Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Well Barry George has been found not guilty of Jill Dandos murder...

Thoughts?

George not guilty of Dando murder
 

After many years of being in prison for a crime he was incapable of doing
George has finaly been freed

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7536815.stm

Re: George not guilty of Dando murder
 

Beat ya to it! :D

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Wonder if all the People at the bbc who where interviewed and Condemned him right after he want to prison the first time.will be Willing to be so fast in giveing there opinion this time.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Re: Not Guilty?
 

So this leaves us with the question of who DID kill Jill Dando and why?

Guess that's one we will never know after all this time.:(

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Another nail in the coffin for capital punishment.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Very true.:tu:

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Good point, Antoine.

Never thought they had sufficient evidence of guilt personally, which is different from saying he didn't do it. However, all I've seen about him tends to suggest that if he had done it, he wouldn't have had the brains to cover it up so well that they couldn't get any decent forensics on him.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Had capital punishment been an option in law I find it unlikely he'd have got it. Usually CP supporters wheel out the line it should apply when the verdict was beyond doubt, which is not the case here as it was based on the presence of gunshot residue in his pocket, hence his appeal.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Er, he's only convicted if it's 'beyond reasonable doubt' - the point about appeals and CP is that if evidence comes to light several years after you've hung him that casts doubt on the verdict you can have all the appeals in the world and it's not going to come close to righting the wrong.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Erm, thanks for repeating my point in more detail...

Re: Not Guilty?
 

It was Professor Plum in the library with the lead pipe

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Even the biggest window licker can have the brains to ditch the clothes he used to kill someone.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

And cover his tracks so well?

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Not a particularly nice turn of phrase to describe someone with learning difficulties.:dozey:

Re: Not Guilty?
 

She was shot just after she announced that she was going to be married. The Police thought it was going to be an open and closed case, look through her diary, find a disgruntled ex, job done.
Problem was there were a hell of a lot of men friends listed in the diary, all of them well to do and able to afford a good brief, fall back on Plan B, arrest the village idiot, job done, pats on the back and promotion all round, *******s.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Or maybe after painstakingly going through the available evidence and finding one name coming up time and time again over the year long investigation they look more closely at him.
They find some forensics (no mean feat after 13 months) and evidence of deeply unhealthy obsessions with guns, celebrities and women and put that evidence to court resulting in a conviction.

Contrary to what some people think the Police don't just fit up the first person they find so they can get back out and issue speeding tickets.

I'm not 100% convinced he didn't do it.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

I respect your view, and you probably see more in this than any of us. What's your view on the notion that someone as simple as he wouldn't be able to organise what happened and make good his escape?

Re: Not Guilty?
 

You've seen the film 'The Usual Suspects'... ;)

Re: Not Guilty?
 

If the police on the case don't find a murderer then they can say goodbye to any promotion prospects they may have had.

Speeding tickets can be a nice little earner, especially dealing with someone where the points will result in a ban. ;)

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Yes and they normally turn up in the religious threads. Back on topic?

Re: Not Guilty?
 

I'm not sure, on one hand there are some very intelligent people who think they can get away with it and don't.

There are also some extremely stupid people who get found out very easily.

I'm certain there are some very intelligent people, some extremely stupid people and plenty in-between who have killed people and not seen the inside of a court or prison.

From my memory of when this happened it didn't seem particularly organised at the time, someone who had thought about it would have pushed her inside the house to conceal the body for longer etc. etc.
As for making good his escape, if you live in an area and know the local rat-runs and lanes it would be easy enough for him to make his way home, from there he had a year to get rid of the gun.

---------- Post added at 18:39 ---------- Previous post was at 18:36 ----------

Complete and utter garbage.

:rolleyes:

Re: Not Guilty?
 

What tracks were there to cover? He only had to get away without being seen or more importantly without anyone paying enough attention to remember him, and that could as easily be a fluke as criminal aptitude.

He didnt know the victim personally so there was no link, he didnt have to get rid of a body, there was no dna or fibres to be found, all he had to do was have an alibi and he didnt do that.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Dead body, gun going off, local wierdo getting away looking very stressed etc?

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Oh give us a break...totally off topic and rather unpleasant of you to drag your obsession into this thread about the murder of a fellow human being.:mad:

Re: Not Guilty?
 

