Did Steve Wright get a fair trial in Ipswich?

[Abby Normal]

[QUOTE=jsi2010;157121]

Hi jsi
This whole thing is very strange and I ask you the same things I ask Noel:

Do you think TS and SW could have been accomplices in these murders?

Answer ; It is possible in my view though I believe Noel has some extremely interesting points to make that the police should look very very closely at and ask themselves alot of questions about and that anyone who makes an allegation should be taken seriously untill proven otherwise by thorough investigation alone, not on opinions based on second hand information and expection based on bias.

Why do you think the police are ignoring you?

Answer ; Any answer is speculation I have written to the chief consatble of suffolk police to ask just that question, when and if I recieve a reply I will let you know !

Are you working closely now with Noel on this?

Answer ; I gained a qualification of competance in private investigation to help me approach this matter and first approached Mr Conrad Wright to tell him of my story, he gave me Noels contact details and I have just listened/read what he has to say and agree there are some very interesting points as I mentioned earlier. I am conducting my own personal investigation into this and am in contact with noel though we are not actually working as a unit for the exact same purpose no.
I seem to remember asking a few questions to a couple of people on here though never had a response, no counter, seems to be a pattern forming ! !..........Regards jsi

Hi jsi
Thanks for the reponse and best of luck. if what you said was true about your sighting then hopefully the police will contact you as they should.
me thinks this is not over and sounds to me like it is more probably that TS and SW were accomplices of some sort and hopefully whover is involved in these tragic events will get their appropriate justice.

[noel o'gara]

This is the final warning that will be given on this matter.

Stating as fact things that are not proven and are purely speculative about people who have not been accused or convicted of a crime is slander.

The next person who engages in this will be permanently banned.

Do not state your speculative opinion as fact.

You are in the role of the judge in this trial by media Mr Admin. As I already pointed out to you there is no danger of a libel action by honest Tom because anything said here was in the public domain already and most of the evidence against him was put there by his own admission to newspaper reporters.

But perhaps you are protecting the police and the CPS lawyers, so let me make a point here. The police arrested honest Tom first on suspicion of five murders so he was accused of the five murders but not charged because he diverted them to Wright before he could be charged.

When Tom Stephens was arrested he was read his rights by a team of detectives and told that he was being arrested on suspicion of the murders of Tania Nicol, Gemma Adams, Anneli Alderton, Annette Nicholls and Paula Clennell and anything he says would be taken down and could be used as evidence against him etc.

Why then did he never take legal action against them for slander??
Were the police reckless for their speculative wrongful arrest of Tom Stephens?
Did the police commit a crime against this misunderstood do gooder?
what happened to all the evidence that the police had to support their accusations?
Was the picture by Max Ernst part of that?

Are we to believe now that his arrest meant nothing?

The CPS lawyers stated their speculative opinions in open court and accused Steve Wright of murdering those five girls when he insisted that he only had sexual contact with them and they proved him correct in that by DNA.
They and the defence lawyers put much more evidence before that jury that showed involvement in the murders by honest Tom but as the judge pointed out to the jury, honest Tom was not on trial so forget about him.
My speculative opinion is that the police believed that Tom was a guilty man and somehow by suggesting that Wright had an accomplice they left the door open to give them a way out if and when the truth emerges.

I've read some other posts in this forum and there is nothing but speculative opinion all over the place in this debating forum, so why pick on me?

I could accuse you of attempting to muzzle me and thereby keeping an innocent man locked up and worse still keeping a dangerous evil killer on the streets of Ipswich but I will let you be the judge and jury of that one.

If your internet forum is to have any meaning you should allow the participants to weigh the evidence and it is only when enough members of the public recognise what happened in Ipswich that there will be calls from various people to look again at the police action in this case.
Your forum could exercise a valuable contribution to honest policing if you allow open debate rather than a covert censored type that you seem to favour.

Do you seriously think that Stefan KIszko or the Birmingham 6 or any one of the many other innocent parties who were fitted up by bent policemen would ever have gotten justice if it was left to the police?

Steve Wright will die in jail as an innocent man and you will have helped him to do it, as well as helping to keep the real killer a free man to kill again.


I can only tell your readers what happened. You can dismiss it or laugh at it but the truth hurts and it doesnt go away.

[noel o'gara]

If, according to O'Gara, Tom Stephens upon arrest gave the plod Steve Wright's car registration number then it logically follows that Stephen's arrest certainy did not mean nothing.

Too true Derrick and it must have been terribly embarrassing for the police to have arrested Stephens in a blaze of stage managed publicity only to be pushed into an arrest of another suspect for the same crimes less than a day later. Stephens gave them all the dope to link Wright to all five victims and they couldnt refuse to check it out.

Now you tell me where they got the information from that led to the second arrest?

