Did Steve Wright get a fair trial in Ipswich?

[noel o'gara]

Ah I see Noel, first, you have no clue whether there was any footprints, whatsoever, but you just presume/assume there was and speak about how this imaginary evidence wasn't presented at trial as if it was a fact.

Second, your idea that a serial killer decided to go out of his way to stitch up another guy would make a nice fiction story. You should write it. Oh wait, you are.

Third, and how did two of the victims blood end up on his jacket? The killer planted that too, did he? Or was that the cops? I tell you, between super genius serial killers and evil stitch up cops, the world is a terrible place. And how wonderful that the serial killer is now able to control his impulses to murder people now that Wright is behind bars. A miracle indeedy.

I've tried to show you how they rushed to judgment after they made the link between Wright's DNA and low copy number traces of DNA recovered on some of the bodies of the victims. Wright's denials and no comments were exposed as lies and he was forced to own up to having sex with them.
However he was charged on Thursday night before they had all those matters of evidence you mention and there was no going back at that stage.

Stephens was released that Thursday night having succeeded in out manouvering the lot of them.

The police only started to gather forensic evidence in London Road on Thursday. This report is in Friday's paper.

http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/news/murder_suspect_appears_in_court_1_112191

Your question about the blood Ally, I already said this was not blood stains. This was microscopic traces of blood that could have come from the victims while he was having sex on the coat and was part of that build up of evidence, fibres etc that the prosecution desperately needed to get a conviction. The footprints are conspicuous by their absence but footprints there must have been.

Your point about a fiction book is valid but could anybody do that if the facts didnt fit the picture portrayed ?
You prefer the fiction as outlined by the prosecution and Ally, my friend, that fiction doesnt fit the facts. Its based on a police mistake.

They only proved that Wright had sex with four victims and that Tania had been in a Ford car. Wright did all that. They kept quiet about the footprints which were definitely left by the killer. They exonerated the man they first arrested as a suspect, the man who arranged a false alibi for himself for the time Gemma Adams went missing. The man who had sex with all five victims and who had befriended them all to the extent that they trusted him with their lives at a time of great peril. The man who had a record of threatening to kill other girl friends and who was an ex cop, familiar with policing of red light areas. You've been reading too much fiction Ally.

[noel o'gara]

Take a read of this evidence read out at the trial which supports my contention that the wrong man was in the dock.

http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/news/tom_stephens_was_twice_arrested_by_police_1_161524

[jsi2010]

Dear JSI2010
I know for certain that Sandra Lean is interested in the Kevin Nunn case which is frighteningly similar to the Ipswich murders. I would approach her in the first instance.
Derrick

Hi Derrick I contacted Sandra as u suggested though she is unable to help at this time due to a heavy work load and her phd, though I am and will certainly continue contacting others...
I have written to Steve Wright who is held in HMP Longlartin, this special delivery letter has apparently been lost by the prison staff, I have sent a copy of said letter to Simon Cartwright with a request for an explanation as to how and why this should happen. He I am told must reply within 28 days
regards john

[jsi2010]

[QUOTE=Ally;152912]Ah I see Noel, first, you have no clue whether there was any footprints, whatsoever, but you just presume/assume there was and speak about how this imaginary evidence wasn't presented at trial as if it was a fact.

Just a point !
I have just been to the two deposition sites of Annete Nicholls and Paula Clenelle and bearing in mind that it is now approx three weeks prior to december 11th, the day I saw Tom Stephens at one of those sites and that it is already very damp and boggy there ! It is impossible to walk in there and around without leaving many footprints.
With a body to carry there would of certainly been many impressions there, so why were these not photographed and presented as evidence at the trial ?

[Limehouse]

[QUOTE=jsi2010;155470]

Ah I see Noel, first, you have no clue whether there was any footprints, whatsoever, but you just presume/assume there was and speak about how this imaginary evidence wasn't presented at trial as if it was a fact.

Just a point !
I have just been to the two deposition sites of Annete Nicholls and Paula Clenelle and bearing in mind that it is now approx three weeks prior to december 11th, the day I saw Tom Stephens at one of those sites and that it is already very damp and boggy there ! It is impossible to walk in there and around without leaving many footprints.
With a body to carry there would of certainly been many impressions there, so why were these not photographed and presented as evidence at the trial ?

May be the killer placed plastic carrier bags over his shoes or boots before disposing of the bodies?

[noel o'gara]

[QUOTE=Limehouse;155489]

May be the killer placed plastic carrier bags over his shoes or boots before disposing of the bodies?

There would still be clear impressions and it doesnt fit with Wright that he would be so careless to leave his semen and DNA stained gloves and jacket and yet put plastic on his shoes to hide his footprints. Wright had no reason to hide anything except from his wife.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/dec/19/suffolkmurders.estheraddley

This is the postcard referred to.
[IMG]

http://www.yorkshireripper.com/ipswi...stcard%201.jpg

[/IMG]


When myself, Patrick and George Westcott were in Ipswich we visited all the deposition places and at a shrine George found another postcard tucked into a plastic bag holding flowers.
For my money it is by the same hand and when we went to the police station to give it to Stewart Gull we were met with indifference and had the window hatch slammed in our faces.
I cant imagine any person in Ipswich putting that disgusting card on the grave of a murdered victim. It was a dance on their graves.