I didn't know his IQ level until now, but I still thought they didn't have case, well not on the basis of a speck gunpower that was less than 1000th of inch and was found a year after the shooting. Now to me that can't be classed as evidence, well not enough to convict anyway.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Link

The poor sods get some crap defence lawyer, the result is a foregone conclusion.
In the Barry George case they are now saying that technology has advanced in the intervening years and the thinking now is that he could have acquired the dust from anywhere, it was all BS at the time and they knew it. Experts, I've **** em!

Re: Not Guilty?
 

It was on a street, im looking out of my window now, I cant see anyone..

Do you know what a gun sounds like? If you hear a loud crack would you go outside etc? I hear bangs all the time here I never even get off my sofa (and there have been 2 shootings within 100m of my house in the last 2 years) its usually a car or fireworks etc

A complete stranger walking briskly down a road....

Even putting the bottom 2 together it was a nice area of London, you wouldnt pay any attention.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

If someone was passing, or looking out, and they saw a dead body what do you reckon they'd do?

Again if someone was passing, they'd notice.

No idea what you're on about there.

YOU might not...

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Exactly what they did do when the body was discovered - Call the police?

I dont know what your debating any more Russ sorry, your point was that he wouldnt be able to make a successful escape or cover his tracks as he isnt the sharpest knife in the drawer etc.

Now your talking about a completeley differnet scenario from that which happened, people were not on the street immediately to see the body or the murderer walking away, people didnt look out and see him or the body. Probably for the reasons I detailed (although people did report hearing it and people did see a suspicious man earlier)

People never expect a shooting on their street, people dont assume a running or nervous looking man is guilty of anything other than being late.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Yes exactly, and he risked that happening in broad daylight and made good his escape. That's either incredible luck or it was well planned, and I don't do 'luck'.

I didn't say he wouldn't, I simply repeated one of the ongoing theories.

Which again either indicates incredible luck or a well-detailed plan.

I didn't say a "running or nervous looking man". I said the local nutter (it seems as if almost everyone in the area knew of him) leaving in a no-doubt aggitated state.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

The body wasn't hidden in any way, a 'planned' killer would no doubt have done this even if in a cack-handed manner. Assuming there was no-one in the street at the immediate time you'll have a few minutes before someone walks past or a suspicious neighbour comes out to do their nosy.
From then you'll have a bit longer for them to go back in a make a 999 call (10 years ago remember, mobiles weren't as common as today) then another 5-10 minutes at least for a cop car/ambulance to make it to the scene then let their control rooms know whats happening.
It would be fairly simple for 30 minutes + to pass before any descriptions of suspects etc. are broadcast.
How far could you make it in 30 minutes if you are in an area you know well, even in a panic?

Re: Not Guilty?
 

If I recall she had been shopping previously so the time she returned home was not on any typical schedule. Even if this wasnt correct and she returned home at the same time every day you couldnt 'plan' that there would be no-one on the street or that no-one would look out of the window.

Even the best made plan would ultimately be 100% dependant on luck as far as making the escape without being observed. Anyone can shoot someone in the back of the head.

It was a shooting in broad daylight on a suburban street - As Derek suggested it was far from well executed

Re: Not Guilty?
 

I used to work for a guy who got speeding tickets all over the country, his brother in law was a detective and no matter where the offence occured he could make the ticket disappear by passing a brown envelope down the line, hell, he used to have me hand the envelope over to his brother in law when it was his day off. My gaffer used to have a saying as he was going out of the office, “I'm just going out to get another speeding ticket�, laughs all round. The fact that no matter where in the country he got caught and was able to fix things made me see how widespread the corruption was. I can't recall just how many times he beat the system but it was a hell of a lot of times. Eventually the scam failed and he spent 6 months riding into the office on a bicycle. Shortly afterwards his brother in law was suspended and after about 2 years he was offered the choice of resigning or facing court on corruption charges, he resigned. I never did find out what the police actually caught him out on, but afterwards he came to work with us, until the place closed down.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Whats that got to do with this thread?

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Absolutely nothing, some people just use any excuse to have a dig at the Police.

Anyway I'm off now to spend a nightshift being fat, lazy, stupid, power-crazed, corrupt and generally ignoring any rapists and murderers I might find so I can give someone a ticket for going 1MPH over the limit. :wavey:

Try to keep the thread on-topic over the next few hours.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

You just described me?!

