Day Three of appeal, Justice for Craigavon Two

11 Oct

Day Three

The prosecution began to set out today how the believed the convictions to be safe and were quickly stopped and scrutinised by the three appeal court judges, the prosecution were asked about the breaking of the window that lured police to the scene, it was quickly ascertained astonishingly that their were no crime scene photos or papers, which asks was the breaking of the window even investigated?.

The judges asked the prosecution about how justice Girvan came to make decisions regarding drawing negative inference and bad character when it was put to the prosecution that he had misdirected himself by drawing inference and bad character before viewing the evidence rather than drawing inference and bad character from the evidence, the prosecution did not respond.

Prosecutors contended that John Paul’s car was near the scene of the attack and driven off within minutes of the killing. However, his legal team insist absolutely no evidence exists to link him to any role in the shooting and the evidence regarding the car comes from the tracking device which was tampered with.

residue found on a coat with a slight forensic link to McConville was later recovered from the vehicle.

On day three of the two men’s joint appeal judges examined whether it could have come from a separate incident.

Some of the residue could have come from another source, the Court of Appeal heard.

Questioned on whether it could be proven that the coat was at the firing point on the night of the killing, prosecution counsel Ciaran Murphy QC said he could prove a connection with the relevant particles.

Lord Chief Justice Sir Declan Morgan then asked: “Are you proving beyond reasonable doubt that the weapon was transported in Mr Wootton’s car?”

The barrister replied: “No.”

Sir Declan continued: “Are you proving beyond reasonable doubt that Mr McConville was transported in Mr Wootton’s car.”

Again the response was: “No.”

Mr Murphy contended that scientific evidence connected the murder weapon – an AK47 rifle which was later recovered – to the jacket.

After it was pointed out to him that some of the discharge could have come from a different incident, he stressed the rarity of the particles.

During exchanges Sir Declan said: “The Crown accept there’s at least a possibility there was some other source which was responsible for some of the gunshot residue.

“How then do you get from knowing there’s another source as well as the gun that was recovered to concluding that other source was not responsible for the entirety of the gunshot residue?”.

going on the above exchange it is now obvious how unsustainable this conviction remains, there is no physical evidence and the the circumstantial evidence produced is either discredited or highly contradictory. Justice Girvan continuously misdirecting himself creating fact from inference where no inference can be drawn.

Campaigners now believe it is a case of when not if this conviction will be quashed. Gerry Conlon said this could be the clincher, the point of no return for the Crown case.

Article reproduced courtesy of :

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: