Really? Image c. Erin Kay@flickr
Perhaps more guilty people get away with crimes than innocent people get convicted, but nonetheless delving into the world of wrongful convictions and potential miscarriages of justice is unsettling. The matter’s been thrown into the limelight, once again, following the release of Sean Hodgson, who spent 27 years in prison for a murder he didn’t commit.
Last week Hodgson stood – like the Birmingham six, the Guildford four, Barry George, Stefan Kiszko, Susan May, Barri White, Frank Johnson and far too many before him – blinking in the natural light outside the Royal Courts of Justice. His brother held up his arm for him as they punched the air. This was to show that justice had been served.
But only just. Hodgson didn’t look like a man who had been served a plate of justice. He looked like a shadow, a ghost, a man who was frightened by a strange ringing piece of plastic in his pocket: the mobile phone he has no idea how to use. A clean bill of innocence 27 years late isn’t justice, it’s a disaster. And the clearest argument we have against the death penalty, which I blogged about a few days ago.
The slogan on the website of Barri White – found completely innocent, in December 2008, of a murder charge, after six years – reads:
“It is not a justice system, it is just a system”
This is (understandably) cynical, but it is the nature of the beast that miscarriages of justice happen. Our criminal justice system is based on the principle of humans judging humans and we are, after all, only human. People lie; people contaminate evidence; juries are misled; fair trials are prejudiced; experts get it wrong; detectives are under extreme pressure to secure convictions; cases can be extraordinarily complex and ambiguous and the prosecution are employed to, well, prosecute. Sometimes there’s no foul play. Mistakes just happen, people just get it wrong.
But people can’t afford to get it wrong.
When we place our faith in justice, we assume that living within the law will keep us safe, and free. But what if this suddenly isn’t the case? What if you’re found guilty on the basis of circumstantial or flawed evidence, which for the same reason can’t free you?
If, like Eddie Gilfoyle, Simon Hall, Susan May and Michael Shields (to name but a meagre few) you find yourself imprisoned for a serious crime you insist you haven’t committed, the prospects aren’t good. You have to hope your friends and family will continue to support you, wage a campaign and get the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) to help you. But even then there are no guarantees.
Eddie Gilfoyle:
Eddie Gilfoyle. Image: Liverpool Echo
Eddie Gilfoyle was convicted of murdering his pregnant wife in 1993. She was found hanging but had left a suicide note, in her own writing. The prosecution said Gilfoyle forced her to write it. In 2008, the expert who helped convict Gilfoyle admitted he was wrong. Paula Gilfoyle’s suicide note, he says, is genuine. Details of Paula’s medical history – which fitted the profile of someone who could commit suicide – have also since emerged. Gilfoyle, who has always maintained his innocence, has been in prison for over 15 years.Campbell Malone QC, who represented Gilfoyle at the Court of Appeal told The Times the case ranks among the worst unresolved miscarriages of justice of all time. And this is why journalists matter. For Gilfoyle’s campaign see here.
Once convicted:
A defendant may be innocent until proven guilty, but once found guilty that’s pretty much it. The blind faith we, and the prison system, necessarily put in criminal justice means those found guilty must be assumed to be so. The principle of law would collapse if a guilty verdict meant nothing, but where does that leave the wrongly convicted?
Prisoners who maintain their innocence are usually considered liars and, often, treated less favourably. But, the real catch 22 is that to be eligible for parole, or for various rehabilitative and training courses which help one progress through the system, a prisoner must admit their guilt. Prisoners who maintain their innocence, who refuse to be pressured into confessing, who may well BE innocent, are not granted parole. They will also find it extremely difficult to overturn their wrongful conviction.
I’m not qualified to pass judgement on the conviction of Eddie Gilfoyle, but I will say that he has always maintained his innocence. And you can’t help but wonder whether a guilty man would have given up and admitted defeat long ago, rather than raging against the machine and losing out in the process. Would a guilty man, and a sane one as he is, draw so much extra attention to his case knowing it may provide definitive proof of his guilt? Who knows. We probably wouldn’t hear about it anyway. What we do know is that our criminal justice system cannot afford to get it wrong. Because when it does, there’s little way out.
Dr Andrew Green, of Innocent wrote on Simon Hall‘s campaign website:
We know how difficult it is to overturn a wrongful conviction and how many obstacles have to be overcome…the system is very slow to rectify its errors”.
To watch a BBC film of an investigative journalist uncovering evidence to show Barri White’s conviction was unsafe click here.
Interested? To read about more potential miscarriages of justice click here.
The Whole Truth and nothing 