The embarrassment of the earlier 'false' arrest was reflected by Michael Crimp the CPS prosecuting lawyer who raced out to the media after the verdict and was at pains to emphasise that it was the unbelievable diligence of the forensic scientists in Birmingham that made the great breakthrough by suddenly finding three profiles of DNA on three bodies all linked to one man and that man was found on the national database to be Steve Wright who had stolen 80 quid several years earlier.
It was all the more amazing because it came just hours after the arrest of Stephens when in actual fact they had almost a week to do those tests prior to his arrest. They had from 12th December to the 18th.

and if you believe that you would believe anything but that is my speculative opinion.
They had to cover their embarrassment of making the 'wrong' arrest and at the same time had to protect their source of 'intelligence' so that Stephens information would forever by hidden from scrutiny.
But that tipp off should have sent alarm bells ringing in their ears.

Let me give my opinion here about the accomplice theory. It is my opinion that its a red herring made by policemen and lawyers at the trial to conceal or explain some of the many inconsistancies and suppressed evidence in the case against Wright.
The murders started with Tania. There was clear motive to conceal this crime by committing a further similar crime and hoping the fall guy gets the blame. I believe that Steve Wright was just a serial sex addict who was targetted as a fall guy by a dangerous killer who escalated the murders to put the blame on him. In this he succeeded beyond his wildest dreams.
In my opinion Wright is totally innocent, just a complete sex addict oblivious of what was happening around him because he was not involved in murder.

[jsi2010]

[QUOTE=Abby Normal;157125]

Hi jsi
Thanks for the reponse and best of luck. if what you said was true about your sighting then hopefully the police will contact you as they should.
me thinks this is not over and sounds to me like it is more probably that TS and SW were accomplices of some sort and hopefully whover is involved in these tragic events will get their appropriate justice.

Thank you Anna I am sure going to need it ! All I can say is that anyone who knows me today, knows me as a no nonesense don't suffer fools gladly, speak my mind and the truth only.
I will continue to make myself heard where ever I can untill the police do thier job and investigate the allegations made. I will readily go head to head, stand my ground and defend my entrenched position with passion and conviction (excuse the pun) untill I achieve my goal, hey it may take a life time but I am a great believer in destiny and fate and this unfortunately is mine so you see I am stuck with it and I understand that people will not want or be willing to acccept my postion let alone understand it and that people will want to vilify me but so be it. If anyone would like copies of my letters to Steve Wright, The Chief Constable of Suffolk police and the Govenor of HMP Longlartin please pm or e-mail me and will supply them to you. I shall at some point issue a formal witness statement..... Regards jsi

[Nemo]

Noel, you are entitled to that opinion without being accused of being a conspiracy nutjob, just as others are entitled to the opinion that Steve Wright is guilty, without being accused of being apologists for the police

Your idea of discussion and debate appears to consist of you stating some theory and expecting everyone to believe it 100% because of course you are the only intelligent and concerned person who can see the truth, anyone who disagrees with you is wrong

That's evidence of a mental aberration that you should get checked out

This is the second serial killer that you claim has been set up by the police due to the unbelievably crass reason that they were trying to cover up their "embarrassment" at arresting the wrong person for a crime

I think the running theme here is your dislike for the police

You have made numerous errors within your investigation into the Yorkshire Ripper so why should you be trusted to have reached the correct conclusion within this case

I resent your derogatory terms such as referring to Ripperologists as "so called crime experts". We are in the main historical researchers, not crime experts. You state some of your expectations from this forum which have not been realised, you haven't made another mistake in posting here have you? - of course not, you are never wrong are you?

When our brilliant and inquiring minds matched with our immense research capabilities turn to your claims in regard to the Yorkshire Ripper your case falls apart doesn't it?

It seems beyond a coincidence that you are the person to collate evidence that another serial killer is wrongly convicted

Scaremongering sells book does it? Read my latest evidence that a serial killer is on the loose in a town near you - yeah right

If "Honest Tom" is guilty of anything, then go get the evidence and push your case to the police

What do you expect to gain from a load of us Ripperologists agreeing/disagreeing with you? Prestige?

[jsi2010]

Noel, you are entitled to that opinion without being accused of being a conspiracy nutjob, just as others are entitled to the opinion that Steve Wright is guilty, without being accused of being apologists for the police

Your idea of discussion and debate appears to consist of you stating some theory and expecting everyone to believe it 100% because of course you are the only intelligent and concerned person who can see the truth, anyone who disagrees with you is wrong

That's evidence of a mental aberration that you should get checked out

This is the second serial killer that you claim has been set up by the police due to the unbelievably crass reason that they were trying to cover up their "embarrassment" at arresting the wrong person for a crime

I think the running theme here is your dislike for the police

You have made numerous errors within your investigation into the Yorkshire Ripper so why should you be trusted to have reached the correct conclusion within this case

I resent your derogatory terms such as referring to Ripperologists as "so called crime experts". We are in the main historical researchers, not crime experts. You state some of your expectations from this forum which have not been realised, you haven't made another mistake in posting here have you? - of course not, you are never wrong are you?