[IMG]

http://www.yorkshireripper.com/ipswi...y%20George.jpg

[/IMG]

[jsi2010]

[QUOTE=noel o'gara;155527][QUOTE=Limehouse;155489]

There would still be clear impressions and it doesnt fit with Wright that he would be so careless to leave his semen and DNA stained gloves and jacket and yet put plastic on his shoes to hide his footprints. Wright had no reason to hide anything except from his wife.

I will go there again today and will put palastic bags over my shoes and will report back on the prints issue.
I must add that having spoken with friends of Pam and Steve Wright, people he worked with and ex-neighbours, they All said the same thing ! That because of his quiet,non aggressive manner,that he was over weight and unfit plus the fact that he is not the brightest candle in the box they were all shocked that it could of been Steve.
The person who carried Annelli Alderton was not Steve Wright for two reasons
1.Tom Stephens disposed of Paula and Annette, annette was posed the same as anneli and Stephens has the Max Ernst art work on his wall which the police knew of.
2. Steve Wright was in capable of carrying annelli that far as he was unfit and over weight, Tom Stephens was a fitness freak and would of had no trouble at all.
The facts speak for themselves... regards jsi

[jsi2010]

[QUOTE=noel o'gara;155527][QUOTE=Limehouse;155489]

There would still be clear impressions and it doesnt fit with Wright that he would be so careless to leave his semen and DNA stained gloves and jacket and yet put plastic on his shoes to hide his footprints. Wright had no reason to hide anything except from his wife.

I will go there again today put bags on my shoes and report back later.

One thing I know for sure and that is Tom Stephens disposed of Anette Nicholls whose body I saw and that he was parked up at the exact spot where Paula Clenelle was found with something large covered on up on the rear seat of a his Renault Clio at 1.50pm 11th December 2006....I welcome the day when he has to answer to this and I will not and can not stop untill he is off the the streets and behind bars where he belongs
The most disturbing and scarey fact of all of this is that the police knew of this at the time yet pushed on ahead regardless with Steve Wright and ignored the Tom Stephens connections and there are many... regards jsi

[noel o'gara]

[QUOTE=jsi2010;155553][QUOTE=noel o'gara;155527]

One thing I know for sure and that is Tom Stephens disposed of Anette Nicholls whose body I saw and that he was parked up at the exact spot where Paula Clenelle was found with something large covered on up on the rear seat of a his Renault Clio at 1.50pm 11th December 2006....I welcome the day when he has to answer to this and I will not and can not stop untill he is off the the streets and behind bars where he belongs

This report of the local paper on Friday 15th December pins Paula down on Saturday night at London Road where Steve Wright lived. The police evidence showed they had fibre etc evidence that she was in his house and of course she felt safe doing business in a house with a trusted client. However when she emerged from his house she then walked into the trusted hands of her killer who was parked up watching and controlling events.

http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/news/paula_friend_speaks_of_her_last_night_1_112022

Paula actually lived very close to Steve Wright.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2006/12/20/hooked-on-hookers-115875-18290063/

And so it seems that the killer kept her body in his car during that Saturday night and all day Sunday and disposed of it on the Monday. Hardly something that Steve Wright would do because he shared his home and his car with Pam.

[Limehouse]

[QUOTE=noel o'gara;155569][QUOTE=jsi2010;155553]

This report of the local paper on Friday 15th December pins Paula down on Saturday night at London Road where Steve Wright lived. The police evidence showed they had fibre etc evidence that she was in his house and of course she felt safe doing business in a house with a trusted client. However when she emerged from his house she then walked into the trusted hands of her killer who was parked up watching and controlling events.

http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/news/paula_friend_speaks_of_her_last_night_1_112022

Paula actually lived very close to Steve Wright.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2006/12/20/hooked-on-hookers-115875-18290063/

And so it seems that the killer kept her body in his car during that Saturday night and all day Sunday and disposed of it on the Monday. Hardly something that Steve Wright would do because he shared his home and his car with Pam.

I don't know how you got that quote with my name on it but I completely disown the comment and have not even been near Ipswich since well before the murdersd and could not possibly have seen Tom Stevens whom I do not even know.

This is turning into a very creepy thread.

[noel o'gara]

I don't know how you got that quote with my name on it but I completely disown the comment and have not even been near Ipswich since well before the murdersd and could not possibly have seen Tom Stevens whom I do not even know.

This is turning into a very creepy thread.

relax Limehouse. anybody who reads the thread can see the quote didnt come up correctly. Sometimes its tricky to use these forums for somebody not used to them. Give the people reading this thread a little credit for intelligence.
There's nothing creepy about it Limehouse.
five innocent girls were murdered.
An innocent man is in jail for life. The real killer is walking free in Ipswich. The police and the CPS are aware of that but because the court reached a guilty verdict, they feel vindicated despite the fact that they charged the wrong man.
You people are still going over the bones of the Victorian Ripper case so you should have a better grasp of murder cases than most. You are experts of sorts due to your interest studying Jack the Ripper 1888 which never reached a court room? Thats why I approached your forum in the first place to get that experienced feedback.

