Author: Peter Wood
Thursday, 01 August 2002 - 06:59 pm |        |
This may come as a surprise to some people, after all you won't often find me championing the causes of those who claim "rough justice".
I think the verdict on Barry George was wrong.
I think the evidence presented before the jury was tenuous in the extreme.
I think the public have been conned.
Maybe Barry George did kill Jill Dando, but on the evidence presented he is no more likely a suspect than Boy George.
Anyone got an opinion on this?
Peter. |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Thursday, 01 August 2002 - 07:35 pm | |
Dear Peter,
You may be right on this one. High profile case. Lack of leads. Lack of motive.Then the odd-ball comes into view with the microscopic particle in his coat pocket but the weapon is never found. The ID evidence a year later is the clincher... from the Appeal Court's point of view.
Rosey :-) |
Author: stephen miller
Friday, 02 August 2002 - 02:14 am | |
Hi Peter Boy George guilty now I could live with that
Seriously though I didn't follow the trial carefully but I seem to remember the coat with the particle in the pocket could have been contaminated during transportation
If so this seems to me to be a bit careless
all the best
steve |
Author: Peter Wood
Friday, 02 August 2002 - 03:14 pm | |
Hi guys
Out of twelve supposed eye witnesses, only one identified Barry George, that - to me - is pretty poor odds.
The speck of powder in his pocket? What does that prove? That he once owned a gun? That he once fired that gun?
Does it prove, or even suggest, that Barry George killed Jill Dando?
No, it doesn't.
I think he became a suspect because he had a fascination with tv celebrities including Jill Dando.
God help me if anyone ever kills Gary Numan!
Peter. |
Author: Garry Ross
Friday, 02 August 2002 - 04:35 pm | |
Peter,
Damn, that Numan fella was top of my list too.
Getting back on topic...remember those Irishmen (Birmingham 6 was it ?)who were arrested for having 'residue' on their hands that the police thought was gunpowder (actually they thought it was plastic explosives residue) but it turned out to be from playing cards ?
Also they have photos of him allegedly holding firearms don't they ? real ? replica ? water pistols ?
and that was the evidence wasn't it ?
residue in pocket
pictures of Jill Dando
photos of him with firearms
confession...later withdrawn
I remember when I saw the news report on Sky news the first thought that popped into my head was "Damn, someone's killed Jill Dando mistakenly thinking it was Prince Edwards' missus"
and I still happen to think that too.
take care
Garry |
Author: Divia deBrevier
Saturday, 03 August 2002 - 01:57 am | |
Greetings, all:
Who?
What?
Where?
When?
Why?
These are the questions that we Americans are probably asking right now! *wink*
Warm regards,
Divia
PS: No need to post the info, I'll go look it up. I know, line on the left, one cross each.... |
Author: Peter Wood
Saturday, 03 August 2002 - 10:25 am | |
Good post Garry,
I'm not aware of any confession, other than the alleged one that he was supposed to have made whilst in jail.
The Met seems to have followed the path of least resistance - they have no forensics against Barry George, the eyewitness evidence is appalling and what is more, he had an alibi that they tried to discredit.
His alibi, I recall, was something to do with him using his mobile phone at a particular location at the time of Jill Dando's murder, apparently that sort of thing can be pinpointed now.
I despair of this one, maybe it will take a change of government before it gets referred to the House of Lords or possibly the European Courts.
I simply fail to see how they can uphold the conviction on the evidence we have seen.
Regards
Peter. |
Author: Garry Ross
Saturday, 03 August 2002 - 11:01 am | |
Peter,
they certainly can pinpoint mobile calls etc (and they've been able to do that for a while..nudge nudge)
there are a lot of links to various parts of this case at the following :-
Dando case
the actual murder does seem to point to a 'professional hit' to me though.
take care
Garry |
Author: Peter Wood
Sunday, 04 August 2002 - 08:23 am | |
Thanks for the link Garry, I've just been there and it confirmed what I already thought.
I find the idea that we can convict people on purely circumstantial evidence absolutely abhorrent.
I always thought that a jury member had to be convinced 'beyond any reasonable doubt' before they could convict.
Surely a lack of motive leaves a reasonable doubt?
One eyewitness in twelve "identified" him. Sounds like reasonable grounds for doubt to me.
The judge at the trial concluded that the crime must have taken months of planning. O.K. so if it was planned, where are the notes? The street maps?
No murder weapon, no motive, no forensics.
Just one speck of powder and a desire to pin it on the loony.
Regards
Peter. |
Author: Simon Owen
Sunday, 04 August 2002 - 02:56 pm | |
This one doesn't strike me as having months of planning , more like the killer walked past Ms Dando's house one day and saw her leaving or entering and thought : ' Hey , Jill Dando lives there '. Then follows some fantasising about said TV presenter , which turns into the desire to kidnap her , kidnap attempt goes wrong , the end.
Alternatively , the gun could have been used to try and force Ms Dando into the house , where she probably would have been raped , tortured and then murdered.
