Comments on: Flawed

By: Satish Sekar

Satish Sekar — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 15:56:51 +0000

Hello Lorraine,

Far from offending anyone, I think that anybody who is not moved by what you have said has no heart. Joint Enterprise is unfortunately a legal principle that has produced injustices as you acknowledge, but as you also say it can work both ways. We do not have a policy yet on JE. That is a matter for the membership, but my opinion, and it is only my opinion, is that it does need a thorough review on how it should be used – Jordan Cunliffe is an example of everything that is wrong with it, but there are other murders where it should have been used, but was not. Rolan Adams is a good example of that and it was used in the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry. I am sorry that you did not get justice, but could it be that the conduct of the prosecution played a part. I do not know of your case personally, so please forgive if I have spoken out of turn.

Best

Satish

By: Satish Sekar

Satish Sekar — Sun, 24 May 2015 14:05:36 +0000

I cannot see how anything you have said would offend any right thinking person Lorraine. You have expressed yourself very well. I hope that you get some measure of justice for your son and assistance from the State. It is the least you deserve. Take care.

By: lorraine k

lorraine k — Wed, 20 May 2015 13:12:16 +0000

As a mum of a murdered teenager I am left living in my own hell….justice let my son down through joint enterprise so why do some jurors find a 100% GUILTY man free and then I read some jurors are putting people away for many years???
I will never get my head around this word joint enterprise as so far as I can see it is not used correctly in some trials. Here I read some comments and understand them totally but then again I have to live knowing the judge said to the jury at my trial charge both men guilty on joint enterprise…
then I watched a guilty man walk out of the court …???
It as good as killed me there and then as the jury did find one man guilty but all who know about my son’s murder ….know full well more should have been charged and jailed as they was 100% guilty on this so called new law….but it was not used correctly at the time and now I see the same word/law ruining many people’s lives in different ways so I am not happy with this law as I am living proof it is wrongly used in many trials unfortunately
Jurors need to be educated on this law before they are putting people in jail after finding some innocent guilty and then some 100% guilty and proven in court but the jurors set them free??
I am sorry but it makes no sense if jails end up full of innocent people and our streets are full of guilty men and women due to this law….
I was hopeful with this law at my trial but unfortunately this word is my worst nightmare now.
I truly hope this law is either scrapped or used for what it was originally when they first brought it back again.
I have read many lives ruined by this law as well as very few it worked as it should have done….but then I think of my judges words and how a jury failed my son getting the justice he deserved so I am looking at both sides of this law now and I see the injustice as well as wrongful convictions as well as some with no justice so all I would like to say is educate the law to all jurors before they put lives in a jurors hands …as a mum who is left with a broken heart I feel for others who need to fight for what is right and what is wrong as we should be able to rely on the justice system not all this what is happening now and people are left suffering for years…even though I am a grieving mum I never fail to sign petitions about the justice system as I say I read about both sides and make my own mind up now as we can not rely on the system no more can we? Hope my words and thoughts have not offended any person as that is not the reason I wrote on this web page I just want others to understand that it hurts the victims as well as the convictions in some so wrongful ways words fail me to be honest.

By: Satish Sekar

Satish Sekar — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 14:20:50 +0000

I hope Jan Cunliffe doesn’t mind if I answer here, but I think it is relevant to point out that despite repeated requests for clarification and also action in support of the Cardiff Five (unusually for a miscarriage of justice, they are victims of crime as well) and even more disgracefully Lynette’s family (the outrageously lenient tariff on the real killer) none of the victims’ rights advocates (including Baroness Newlove) and anti-knife-crime advocates have done a thing to combat the appalling message sent by the ludicrous tariff imposed on Jeffrey Gafoor the real murderer of Lynette White. It is also interesting that the Crown’s case hinged on alleged joint enterprise between the five men. Not only was this joint enterprise never proved, it has been conclusively proved false by the conviction of Gafoor.

By: pull up a chair

pull up a chair — Wed, 28 Jan 2015 02:31:21 +0000

Why not indeed!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Its a travesty, the british justice system stinks! I’m sorry but can I ask the question, there are a lot of families out there who have lost their family members through murder and my deepest sympathy goes out to them all… but why was Gary Newlove’s wife made a baroness? What was different about this murder to any other? No matter how or what way a murder is committed (violence, weapon or anything else) the pain for the families is exactly the same, why not give all victims families titles? If anyone deserves a title its Jan Cuncliffe for fighting a system that imprisons children (despite the evidence of their innocence) to keep Joe public appeased. I’m sure if Mrs Newlove and her daughters was to read this post they may just see the injustice.