La polizia ha incastrato l’uomo per omicidio, suggeriscono nuove prove

Assuming the details in the article are true then the officers involved need perverting the course of justice charges against them & we need to reexamine every other case they were involved in.

Typical police though! This happens way more than you think

The write up about Leanne’s witness statements looks bad, but is really explainable. Which is making me wonder about some of the other points.

Having given statements multiple times the police need them written in a really specific way to get the information for court, which is very unlike natural conversation. But they also need it said by the witness.

So you start with telling the police ‘I saw him stab a guy’. This changes to ‘I Joe Bloggs, at 07:32, walking North on Park Avenue, saw a man who I now know to be Joe Bloggs, take a blade longer then 4 inches and inflict harm on another man who in now know to be Simon Smith’

It’s a weird process that can take a long time. If you’re in shock, 17, and in hindsight it might feel like your account it being written. But it’s easily explainable.

I can’t speak to the other stuff and sounds like the case needs to be reinvestigated. Though he’s had 2 trips the the Court of Appeals, and failed.

Can anyone explain how the CPS got 3 trials.in the first place? Collapse of trial and failure to return a verdict?