It could have been a hit , but I don't think it was a professional job ; rather some inexperienced thug would have done it , suggesting the dislike of Ms Dando was personal. |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Sunday, 04 August 2002 - 08:43 pm | |
Dear Simon,
The most substantial clue to the murder was...and remains... the curious bullet.
Rosey :-) |
Author: Simon Owen
Monday, 05 August 2002 - 01:00 pm | |
What about the bullet ?
Wasn't it the cartridge that had the scratchmarks on it ?
Enlighten us Rosie ! |
Author: Peter Wood
Monday, 05 August 2002 - 05:01 pm | |
I don't think it was opportunistic, it just doesn't strike me as so.
The prosecution case against Barry George was that he was a fantasist, obsessed with Jill Dando, not that he was an opportunist killer.
For all his obvious faults I don't believe he did it.
Peter. |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Monday, 05 August 2002 - 05:45 pm | |
Dear Simon,
A crimping tool used to assemble/reassemble the bullet left a distinct marking on the cartridge case. So far, this peculiarity has not been explained or identified after a worldwide search for a similar marking.
Ballistic experts (!) suggested this marking was that of an "armourer" who had a unique instrument.
Hence, the " professional killer" profile was offered to explain the murder scenario and with this thought in mind, Scotland Yard was at a loss
how to bring Jill Dando's killer to justice... then the pressure started to mount.
Did the killer assemble his own bullet/bullets? Or did he REASSEMBLE them for some oblique reason known to "Assassins Inc"?
The story at a later date appears to be that George was on his way to some Day Centre near the SoC when serendipity presented a TV celebrity and George whipped out a pistol and shot her through the temple at close range. Then carried on about his normal (!) day-today routine.
To square the circle, we must explain to the unintiated public that this is an example of an autistic criminal genius.MAY BE SO!
Rosey :-) |
Author: Simon Owen
Tuesday, 06 August 2002 - 05:59 pm | |
Surely the experienced assassin would have planted a carbomb under Ms Dando's car , or taken her out from long range instead. What would have been gained by confronting her face-to-face apart from a greater propensity for the crime to go wrong ? Which it did - Miss Dando started screaming and the killer probably shot her in a panic because she had seen his face !
Maybe I've been watching too many Alain Delon movies , but I think professional assassins tend to get the job done without too much fuss !
I don't think it was a terrorist group as then somebody would have claimed the incident as being their work : to me its seems like the work of an obsessed stalker or a jealous ex-boyfriend. Since the latter option seems to be discounted , I'd suggest the former is most likely.
The marks on the cartridge don't seem like the work of a master armourer , rather they seem like the work of some idiot fiddling with the bullet to me - maybe the killer was trying to make a hollow-point bullet or a rubber bullet or something ? |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Tuesday, 06 August 2002 - 07:47 pm | |
Dear Simon,
Emm. And the smartly-dressed man with the mobile phone for whom the police made a nationwide appeal?
And the Range Rover seen speeding from the scene
and a nationwide appeal?
And the FACT that her shout was heard next door but not the gunshot?
It is a particular type of killer who deals in 'close quarter' killing. The penultimate cheorography is required...garrotte, knife or 'silent bullet' is a requisite accomplice. It is my experience that they have done it before.
But, before we rush to judgement, let us remember
the words of that rather forlorn figure Scapegoat:
"Who cares?".
Rosey :-) |
Author: Garry Ross
Tuesday, 06 August 2002 - 08:03 pm | |
Simon,
if it was someone inexperienced I'd expect a 'bodyshot' at the least due to panic but it was one shot to the head from close range and the 'job' was done, pretty clinical.
A 'silencer' must have been used, therefore it took planning.
The prosecution went against the 'hit' theory because they had to, it was their job to convince the jury that this man had done the deed.
I don't want to bring up the 'diplomat' thing but it's happened before and in a high profile case they had to get someone didn't they?
I don't know why but there's something very odd about this case.
take care
Garry |
Author: Ashleah Skinner
Wednesday, 07 August 2002 - 02:59 pm | |
The forensic could and was believed to be tampered with and also it was too small to be presented.
I believe it was a professional murder and he was framed |
Author: Bob Hinton
Thursday, 08 August 2002 - 02:42 pm | |
Dear Everyone,
I was asked by the Welsh Mirror ( The Daily Mirror sold in Wales) to investigate the murder of Jill Dando, together with a psychic that I sometimes use to investigate murders.
At the scene we split up I accompanied the reporter and Diane accompanied the photographer. We ran through the whole crime and then met up to compare notes. I was giving the killers view and Diane was giving the psychics view.
It was amazing how much we agreed with each other, where the killer stood, where he crossed the road, how he approached Miss Dando, how he shot her and where he went afterwards.
The main points that stood out were:
1. It was a very carefully planned killing. The killer had just eight seconds to cross the road, walk through the gate and fire the shot. (this is the least amount of time he had) If she had dropped her keys or fumbled with her shopping he would have had a few seconds more. Note: Miss Dando had three locks fitted to her front door.
