Scandalous

Tomorrow is Mother’s Day. With a cruel irony – cruel because 20-year-old Lynette White was denied the chance of motherhood that she desired – her murderer becomes eligible to apply for parole after a serving a paltry thirteen years. Twenty-eight years ago on Saint Valentine’s Day Lynette was the victim of what was then the most brutal murder of its type in Welsh history. She was stabbed over fifty times. Her throat was slit more than once. Her murderer continued stabbing her as she lay dying, or even dead.

Tomorrow, of all days, Jeffrey Gafoor, her self-confessed sole killer, completes the excessively lenient tariff that was imposed on him by Mr Justice (Sir John) Royce almost ten years ago. It was a tariff strewn with error, but there’s none as blind as those who refuse to see.

Verging on the sadistic?

When giving his reasons for imposing the tariff, Royce said that Lynette’s murder, “verged on the sadistic”. Lloyd Paris – brother of Tony, who was one of three men wrongly convicted of Lynette’s murder in 1990 – disagrees. “I would say the man was wrong”, he said. “It is sadistic. Well, that was the most sadistic thing that ever happened around me”.

Is there any doubt that it was sadistic? Not for Lloyd Paris.

“Totally, you know. He [Gafoor] says something like, ‘I can remember stabbing her a few times, but I can’t remember the rest. It’s all a haze’. Well he should be able to. Someone should be showing him the facts of what he done, so it’s not a haze no more, so when he starts quoting things, he can say, ‘Yeah, it was a haze but I’ve been told that this was the damage’”.

And he’s not alone in thinking that Lynette’s murder was sadistic. There’s not much that surprises the Western Mail’s Chief Reporter, Martin Shipton, but this does. “Well I don’t know what his perception of the threshold of sadism is, but mine certainly, it would seem, isn’t lower than his” Shipton said with incredulity at the suggestion that it could be seen as anything other than sadistic.

Consequences

It had a considerable effect. If Lynette’s murder had been termed sadistic, the starting point could have been thirty years rather than the fifteen that Royce decided was appropriate.

“Well that’s obviously made a considerable difference, though I’m not clear why he has come to that conclusion, because obviously fifty stab wounds is much more than would be required to kill someone”, Shipton said. “Well that’s a considerable difference clearly. I suppose the prospect this man could be out after fifteen years is quite disturbing given the level of violence that was involved in the crime”.

Lloyd Paris goes further. “That’s where he should have started – simple as”, he said. “It is sadistic. It don’t verge on nothing, you know. The damage done to that poor girl was horrific, so how he could say it verges on sadistic is a joke”.

And there were other problems too. Lynette’s murder was exceptionally brutal. However, there was another serious aggravating circumstance – one that Royce viewed as the most important. Gafoor had allowed five innocent men to go to prison for a total of sixteen years for a crime that he knew he had committed on his own. The tariff should fit the crimes and in this case it plainly did not.

Having set his starting point at fifteen years Royce thought that he could only allow a third for aggravating circumstances. With that starting point he had to include both the brutality of Lynette’s murder and allowing the innocent to suffer in the aggravating circumstances. Five years for both of those aggravating circumstances? “No”, an outraged Lloyd Paris said. “No. Five years is not enough”. It is hard to disagree, especially as Royce only allowed four and a half for both.

Limits

Max Hill QC suggests that there was no limit on Royce regarding aggravating circumstances. “It [a document published by the Sentencing Council] makes it clear that the Coroners and Justice Act, which is the vehicle for this, expects courts to sentence according to the guidelines, but if the court is satisfied that it’s according to the interests of justice to do so, that court can do so and that to me is a clear signal that if there is an unusual feature in a case, which might be an unusual feature that mitigates downwards or an unusual feature that aggravates upwards, every judge has the ability to take that into account and to act on it”, Hill said.

“And so, just before we get into any detail, if you are sentencing someone whose been proven on scientific evidence to be guilty of a serious crime and you are told that there was an earlier prosecution, which led to conviction at a time when the real culprit was living in this jurisdiction and, as it were, did nothing to come forward or to assist, the sentencing judge on being told that, is entitled, using the interests of justice safety valve, to say, ‘Well that is a unique feature of this case and I don’t need anything in black and white in my guidelines to tell me that I can treat that as an aggravating feature’”, he continued, but that was not the issue – the amount was.

After he had taken mitigation into account, Royce decided that the very serious aggravating circumstances only outweighed mitigation by a year. “No, it don’t reflect the enormity”, Lloyd Paris says. “It don’t reflect anything. One year is nothing”.

Miscategorised

But these are far from the only errors of judgement to plague this case. Lynette had not been raped, or sexually assaulted and she was fully clothed, yet this was a sexually motivated homicide. “All but a very few are on the breasts, but sheʼs had her neck cut as well and wrists and so on”, Barclay explains. “Thereʼs a slash across the face. Itʼs a sexually motivated homicide – full stop”.