[Limehouse]

relax Limehouse. anybody who reads the thread can see the quote didnt come up correctly. Sometimes its tricky to use these forums for somebody not used to them. Give the people reading this thread a little credit for intelligence.
There's nothing creepy about it Limehouse.
five innocent girls were murdered.
An innocent man is in jail for life. The real killer is walking free in Ipswich. The police and the CPS are aware of that but because the court reached a guilty verdict, they feel vindicated despite the fact that they charged the wrong man.
You people are still going over the bones of the Victorian Ripper case so you should have a better grasp of murder cases than most. You are experts of sorts due to your interest studying Jack the Ripper 1888 which never reached a court room? Thats why I approached your forum in the first place to get that experienced feedback.

If there really has been a miscarriage of justice and there is sufficient evidence to indicate this - the verdict can be overturned. It would not be the first time a jury has reached a guity verdict which has been followed by a new trial or the release of the prisoner due to new evidence. Such cases have been discussed on this site.

I am unsure about the strength of evidence against Steve Wright that has been presented here so far and I do not really wish to become too involved in this case without doing further research. However - I admire your fighting spirit.

[jsi2010]

[QUOTE=jsi2010;155553][QUOTE=noel o'gara;155527][QUOTE=Limehouse;155489]

There would still be clear impressions and it doesnt fit with Wright that he would be so careless to leave his semen and DNA stained gloves and jacket and yet put plastic on his shoes to hide his footprints. Wright had no reason to hide anything except from his wife.

I will go there again today put bags on my shoes and report back later.

As promised I went to the two deposition sites 4 and 5, having placed a plastic carrier bag over each shoe and walking around within those sites I determined that it would be virtually impossible to walk in and around the areas without leaving at least some kind of print.
Leaves and grass may reduce the effect to a certain degree though when I moved debris away from under foot, prints could clearly be seen in many parts.
Being 12st in weight I am at least 3st lighter than Steve Wright, he being heavy set over weight and approx 15st and he would of had the added dead weight of a body say 7 or 8st, that would make a combined weight of 22 to 23 st.
This is leaf litter peaty type soil which moulds very easily when wet and pressure is applied...
So if prints were logged and not presented why ? Because they were not Steve Wrights and did not help the police case. The reason they were not his is the FACT that any there belonged to Tom Stephens as it was he who disposed of Annette and Paula
Regarding site 3 Anneli Alderton, the police say Wright may of had an accomplice due to the lack of dragging a body signs and might of had help, yet again no mention of prints not one set, not one !! yet they say there may of been two people carrying a body a long way into the undergrowth in that type of boggy wet soil.
Wright could not of carried a body that far alone he was over weight and unfit he would of had great diffilculty.
Stephens ! he was a fitness fanatic and openly boasted how he could pick one them up with one hand so would of found this relatively easy.
Either way there would of been much evidence to recover.
WAS IT taken ? if so where is it now and why was it not made more of and not forgetting that Annette and Annelli were both posed the same as the art work by Max Earnst that hung on Stephens wall at his home.... regards jsi

[noel o'gara]

if so where is it now and why was it not made more of and not forgetting that Annette and Annelli were both posed the same as the art work by Max Earnst that hung on Stephens wall at his home.... regards jsi

Some more interesting evidence that the local weirdo was at the very centre of the Ipswich murder investigation.

http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/news/weird_man_stopped_in_red_light_zone_1_161091

When Stephens was arrested on the 16th December there was little or no publicity to that.
Was that arrest kept a secret?
It seemed that Stephens made no secret of it when he conversed with that witness.
The first I heard of his arrest was on the 18th on Sky News and all the media were briefed by police PR coordinators who blasted it to the world with pictures of his car being taken away and interviews with his neighbours etc.
There was an aura of police euphoria that was to dissolve within hours.
At that stage they were going to charge him until he landed them with more information about the man who was observed by him taking some victims into his Mondeo car on those fateful nights. They had no choice but to check it out and as I already outlined, the CPS boffins jumped to the wrong conclusion when Wright's DNA was confirmed to be found on a few of the bodies.
There was as much evidence against Stephens regarding DNA and a whole lot more, not least the picture in his flat which directly linked him to the posed bodies of two victims and now we have a real witness who actually saw him beside one body deposition site and another naked female body lying just a bit up the road. In addition there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence enough to convince any jury.
How could that be coincidence?

[noel o'gara]

Moreover, I think the police did absolutely brilliantly over the capture and conviction of Steven Wright.Credit where credits due.And thank God the swine has been put away.
Norma

http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/news/conjecture_that_tom_stephens_involved_1_161581

Well Natalie, do you still think it was brilliant?
Remember that you, the expert crime readers, are the jury here.
The evidence is all there but they got it all mixed up.
With the real killer in the picture all the pieces of the jigsaw can be slotted in place. With Wright in the frame nothing fits.