Dr. Lee's Book

[dottierainbow]

Jayelles,
England is a beautifil place to visit. We have family in Folkestone , Kent.My husband's mum was from there. She was a war bride who came to Usa. We were there 2 years ago and also visited London.
Is it because of the rules that the British have concerning what they relay to guilt of someone charged before trial, does it have to do with how you view cases and not jump to conclusions of innocence or guilt quickly?
By the way I enjoy your posts.
Amy

 

[Jayelles]

Jayelles,
England is a beautifil place to visit. We have family in Folkestone , Kent.My husband's mum was from there. She was a war bride who came to Usa. We were there 2 years ago and also visited London.
Is it because of the rules that the British have concerning what they relay to guilt of someone charged before trial, does it have to do with how you view cases and not jump to conclusions of innocence or guilt quickly?
By the way I enjoy your posts.
Amy

Yes, the subjudice laws are there to ensure that a convicted person has a fair trial. Everyone just accepts that cases will disappear off the radar between the suspect being charged and the trial starting. In Scotland we also have a 100 day rule which means that if a suspect is not granted bail after being charged with a crime, the prosecution must bring them to trial within 100 days. Otherwise trials can take many, many months to come to trial and when they do, we've all but forgotten about them. In the odd occasion when a newspaper or other media outlet contravenes subjudice, they are usually severely punished - so it rarely happens.

I was totally shocked at the way the Ramseys were tried by media - it was the one aspect about the case which struck me most. I kept thinking "Thank goodness that couldn't happen here..." However, one other aspect of the case which wouldn't have happened here is that the Ramseys would not have been allowed to hide behind their lawyers. They wouldn't have been allowed to decline police interviews. If they did, they would almost certainly have been arrested for obstructing justice. Our police seem to have more autonomy. We don't have District Attorneys. In Scotland we have Procurator Fiscals but they don't interfere with police business.

Scotland has a separate and different legal system to England and Wales, We also have three verdicts - Guilty, Not Guilty and Not Proven (which means "we think you did it, but we can't prove it"). The defendant walks free after a Not Proven verdict but carries the stigma of the verdict forevermore.

 

[sissi]

Sissi, please understand that rather than "jumping to the conclusion that this isn't a fact", I am "not jumping to the conclusion that it is a fact".

There is a difference. I am very interested to know how they arrived at their conclusion that the panty-DNA was from a white male based upon what I have found out about DNA.

ETA - This could be DNA-x which was more recent evidence, tested with more up to date methods.

Gee, my post sounded a bit harsher than my intention. I, am, as well, very interested in "who" said it, and wish I had it on tape. I was trying not to "jump to the conclusion" that it was the cbi without "seeing" it with my own eyes. (which I thought I did) but am waiting to verify. Though I asked on the other forum, and someone whom I highly respect, "saw" it ,I am "holding back" on stating it as fact , because of the "chopped up" format of the show, with a lot of "flitting" from expert to expert, which could confuse.

 

[Jayelles]

Gee, my post sounded a bit harsher than my intention. I, am, as well, very interested in "who" said it, and wish I had it on tape. I was trying not to "jump to the conclusion" that it was the cbi without "seeing" it with my own eyes. (which I thought I did) but am waiting to verify. Though I asked on the other forum, and someone whom I highly respect, "saw" it ,I am "holding back" on stating it as fact , because of the "chopped up" format of the show, with a lot of "flitting" from expert to expert, which could confuse.

I would have been more than happy to transcribe the programme if I had been able to record it. As it stands, I can't even see it.

Which tv station showed this?

 

[hollyjokers]

I am one of those who believe the Ramsey's had nothing to do with the murder, but in regards to the DNA: the underwear were just removed from the package & I believe I read somewhere that some DNA was also recovered from a 2nd panty in the same package. This leads me to believe that the DNA is a red herring & the source is probably from Inspector 32 from the Bloomies underwear factory who could have sneezed or coughed just before placing a "inspected by 32" tag inside the panties.

 

[BBB167893]

"Yea and he must not have even been in his own RV because they didn't find a single fingerprint of his in there..gee whiz"

Sorry, RKnowley. I was a tad upset with someone here in the house at the time, and when I get mad, I don't think clearly. I meant to say we wasn't there very long.

"They wouldn't have been allowed to decline police interviews. If they did, they would almost certainly have been arrested for obstructing justice."

Some people, myself included, think that they should have been, and probably would have been if their lawyers didn't run the state. My rear end would be hanging from the yardarm if I did half of what was done here.

"the underwear were just removed from the package & I believe I read somewhere that some DNA was also recovered from a 2nd panty in the same package."

That is correct, far as I know. Cyril Wecht said so in Mortal Evidence I know that much.

Has anyone here ever heard of Dennis DeChaine, while we're on the subject?