Tuesday, 8 March 2011


TIMES readers mostly condemned ZANDER's prejudicial article.
Except one sour puss ex JP.

See image immediately below.

Circa 1951 legal limitations on Police Intelligence collations re innocent persons -
see high-lighted passage.

No forensic in this case didn't stop police skull-duggery for 35 years.
Far from it - the non incriminating forensic THAT THERE WAS was suppressed -

see TIMES leading article immediately below.

Recent TIMES editorial (February 25th) castigating Police and Courts
and calling for a far too long delayed decisive outcome.
Double CLICK above images to ENLARGE texts.

The recent crass article by Michael Zander QC -
whose surname even contains
more than a trace of back-to-front DNA!
There's no stopping TIMES stroke L.S.E. egghead MICHAEL ZANDER QC - he's got so much back-to-front DNA in his monika that he's lost the plot. Methinks he's been over doing it on the EMERITAS spliffs!
Two of the image repro's above are from ANTHONY MARTIENSSEN's 1951 study "CRIME AND THE POLICE". At page 37 (see above IMAGE with added highlighting) Martienssen plays it straight re cop intelligence collating and record keeping - it's a little known Collectors item.
So too is Zander's TIMES article (also reproduced above) - though the latter is best collected into the Hoover Bag to join other tansient grot. Presumption of innocence? Forget it!! It's Zander Rules OK!!
Altho' Zander's crabby vibe has been triggered by Home Secretary (so-called) TERESEA MAY - who has called for some kind of restriction to be placed on the retention of DNA police intelligence files you wonder if Zander read, and if so understood the outspoken very very recent 25 February TIMES editorial - also reproduced above - calling on the Court of Appeal to finally declare GEORGE DAVIS's innocence after a wait of 35 plus years with even more exasperating bullshit delays now on the menu.
Would the police or prosecuting authorites play devious DNA evidence games? There must be possibilities if a prosecution might fail if they disclosed DNA evidence that might result in a non conviction. Take the DAVIS CASE which was manipulated re police forensic evidence - there was evidence found at the scene of the crime but it was suppressed because for police to have admitted it would have pointed to Davis's innocence.
This blogger wrote the case up in great detail back in August 1975 - see previous blogspot immediately below - and had made the very important point about suppressed forensics -
fat lot of good it did!


At 9 March 2011 at 09:49 , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting thanks. How the BIG BROTHER state has crept up since Martienssen's book.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home