When our brilliant and inquiring minds matched with our immense research capabilities turn to your claims in regard to the Yorkshire Ripper your case falls apart doesn't it?

It seems beyond a coincidence that you are the person to collate evidence that another serial killer is wrongly convicted

Scaremongering sells book does it? Read my latest evidence that a serial killer is on the loose in a town near you - yeah right

If "Honest Tom" is guilty of anything, then go get the evidence and push your case to the police

What do you expect to gain from a load of us Ripperologists agreeing/disagreeing with you? Prestige?

Noel has asked me to let you know he has been barred from posting by the admin is unable and reply to your comments.............. Regards jsi

[Nemo]

Thanks for passing on the message JSI

I will await his return

Regards

Nemo

[jsi2010]

Thanks for passing on the message JSI

I will await his return

Regards

Nemo

Is it a tempory ban then ?

[Nemo]

I wouldn't know JSI

I thought you were telling me about it

[jsi2010]

I wouldn't know JSI

I thought you were telling me about it

Well I was telling you he can not post any more so is unable to answer any critics and that the admin removed a couple of his posts though we have all this on file in hard copy.
I can also confirm that the newspaper reports of Pam abandoning Steve Wright are false and there should hopefully soon be a statement released to that effect. I have it on good authority that she still speaks with him every day and still visits him once a month.
This is far from over thats for sure as Noel myself and others will be keeping up the pressure and as this is a country of free speech that is our constitutional right and we fully intend to exercise that right....... Regards jsi

[jsi2010]

[QUOTE=Nemo;157164]Noel, you are entitled to that opinion without being accused of being a conspiracy nutjob, just as others are entitled to the opinion
I think the running theme here is your dislike for the police

If "Honest Tom" is guilty of anything, then go get the evidence and push your case to the police....................

I personaly have always held the police with high regard as the best police force in the world though having said that, it is run by human beings who have the same defects as the rest of us, so there for not beyond reproach and like it or not things are not quite as they appear to be in this case and yes hard evidence is required and it needs to be found and soon too....... Regards jsi

[Ally]

So let me see if I understand this correctly. Noel O'Gara, who admitted on this thread that his server shut down his own website because he lost a libel suit against a police officer on another case, actually has the audacity to lecture someone else on how to run a site?

And wants to claim it's vile and manipulative censorship for Casebook to refuse to allow him to use it as a platform for his unfounded theories, blatant inventions and pure speculation presented as gods honest truth. He gets his own site shut down because he doesn't understand the simple difference between fact and opinion, and yet everyone else is supposed to risk their hard won sites for HIM?

That might be both the most hilarious AND deluded thing I've read ever.

[jsi2010]

So let me see if I understand this correctly. Noel O'Gara, who admitted on this thread that his server shut down his own website because he lost a libel suit against a police officer on another case, actually has the audacity to lecture someone else on how to run a site?

And wants to claim it's vile and manipulative censorship for Casebook to refuse to allow him to use it as a platform for his unfounded theories, blatant inventions and pure speculation presented as gods honest truth. He gets his own site shut down because he doesn't understand the simple difference between fact and opinion, and yet everyone else is supposed to risk their hard won sites for HIM?

That might be both the most hilarious AND deluded thing I've read ever.

Not really fair to knock someone when they are unable to defend themselves, cheap trick that Ally and before you say a certain person is not able to do that, yes he is and he will get his chance. I am openly discussing this issue within Felixstowe, The Trimleys and Ipswich so he will learn of this very soon and will happily give him the chance to dispute any allegations, hopefully in a police presence !
One thing I have noticed about you in these posts and that is your brash arrogance and often blatant rudeness and impoliteness, it is indeed a true blessing that I will never have to meet you in person......... Regards jsi

[Ally]

The fact that he is unable to "defend himself" is entirely his own choice and his own doing, and therefore, I don't feel the need to stifle my opinion because he can't recognize that his opinion isn't fact.

And don't be sad because your leash holder has been booted, like you said, you can go lap at his heels on his own site soon...until he gets it shut down for libel again.

[jsi2010]

The fact that he is unable to "defend himself" is entirely his own choice and his own doing, and therefore, I don't feel the need to stifle my opinion because he can't recognize that his opinion isn't fact.

And don't be sad because your leash holder has been booted, like you said, you can go lap at his heels on his own site soon...until he gets it shut down for libel again.

would you like a saucer of milk Ally ? meowwww ...... Regards jsi