earlier that evening and had arranged to meet her again when the pub closed.

But a jury at the High Court in Edinburgh rejected the story and found him guilty.

At the Court of Criminal Appeal yesterday Lord Johnston, sitting with Lords Nimmo Smith and Eassie, heard the woman had convictions for prostitution.

The appeal judges also heard how the jury were prevented from knowing this.

Defence lawyers are not allowed to question alleged rape victims about their previous sexual history, unless a judge allows an exception.

Trial judge Lord Macphail refused to allow the mum to be quizzed over her convictions.

Yesterday, Chris Shead, defending McIntear, told the appeal court: "She would have been bound to concede there were convictions and that would have enabled the jury to see her evidence in a completely different light."

Giving the judges' decision, Lord Johnston said the issue of whether the woman was working as a prostitute was "highly relevant" to the defence."

He added: "The question of what caused the woman to get into the car was central."

The judges also refused a Crown request to make McIntear face a retrial.

Scott Law · Joined: 06 Nov 2007 Posts: 36

Relief for Jodi family as killer loses court appeal

Jodi's mother Judy leaves Edinburgh High Court today

Mitchell arriving at court to hear his appeal fail

Victim Jodi Jones

THE family of murdered schoolgirl Jodi Jones left court today with the satisfaction of knowing their daughter's killer remains behind bars.

Luke Mitchell failed to overturn his conviction for the savage knife attack on his 14-year-old girlfriend.

Appeal judges Lord Justice General Lord Hamilton, sitting with Lords Osborne and Kingarth, took just 20 minutes to announce their decision and dash his hopes of freedom. However, they did condemn the way police questioned him in the wake of the killing as "outrageous."

Jodi's naked, bound and mutilated body was found in June 2003 in woods beside a path that joined her house with the Mitchell home in Dalkeith, Midlothian.

advertisement
After months of suspicion Mitchell - also 14 at the time of the murder - was charged and brought to trial at the High Court in Edinburgh the following November.

The appeal judges had spent weeks scrutinising Mitchell's claims he did not get a fair trial before announcing today the guilty verdict should stand.

In a rare move, television cameras were allowed in court to record the decision.

Pony-tailed Mitchell, now 19, has always maintained his innocence. Today, his only reaction was the flicker of a smile towards his mum, Corinne, as he was led into court.

Jodi's mum, Judith, sister Janine and other members of the Jones family were sitting on the other side of the court. Mrs Jones wiped a hand across her face in relief as Lord Hamilton finished giving the verdict.

Mitchell's conviction and sentence - in the same courtroom at the High Court in Edinburgh - followed one of the most unusual trials seen in Scotland, which included a visit by jurors to the woods where Jodi was found.

And in a specially constructed court room, a section of the wall which bounded the crime scene was built by theatre set designers to demonstrate key evidence in the prosecution case.

Jodi, arms tied with her own trousers, had suffered terrible injuries - before and after a frenzied knife attack.

Jailing Mitchell for life, trial judge Lord Nimmo Smith ordered he serve at last 20 years before applying for parole, the longest sentence handed down to a youth in Scotland.

During the appeal, defence QC Donald Findlay argued Mitchell did not get a fair trial because of local prejudice. The lawyer also challenged identification evidence, the sufficiency of evidence and an alleged "ambush" by leading surprise evidence when questioning Mitchell's mum and police tactics.

All the grounds were rejected and junior counsel Jane Farquharson told the court further claims of "new evidence" pointing the finger at another suspect, were being dropped.

Mitchell will return to court at a later date to try to cut the length of his minimum sentence.

His only consolation today was the harsh words used to describe a police interview.

The judges said detectives carried out an "overbearing and hostile interrogation" in a bid to make him confess.

"Some of the questions can only be described as outrageous," said Lord Hamilton. But the judges said there was no miscarriage of justice.

Mitchell's mother left court saying only "Luke is innocent. The fight goes on."

Publication date 16/05/08

Scott Law · Joined: 06 Nov 2007 Posts: 36

Clearly in the Mitchell appeal there is more contradictory evidence to make his conviction unsafe.

With all the contradictions and unheard evidence of Condoms being found this conviction is a joke.

The chief witness Bryson actually described someone in their twenties, not consistent with Mitchell being the murderer, More consistent with the cousin who not only appeared later with scratches but also left a used condom at the lane.

What happened to the evidence of him also having drawn some article consistent with the murder.

This whole case actually smells rotten.

The Police were condemned for their tactics at least but it didn't amount to a miscarriage, Sorry i think it does.

How did the chief witness not notice the big logo on the back of jacket.

Some comments from the opinion

She was cross-examined under reference to label production 146 (the black or very dark navy hooded top which the deceased had worn the evening she died) and challenged about a prominent, brightly coloured, Deftones logo or badge on its back. When asked how she could fail to have seen this, she responded "I have no idea". She was challenged on her evidence about the jacket the male was wearing, Mr Findlay eliciting a number of differences between what she had described and the label production replicating the appellant's jacket (which had subsequently disappeared). She had also described to the police the male she had seen as " ... white, early 20s, average height, not tall or short, medium build, sandy/brown hair sticking up on the top and very thick".

To regard the identification evidence as acceptable, it is not necessary that you should conclude that the witness in question has made a one hundred percent absolutely
certain identification.