Re: Not Guilty?
 

The big thing in the media at the time was a well dressed man seen hurrying away and also a Range Rover speeding away, no mention at that time of anyone seeing Barry George, a character who everyone seemed to know.
The woman who phoned in reporting finding the body didn't see anything apart from the body, which she said she thought was Jill Dando.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Never the less this has absolutely nothing do do with Jill Dando's murder.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Both have to do with corruption, grabbing the village idiot and putting him in the frame because it's an easy way out, to me is more corrupt than taking a bribe.

Personally I have never had any bad experiences with the police, on the odd occasion I have been caught speeding I was bang to rights and accepted it. When I caught a bugler who broke into my house one time all the police cars, vans and dog handlers for miles around arrived within minutes surrounding the house, the neighbours couldn't make up their minds if I was the Yorkshire Ripper or if they were making a movie. :D

So you see I do not have an agenda, but it does make my blood boil when I read of yet another village idiot being, well, framed, as if the poor sods do not have enough trouble just coping with life.

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Well why didn't you say this instead of ranting about speed limits and driving issues? :shrug:

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

oh dear he's been in a bit of bother before yet no one seems to have seen the signs that he needed serious psychological help

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ry-George.html

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Jesus, i wonder what type of payout he'll get?
+6 million?

Re: Not Guilty?
 

Another man who is absolutely convinced he is guilty is Nick Ross, her co-presenter on Crimewatch. I remember watching an reenactment after his last appeal failed and Ross was adamant they had convicted the right man.

---------- Post added at 02:55 ---------- Previous post was at 02:48 ----------

I imagine he will be lucky to get anywhere near a million, apart from his loss of liberty the compensation is totted up on his potential earnings whilst inside, being as he didn't have a well payed job they would, at a guess, be looking at six times 30,000 then add that to six years lost liberty. If I had to hazard a guess I'd say he'd get arround 250,000 to 500,000.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

£250,000 according to the news this very second

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Locking someone up wrongly for 8 years should be worth more than £250,000

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Agreed, something even more outrageous I heard on BBC news 24 this morning was a solicitor saying that the government had recently passed a law capping compensation for "wrongful imprisonment" at £500,000. Apparently in the past it was set by an independent board with no ceiling, as obviously every case is different, imo there shouldn't be any cap, presumably these cases are rare so when the state makes a mistake they should have to make all amends possible, not try and save a few bob.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

That law doesn't come into effect before October, apparently.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7538639.stm

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

If it's money he's after (and who could blame him? Think what he's been through over the last 8 years. Yes he's an attempted rapist and menace to women but he has been wrongfully imprisoned) then he won't go short. After his compensation he'll no doubt sell his story or get a ghostwriter to pen his lifestory.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Another cock up by the boys in blue, who answers to all these trials that get overturned?? Barry Georges compensation should be paid by the Police force who framed him, they might think twice the next time thy take a flawed case on.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

So it's either a cock-up or a frame job. Do you want to make your mind up on that?

Besides in case people forget the evidence against him was strong enough to survive the initial appeal he had so it wasn't just the first nutter wheeled in off the streets to stand in front of the court.

And if anyone should be paying the compensation (even though it comes from everyones pockets at the end of the day) shouldn't it be the CPS? They make the decisions about who gets prosecuted and what evidence is used.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Derek, you really have to learn to stop bringing experience, facts and reasoning into a thread - only emotional and sweeping derogatory statements are required. ;)

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Whatever, don't the Police send the evidence to the CPS?? If the evidence is flawed, like the very tiny flake of gun powder supposedly found in his jacket pocket, the Police said it came from a gun when it transpired the gun powder came from something else. The evidence was flawed right from the start.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

That is why it goes to trial, the Police can only present the evidence they find, the CPS decide whether a trial is justified, the court then decides innocence/guilt, as appropriate.