2. There is no mystery about the weapon used only why the newspapers and the police consistantly misidentified it. It was constantly referred to as a 9mm - it wasn't it was a 9mm Short which is an entirely different round and type of pistol.
The information about the marks on the case is nonsense. Many thousands of marksmen load their own pistol ammunition, myself included, and the marks left on the case depend on what tool you use to crimp the bullet in. However you do not crimp rounds used for a semi automatic pistol - you only crimp revolver and some rifle rounds. The bullet is held in an auto round by the constriction of the cartridge case. The reason why this case was marked was because the killer removed the bullet to dump some of the powder. Why? For two main reasons.
1. The shot was to be fired from very close range (many professional killers shoot from point blank range, Mossad for example use a specially converted .22 Beretta up close and personal)dump half the powder you have enough to get the job done but not enough to make excessive noise, dont forget the noise of a gunshot is caused by the gas exiting the barrel - smother it with a persons body or skull and it can be very quiet indeed.
2. The pistol used was a reactivated weapon which had been rebuilt using an ordinairy piece of metal tube for the barrel - the killer didn't want the chance of the thing blowing up in his hand. I believe I know the make of weapon used but because it has never been recovered I am not at liberty to say what it was.
What happened to the gun afterwards? I believe the killer placed it in a cardboard box addressed to a safe house and popped it into the mail - there was a mail collection shortly afterwards in the area.
Points to ponder:
Miss Dando was not living at her flat. She only visited it rarely. Someone knew she was on her way to that address - unless you believe the killer just waited outside for several weeks on the off chance he would get lucky.
Miss Dando had brought some fish that day - enough for two. Who was the other piece of fish for? If she was intending to return to her boyfriends house later to eat the fish why buy it first? This suggests she brought it with the intention of cooking it at her flat.
I have spoken to several reporters who actually covered the trial and without exception these highly experienced men and women were amazed that George was convicted. See the Daily Telegraph leader for the day after for the full flavour.
all the best
Bob Hinton |
Author: Peter Wood
Thursday, 08 August 2002 - 06:48 pm | |
Bob
Thanks for pointing out that it isn't necessary to have a silencer fitted to a gun in order to dull it's sound. Undoubtedly Jill Dando was shot from a close enough range for the noise to have been dulled.
And what a good point from Rosey: What did come of the search for the sharp dressed man with the mobile phone? And the Range Rover?
I don't think Barry George killed Jill Dando, if I had been on the jury I wouldn't have voted to convict.
I have to be hopeful that justice will be done eventually, perhaps at the European courts or maybe the House of Lords.
Peter. |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Thursday, 08 August 2002 - 07:20 pm | |
Dear Mr Hinton,
A horrible thought! The killer may be among us,
here, on the Casebook!!! My alibi is that I was sat here at the time and I can prove it. What's yours?
Rosey :-) |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Thursday, 08 August 2002 - 07:48 pm | |
Dear Peter,
Let us not forget that the fundamental reason why the ID was acceptable to the majority of the jury
is the summing up by the Judge, to the effect that
identity+gunpower+obsession = Barry George (and Guy Fawkes).
Odd though Peter. I wonder if Mr Hinton realises
what the police may discover if they were to search his coat-pocket? "Microscopic firearms residue", is the term, I believe. Thank the lord the killer comes from Hampshire.
Excuse me while I reload the phone.
Rosey :-) |
Author: Ashleah Skinner
Thursday, 08 August 2002 - 08:10 pm | |
| Bob your very right have you got any pans to help Barry and his family overturn his conviction at The House Of Lords. visit http://www.faxyourmp.com to contact your Member Of Parliament |
Author: Bob Hinton
Friday, 09 August 2002 - 03:09 am | |
Dear Everyone,
Rosemary makes a very good point, about the level of 'evidence' in this case.
If police were to search my house they would find:
1. Several hundred books on gruesome murders.
2. Reloading equipment for the manufacture of ammunition and the various bits and pieces required to do so.
3. Several books on stalking.(people)
4. Several photographs of Miss Dandos flat and the surrounding streets, and large scale street maps of London.
5. Tools and equipment neccessary to reactivate a pistol.
6. Various bits of documentation which shows I have a knowledge of firearms.
7. Various bits of documentation which shows that I have led an interesting life.
8. Enough powder residue from my clothing to re-equip the battleship Potemkin.
9. Several hundred photographs of me firing various weapons ranging from a .22 'derringer' to a 50 cal Browning (used for lecture purposes)
and yet
I didn't do it!
Bob Hinton |
Author: Garry Ross
Friday, 09 August 2002 - 06:00 am | |
Bob,
Sounds like a confession to me, especially that "I didn't do it!" part
When was Jill supposed to be getting married?
Was her ex interviewed by the police at all?
any other interesting bits of info that aren't generally known?
take care
Garry |