Think carefully about questions such as this, as they may be important when you consider identification evidence, especially that of Mrs Bryson."
He later said:

Scott Law · Joined: 06 Nov 2007 Posts: 36

Bullied

The following comments show that at it's best Lothian & Borders Police tried to intimidate Mitchell into a confession.

"Having considered the transcript of the interview, we are driven to the conclusion that some of the questions put by the interviewing police officer can only be described as outrageous," Lord Hamilton said.

"At times, the nature of the questioning was such that the questioner did not seem to be seriously interested in a response from the appellant but rather endeavouring to break him down into giving some hoped-for confession by his overbearing and hostile interrogation.

"Such conduct, particularly where the interviewee was a 15-year-old youth, can only be deplored."

A police spokeswoman said: "We duly note the comments made by the appeal judges.

"We will talk time to consider the statements; it would be inappropriate to comment further.

"This was a grave crime and our thoughts are with the family at this time."

My own opinion is they just bullied him, Wouldn't trust a word that came out of any L & B Policemans mouth

Scott Law · Joined: 06 Nov 2007 Posts: 36

Not before time has anyone with balls stood up against the Scottish judicial System.

Why wasn't the evidence allowed ?

This was the same person i am told also left a used condom at the scene.

Jodi killer plans fresh appeal

Judy Jones

« Previous « PreviousNext » Next »View Gallery Published Date: 18 May 2008
By Marcello Mega
THE family of murdered Jodi Jones face new heartache this weekend as lawyers for teenage killer Luke Mitchell plan to seek a fresh appeal against his conviction.
Appeal judges last week upheld 19-year-old Mitchell's conviction for the killing of his 14-year-old girlfriend in Midlothian in 2003.

But his lawyers revealed yesterday that they will take his case to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission to seek a fresh appeal hearing.

They are determined that the appeal court should examine fresh evidence that it has so far refused to consider relating to a potential alternative suspect for the brutal murder.

Mitchell's legal team expected that the appeal judges, led last week by the Lord President, Lord Hamilton, would uphold the conviction.

One of the team, Nigel Beaumont, said: "He's 19 years old with 16 years of a life sentence still to serve.

"No-one would expect him to give up now when there is still credible evidence that could help his case that has not been fully examined."

The new moves will come as a blow to Jodi's family, who expected last week's appeal hearing would end their post-trial ordeal. They were unavailable for comment yesterday but Jodi's mother, Judith, left court saying the rejection of the appeal was "brilliant" and she was "relieved it was all over".

Mitchell was convicted in January 2005 of a murder that shocked the world. The killer and his victim, both from Dalkeith, were just 14 at the time of June 30, 2003, when Jodi was killed in a ferocious knife attack. Her virtually naked body was found in a wooded area alongside a path that ran between their homes.

Police suspicions against Mitchell were first aroused by the fact that he discovered her body during a search conducted by her friends and relatives. Others who were present later told detectives that the body was not visible from the path, yet Mitchell appeared to have led them straight to it.

But Mitchell's legal team believe this is in part why the fresh evidence is crucial.

A source close to the team said: "The police said publicly that from the very start they kept an open mind, that they spent months examining every witness statement, every piece of information, and did not make their move until they had eliminated every other possibility.

"Yet many months after the trial and conviction, they receive a witness statement from someone who had told the police at the time of a potential suspect.

"Not only did the Crown not pass that information to the defence, as they should have done under disclosure rules, they did not consider the alternative suspect seriously because their mind was made up."

The alternative suspect was named in appeal papers submitted by Mitchell's legal team as Mark Kane. At the time of the murder, he was on a residential course at Newbattle Abbey College for people recovering from addiction problems.

But the appeal court was told that Kane had been cleared by DNA tests.

Advocate depute John Beckett QC, for the Crown, also told the judges that Kane had been questioned by police and had told them: "I know nothing else about the murder of Jodi Jones."

It was alleged by a friend of Kane's that he often took alcohol and cannabis into the woods, close to where Jodi was murdered, to avoid detection by course supervisors.

Like Mitchell, he was a devotee of the rock band Nirvana and the singer Marilyn Manson, whose pictures of the infamous Black Dahlia murder victim Elizabeth Short were believed to have influenced the killer when mutilating Jodi's body.

Kane also had a fascination with websites that displayed graphic images of violence and would show his favourite scenes, such as people being impaled on spikes, to his fellow-students.

He was suspected by college authorities of being responsible for defacing doors and walls with a heavy knife or chisel with the words 'kill' and 'die' and the Nazi swastika. Three weeks before Jodi's murder, he penned an essay entitled 'Killing a female in the woods'.

On the day after the murder, he had scratches to his face and arms, particularly under the eye, and claimed he could not remember how he got them, but when pressed later gave at least three different accounts.

The source said: "Here was someone who had an interest in graphic violence against women. He wasn't in Inverness or Aberdeen. He was right on the doorstep at the time of the murder.

"The standard for admitting fresh evidence at the appeal stage is that it could not have been made available at the time and is significant enough that it could have had a material impact on the jury's verdict.

"The defence could not make available what it had not been told. As for the second part, I think the jury would have been interested to know there was an alternative suspect to a 14-year-old boy."

The full article contains 833 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.Page 1 of 1

Last Updated: 17 May 2008 7:12 PM
Source: Scotland On Sunday
Location: Scotland

Well done Mega