10 comments on “Barry George Was Fitted Up

  1. You are talking about the UK, aren’t you? Since when has any part of the British state actually taken responsibility? Not in my lifetime…

  2. “Barry George Was Fitted Up”

    NO. It was much worse than that. He WASN’T fitted up. Or if so, hardly at all.

    The shocking thing about George’s conviction was that it was NOT based on ANY evidence. He was convicted entirely on circumstantial evidence, which was that he lived in the area and behaved oddly. The ‘particle of residue’ was hardly defended against forensically at all, and could as easily have been a bonfire particle for all the defence knew.

    This was the first case I have seen in the UK courts where someone was convicted on no evidence since the end of the witch trials. It was NOT the case that the police constructed a frame-up – they didn’t need to. Everyone just assumed he was guilty, and what circumstantial evidence there was was just there for show. Mr Justice Gage has a lot to answer for…

  3. Agree with DG – no effort went into ‘fitting him up’ in the usual sense of the word. They didn’t need to, after all.

    “This was the first case I have seen in the UK courts where someone was convicted on no evidence since the end of the witch trials…”

    Not quite. There’s also the case of Michael Stone, another ‘Ok, there’s no forensic, motive, connections, etc, but here’s a sacrificial nutter for you. Another criminal swears he did it!’.

  4. This case deserved a blog all of its own, from the very beginning I thought the conviction was a nonsense. Heads should roll, but of course they won’t. In fact I haven’t heard the police even apologise yet.

  5. DG and Julia, I’ve just said much the same thing at the blog Tim linked to. It’s all a bloody scandal. A bit of jail time for a couple of people from the original prosecution team – one policeman, say, and one CPS stooge – would be a good idea, a bit of humiliation for the judge who failed to throw it out of court and, though I don’t know how, some sort of ordure to be poured over the original jury.

  6. “A bit of jail time for a couple of people from the original prosecution team – one policeman, say, and one CPS stooge – would be a good idea…”

    Splendid idea! And to drive the point home, don’t worry about selecting the ones in on the original case either – just anyone from the CPS and police who looks ‘a bit incompetent’ and is in the general vicinity.. 😉

  7. I agree he was set up.

    I agree he is innocent of the murder.

    I agree that he is entitled to sue for damages.

    And I agree that the woman he tried to rape (conviction beyond doubt) has the right to countersue him for all the money he gets out of this.

  8. Equally, she should – and does, and may well exercise – have the right solely to sue him for damages proportionate to the original offence, which is rather less than the compo due for eight years’ false imprisonment.

    [although come to think of it, I’m not sure you can say the conviction is ‘beyond doubt’ there either – just, fitting up the local nutter with three years’ jail in an attempted rape case gets less PR than fitting him up to go to jail forever for shooting a celeb…]

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.