Did Steve Wright get a fair trial in Ipswich?

[juan.kerr]

Anyone else notice how he completely dodged the question?


You know what else didn't get an airing in court? The fingerprint on the murder weapon that didn't match Wrights, the DNA evidence left inside the wounds that didn't match Wrights, the tire tracks that ran over the body that didn't match Wrights car and the signed confession left at the scene that didn't match Wrights. You know why they didn't get aired in court? Because they didn't exist.

You know what did match? His DNA on the victims. Carpet fiber from his car on the victims. And yes, it is beyond the realm of coincidence that all five just happened to have been visited by two completely different men, one totally innocent and one their killer.

I know I'm coming to this one a little later than everyone else, but I hope that people are still around to discuss it, especially Noel (his status shows as "inactive"). There seem to be some inconsistencies in the evidence in the case (and the other suspect is certainly interesting), but I'm puzzled by the references to a murder weapon, wounds, tyre tracks and a confession. is this the same case that Noel is referring to or are you talking about something else?

[juan.kerr]

The other suspect

I don't know how the other suspect managed to afford rent or a mortgage and run a car on a supermarket worker's wages.

Piecing together information from newspaper reports that are freely available, it seems the other suspect stopped being a Special Constable (a voluntary role rather than a paying job) before moving to the town where the murders were committed.

He married a nurse, but the marriage broke down and he left the home. He lived in a cheap one room bedsit for two or three years. He cycled five miles to work in a supermarket. Just before the murders began, he moved to a semi detached house. He also acquired the car that was used to ferry the girls around. I'm curious about the economics: did he have another means of income? (part time mini cab work, perhaps? Or something connected to the girls' trade and habits?)

[juan.kerr]

Some of the evidence used to convict Wright was blood from a couple of the murder victims. As the victims were killed either by asphyxiation or compression of the neck, the specks of blood don't seem to indicate lethal contact so much as their presence in Wright's car. I wonder if what the blood actually shows is evidence of intravenous drug use in the car?

[Donna]

Steve Wright

The 'blood' found in Wrights car 'matched' two of the victims, however, I do not think it was ever established whether the sample referred to DNA or whether it was just blood type. ie Group O. Wright had a crap defense.

Also a newspaper (I think it was the Telegraph ) reported that a high ranking police officer had his DNA on 4 of the victims!! Suffolk Police said they "could not confirm or deny this".

With regards to the high vis jacket, would someone be so stupid to wear it whist dumping bodies and then hang it in his hall!!

[Stephen Thomas]

Also a newspaper (I think it was the Telegraph ) reported that a high ranking police officer had his DNA on 4 of the victims!! Suffolk Police said they "could not confirm or deny this".

If that's true it says a lot about DNA analysis.

[Donna]

Many defense lawyers simply accept lab reports at face value without looking behind them to see whether the actual test results fully support the laboratory's conclusions.

Examination of the underlying laboratory results frequently reveals limitations or problems that would not be apparent from the laboratory report, such as inconsistencies between purportedly "matching" profiles, evidence of additional unreported contributors to evidential samples, errors in statistical computations and unreported problems with experimental controls that raise doubts about the validity of the results.
The trouble is not many defense lawyers take the time to question these results.

“It is important to realise what a random match probability is not. It is not the chance that someone else is guilty or that someone else left the biological material at the crime scene. Likewise it is not the chance of the defendant being guilty or the chance that someone else in reality would have that same genotype. Rather, a random match probability is the estimated frequency at which a particular STR profile would be expected to occur in the population. This random match probability may also be thought of as the theoretical chance that if you sample one person at random from the population they will have the particular profile in question.” JM Butler, Forensic DNA Typing 2nd Ed. Elsevier (USA) 2005 at page 500.[/I]

[juan.kerr]

I've found a couple of references in some news stories from the time to one of Paula Clennell's regulars who was "a police officer from a neighboring police force" according to The Independent [common sense and geography would suggest Essex]. He becomes a "top cop" or senior police officer in the News of the World, who also availed himself of the services of one of the other murdered prostitutes.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-officer-on-list-of-suspects-in-hunt-for-ipswich-killer-428932.html

http://notwats.blogspot.com/2006/12/exclusive-strangler-victims-client-was.html

After a bit more poking about, it appears that TNOTW is the source of this story (I wonder if it someone left a message about it on someone else's answerphone?)

[dannymc]

did steve wright get a fair trial

Juan Kerr that is a very good point about the other suspects abillity to pay rent and car. Maybe he was getting housing benefit for his rent and disability allowance which provides a car.

[juan.kerr]

Juan Kerr that is a very good point about the other suspects abillity to pay rent and car. Maybe he was getting housing benefit for his rent and disability allowance which provides a car.

There's certainly no evidence of disability: after a stint as a special constable (which was ended somewhat ignominously) and as a cabbie, he moved to a city 50 miles away and got a job in a supermarket, either as a shelf-filler or a trolley-dolly. He got married as well. When the marriage broke down, he left the marital home and rented a single-room bedsit for £280 a month in a house where three other people also rented rooms. He cycled five miles from this address to the supermarket (he was quite keen on physical fitness too, which also suggests there was no disability benefit).

All this information is from various newspaper articles which can be found online. What the available information doesn't seem to account for, however, is the apparent a sudden change in fortune when he moved to a semi-detached house in September 2006, just before the spate of killings started. I don't know when the car was acquired: it may have been bought while he still living in the bedsit.

I also don't know for sure if the semi was rented or if he had taken out a mortgage (where did the deposit come from?) but my research suggests the house was sold close enough for the date that he moved in that it is very likely he would have been the mortgagee. I'm sure if there were any benefits, he would have been characterised as "disabled" "unemployed" or "a scrounger" by the UK tabloids.

Monthly house payments, the upkeep of the car, and a hobby that involved meeting girls in the street and paying them for their services as well as driving them around: that would seem to add up to a considerable outgoing sum. Perhaps he was doing a bit of cabbing, but I haven't come across any stories that quote the owner of a local minicab firm, or another driver, saying how quiet or ordinary or weird he seemed. So perhaps he was getting something from the girls for ferrying them about in addition to the odd freebie.

[dannymc]

maybe he was working on the side?
dealing drugs?
doing armed hold ups?
burgular?
pimp?
(Iam not sayihg that this is what he did but this could account for people with suspicious income.)

[juan.kerr]

There is an interesting account of the flaws in the case against Wright to be found here: http://www.justjustice.org/cascade.html

While there is much to consider on the above page, including the use of a high-visibility jacket and some knowledge of or training in the use of a headlock with lethal consequences, one of the things that isn't suggested is that the suspect whom police released without charge would seem fit the profile of a high-visiblity jacket wearing person trained to use restraint positions.

This may also accord with some of the points made by John Symonds earlier in this thread.

[Nemo]

Hi Noel, or Wan Ker, or Juan or whatever your name is at the moment

The person who wrote that rubbish at the link you gave to the "Algebra of Justice" site shows a complete, and in my view intentional, disregard for the true facts and evidence and the method and practicality of gathering such evidence

Regards

Nemo

[juan.kerr]

No-one, you seem to be a little confused as to the identity of the person to whom you are postng a reply. There's no need to be confused as the username appears immediately above the post (top left).

I sense your reply is a little dismissive (there are hints in some of the terms you use, such as "rubbish" and "disregard"), but you offer no real substance to actually refute the points made in the Algebra of Justice material. However, I'd be interested to see some detail if you could offer anything by way of substantiation.

[nugnug]

Algebra of justice isnt that the sight that says ian huntley and roy whiteing are innocent i see why people don't exactly take it seriously.