Gunpowder coming from a gun is a very logical assumption & certainly could not be ignored, it is the job of the court to make the final judgement as to whether that constituted proof beyond reasonable doubt. As for 'flawed from the start', hindsight is always 20/20 - it wasn't thought to be flawed when the initial conviction was secured, nor when the initial appeal against that conviction failed.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

At the end of the day we can talk all we want about this there are some things that are
Very clear the Lifes of two families have been totally destroyed by this.the Dando's will
Never get a much loved familie mamber back the George's won't get back the 8 years that
Barry spant away from tham.the only winner now can be Justice maybe it won't happen Overnight but someday for the sake of all the ruined Lifes that this tearable event has
Touched Justice must be done.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Well said:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

---------- Post added at 16:49 ---------- Previous post was at 16:45 ----------

I'm not in argument mode or anything but, I thought this DNA stuff they supposedly got Barry George on was bang to rights, didn't they say something about the chances of it not being Barry George were 200million to one. This opens a whole can of worms.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

To be honest, I don't know enough about the specifics of this part of the evidence to comment.

In general DNA matching is, statistically, a sound technology, however corroboration should also place the suspect at the scene of the crime, as any forensic technique has a degree of uncertainty.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Anyone see Sky news, Barry George said he couldn't have killed Jill Dando because he was stalking another woman at the time :erm: if only he had made this known in the first place, he may never have gone to jail at all :rolleyes:

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Yes well one can see that might have made a better defence but in light of the fact it was his stalking habits that got him noticed as a possible suspect in the first place I can see why he didn't mention it...

One way or another I think he was going to end up in prison eventually. I'm concerned that he may not have learnt a lesson and may still be a potential stalker in the future.:erm:

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Have I missed something? I don't think there was any DNA evidence in this case. Just a speck of gunpowder, found one year after the event.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

I was actually joking but when you consider what his defence managed to achieve, perhaps it was worth mentioning after all

I agree, lets hope he is no more of a danger to women, in particular than that though

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

I feel very sorry for this guy, he has spent time in prison for a crime, he did not commit, and we have some smarmy git of a politican, having a go becuase he has sold his story, that guy can go and get stuff as far as l am concerned, here is a guy, who has been stitched up by the law, and spends an amount of time in prison, and this guy has a go, good luck to George.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

It's up to you who you show pity for but imo he is lucky to be out of prison at all, if I had my way him and all the other raping/attempted raping sickos would never taste freedom again, I am disgusted that my taxes are being used to give him compo, I wonder how much he paid his victims?

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

I don't think he's been the same since he left culture club.

Barry George...again...
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7676036.stm

Possibly wierd but I still don't see him as a killer.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Well he's obviously still a well-adjusted individual.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7676036.stm

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Read the article, he asked for a tape of an interview ^^

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

I think there has to be more to the allegations then him simply asking for a copy of the interview. I don't understand why the story would have been released if this is all he is supposed to have done.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Ah, the old 'no smoke without fire' fallacy ...

Since when was our news media - and especially that part of it run by Rupert Murdoch - the arbiter of who is guilty or innocent of anything?

I think the most likely reason for this story being 'released' is the sensational fact that it includes the name 'Barry George'.

What could get the hacks in a froth more quickly than a man recently acquitted on appeal of murdering a female TV journalist, being accused of harassing a female TV journalist?

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

I was looking at it from the journalist's view point who has taken time off work since Tuesday (Im assuming because of this). Don't get me wrong, I don't think he is guilty of anything, just saying that if they are gonna make allegations against someone who has just been acquited, I'd have thought it would be based on more than the fact that he asked for an interview copy.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Maybe, but on the other hand ...

So, stressed out hack gets a call to say known celebrity stalker Barry George is in the lobby, and has a breakdown in panic that he has come to 'get' her ... straw that broke the camel's back, and all that.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

Ok, you could well have a valid point. Blooming journos, making mountains out of molehills....

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

If that's the case than thay should come out and clearly state That George is or is not
The cause of her illness.it's mad to let this story get more out of control with every pasing
Day it's not good for anyone involved.right now there are bare bone facts as to the true
About what he's suppost to have done apart from a few Unsubstantiated Rumors In the
papers.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

It makes you wonder why Sky put a woman forward to do the interview with George, they were well aware of his tendency to fixate on certain woman.

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

That's a very good point

Re: Barry George did not kill Jill Dando
 

News Group pay out large sum in damages after false allegations in the Sun and NotW:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8415772.stm

Considering the Kay Burley story was from a sister news organisation, I do wonder what the hell's going on here.