Billie Jo Jenkins

[Zodiac]

You are correct Ally.It is for the prosecution to prove guilt and two juries failed to agree in this case.This doesn"t mean they found him innocent.
The tramp story has not been corroborated as I understand.
His then wife and four children will have nothing to do with him.They have gone to live in Australia.

I believe that in Scottish Law they have verdicts of "Proven", the equivalent of "Guilty" in English law. "Not Guilty", exactly as in the English system and one of "Not Proven", which I think would probably be the verdict in this case, had it occurred in Scotland.

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

[Natalie Severn]

You are correct Ally.It is for the prosecution to prove guilt and two juries failed to agree in this case.This doesn"t mean they found him innocent.
The tramp story has not been corroborated as I understand.
His then wife and four children will have nothing to do with him.They have gone to live in Australia.

[Ally]

I don't know how it works in the UK, but in the US a verdict of not guilty is not a verdict of innocence. It is the burden of the state to PROVE they committed the offense they are tried for and if the burden of proof is not met, then that means the prosecution failed to prove its case, not that the person did not commit the crime. So a person can be found not guilty in a criminal court, but can still be tried (for monetary damages) in a civil court and be found liable for the crime and forced to pay (as happened in a famous case-OJ simpson).

In that specific case though, he wasn't found not guilty according to the article I read, the jury failed to reach a verdict twice, allowing him to be acquitted on technicality. Which is not the same thing as being found not guilty, though the article may have gotten it wrong.

[jimornot?]

Dear all

I don't think anything has been started on this subject matter yet. The case is in the news again today as her step father Sion Jenkins (who served something like 6 years for her murder before finally being retried in 2006 and found not guilty) has had a claim for £500k compensation rejected. This is apparently because the Ministry of Justice stated something to the effect that only people who are clearly innocent are entitled to damages for a miscarriage of justice.

Surely if he has been found not guilty (maybe I have that wrong?) he is innocent? Interested in any views on this and indeed the case as a whole forexample where did the police get to in their investigations of a mentally ill tramp seen in the area?

thanks

Viv