Could there be any doubt? Not according to Barclay and he should know. He has conducted several reviews of homicides, including Lynette’s. “No there cannot be and I use it in my lectures to forensic psychology students and as soon as I say, what sort of murder is this and as soon as I show the picture without the puffa jacket, itʼs a sexually motivated homicide and donʼt forget those stab wounds are through the puffa jacket and clothing and yet theyʼre still, theyʼre all concentrated on the breasts. Itʼs a single male sexually motivated homicide”.

So was it sadistic? “Well it is quite sadistic doing that sort of stuff”, he said. “No, itʼs a sexually motivated homicide. Sexually motivated homicides are not necessarily sadistic”. Although he would not necessarily use the term sadistic, this was the missing link – this showed that the violence suffered by Lynette was indeed sexually motivated and that should have been considered. The judge mentioned that twenty-five wounds were to her breasts, but tellingly he does not describe it as a sexually motivated homicide, which begs the question, why wasn’t he told that by the prosecution?

Further Error

Having set his starting point at fifteen years, Royce detailed how the policy at the relevant time was to start at twelve years. He felt bound to do the same, but was he? Two other murders that occurred in Cardiff – both sexually motivated and I would say sadistic suggest otherwise. Geraldine Palk was the victim of an even more brutal murder than Lynette in December 1990. Her murderer, Mark Hampson was brought to justice around the same time as Gafoor.

And in 1996 Karen Skipper was murdered. Her estranged husband Phillip was rightly acquitted in 1997. Her real murderer, John Pope, was convicted of her murder in 2009 and again at retrial in 2011. Lady Justice (Dame Heather) Hallett chose a starting point of fifteen years for Hampson. Mr Justices (Sir Nigel) Davis and (Sir Roderick) Evans selected a starting point of fifteen years for Pope. Davis, Evans and Hallett stuck to fifteen years. Either they are wrong or Royce was. There appear to be several grounds to appeal against the leniency of Gafoor’s tariff, but that was not done at the time.

Adding insult to injury, Gafoor appears to have received a very lenient tariff and even that was applied wrongly. At least two of the innocent Cardiff Three, the late Yusef Abdullahi and Tony Paris received harsher tariffs for the same crime. Gafoor could show remorse, do all the courses and progress towards parole in a system designed to help rehabilitate him, while the Cardiff Three could not without admitting a lie that would have prevented their eventual vindication. And now the real killer becomes eligible to apply for parole on Mother’s Day.

Radio Cardiff

Part One Satish Sekar with Georgina Sammut and Shawty

Satish Sekar discusses the foundation of The Fitted-In Project and why it was re-established on this Community Radio programme. He explains why the vindication of the Cardiff Five was necessary. Sekar details the methods used to secure convictions and consequences of it. He comments on why he holds the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) more responsible than the police for the wrongful prosecutions of the Cardiff Five. Sekar credits the work of Professor Dave Barclay in the eventual vindication of the Cardiff Five and also South Wales Police in correctly solving the murder of Lynette White. He details how they detected Gafoor.

Part Two Satish Sekar with Georgina Sammut and Shawty

Sekar explains the arrest of Jeffey Gafoor and the significance of vindication. There are currently seven such cases in Britain. He explains that there are more victims of these cases and that there has to be processes to explain how justice miscarried. Sekar details the trial of the core witnesses. He calls them the New Cardiff Three, He explains the role of the CPS in another vindication case, that of Phillip Skipper, for the murder of his estranged wife, Karen. It gifted a defence to the real murderer, John Pope, who repeatedly accused Skipper of being the murderer after Skipper had been acquitted and had sadly died. Sekar details how Barclay demolishes the prosecution scenario in the Lynette White Inquiry and why he should have been a witness in the collapsed trial, before explaining why Sekar was prevented from attending the Police Corruption Trial and its consequences. He explains his controversial view that the CPS, rather than South Wales Police are more responsible for the miscarriages of justice and how they have evaded taking responsibility for any of it. Sekar also calls for fiscal responsibility. He says both the IPCC and HMCPSI processes were inadequate.

Part Three Satish Sekar with Georgina Sammut and Shawty

In the third part of these interviews Sekar explains the process of trying to secure accountability from the CPS over the whole case. The CPS refused to answer his complaint – a process that has been ongoing since 1993! He explains how its own Code for Crown Prosecutors proves the Cardiff Five should never have been prosecuted. Sekar details why the CPS has to be held responsible and that Alun Michael has asked questions of the CPS as well. He then explains some projects that The Fitted-In Project conducts and the scandalous treatment that all the victims of vindication cases have been subjected to. Sekar then makes his case for fiscal accountability.

Raphael Rowe (Reporter for the BBC’s Panorama)

“Satish is a dedicated investigative journalist who worked hard to investigate the background to the jailing of the Cardiff Three for the 1988 murder of Lynette White. The success of their appeal against their convictions is largely down to his hard work. He wrote the story of this case and his subsequent campaign to have the case reinvestigated in his book ‘Fitted In: The Cardiff Three and the Lynette White Inquiry’. I wanted to write about the forensic aspects of the case in my book Cold Case Files – and he was very generous with his help”.

Liz Porter (Journalist at Sunday Age, Australia)

“Satish is extremely thorough in his investigations and is doggedly determined to get to the bottom of things. He is meticulous and has an eye for detail when looking at cases of miscarriages of justice.”

Lovejit Dhaliwal (Director of Sharp Curiosity Productions)

 “Satish is an excellent investigative journalist – very committed and persistent”.

Richard Keeble (Professor of Journalism at the University of Lincoln)

“Satish is an author of ‘Fitted In: The Cardiff 3 and the Lynette White Inquiry‘ and the recently published “The Cardiff Five: Innocent Beyond Any Doubt“. He is also a journalist, academic, researcher and expert, especially for those who have suffered miscarriages of justice. Although at times, Satish is highly critical of the criminal justice system, he only challenges from a position of desiring improvement for the benefit of all, whether they be the investigator or the investigated. Members of the criminal justice system as well as academia could well benefit from hearing the experiences and lessons learnt by Satish over the past 20 plus years of academic and field research that he has undertaken.

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera (Lecturer and Director of S-Team Consultancy)

“Satish is an outstanding journalist, researcher and author whose work has achieved justice for people who would otherwise have had no-one to defend them. His grasp of detail and tenacity is a model for all reporters.”

Alan Slingsby (Partner, Edition Periodicals)

“Satish is a dedicated investigator with a passion for justice, both to correct miscarriages to absolve the innocent, and to identify and bring the true perpetrator(s) to account. His dogged determination and indefatigable efforts to explore overlooked or disregarded facts and possibilities, and to publish his findings publicly, have made a significant contribution to the Criminal Justice System in Britain and abroad.”

Robert (Bob) Parsons (Forensic Chemist/Alcohol Toxicologist, Indian River Crime Laboratory, USA)

“In my dealings with Satish I found him to be reliable, extremely knowledgeable and passionate about his subject. His enthusiasm and commitment to the project of righting miscarriages of justice was highly commendable. He works very hard in this field and in ridding sport of racism.”

Alun Owen (Territory manager for Random House Publishers)

“Satish is an investigative journalist and has campaigned against the miscarriages of justice. He stays involved with the wrongfully convicted (and wrongly accused), even after proof of innocence, and works against racism. I would highly recommend Satish in his fields of expertise.”

Bill Pelke (President of The Journey of Hope…From Violence to Healing)

“I have worked with Satish on several occasions since the 1990s. I have always found him to be imaginative, diligent, resourceful, personable and a great team player.”

Geoff Small (P/D of Geoff Small Inc.)

“Satish is a diligent and conscientious journalist, who is trustworthy and very reliable”.

John McManus (Former Project Coordinator of The Miscarriages of Justice Organisation)

“Satish is hard-working and painstaking in all that he undertakes. His research is second to none. He pays significant attention to the important detail surrounding an issue which he will tenaciously advance whilst being open to the views of others.”

Stuart Hutton (Senior Partner at Hutton’s Solicitors & Advocates)

“Satish is an experienced human rights and civil liberties advocate and writer whose work has benefited many people. He works hard, is afraid of no-one and puts his heart and soul into fighting cases of injustice.”

Mark Metcalf (Freelance journalist, author and trustee of FIP)

 “Satish is reliable, informed, thorough, and dependable. And has proved to be a veritable one man army in the pursuit of justice on countless occasions.”

Derek Miller (Journalist and Editor)

“Satish Sekar’s meticulous attention to detail and dogged determination to pursue an objective was key to unravelling a complex murder case that had resulted in an appalling miscarriage of justice. His commitment to establishing the truth cannot be questioned.”

Martin Shipton (Chief Reporter of The Western Mail)

“Satish is an experienced and able author and investigative journalist with a long track record in campaigning against miscarriages of justice. He continues acting as a pressure group to alleviate the problems which those wrongfully convicted suffer in the long term, even after they have been vindicated. He is also actively involved in anti-racism initiatives, particularly in football, and seeks to improve racial equality by increasing the sporting opportunities available for disadvantaged groups.”

Dave Barclay (Retired Forensic Scientist)

Top qualities: Great Results, Expert, High Integrity
“Satish is a determined and meticulous researcher. His work is always reliable.”

Tim Gopsill (Former Editor of The Journalist)