Innocence Network UK
Innocence Network UK (INUK) brings together academics, victim support groups and campaigning organisations, criminal appeal lawyers, forensic scientists and investigative journalists. They work together to raise awareness about the plight of innocent prisoners and the issue of wrongful convictions as a cause for concern, to research why these wrongful convictions have occurred, and to encourage legal reform that will stop this happening.
Innocence Project in Cardiff
The Innocence Project at Cardiff brings together Law and Journalism students with a real practical aim. We take on an investigative role and with the supervision of academics and practicing solicitors we look into real criminal cases of alleged innocent victims of wrongful conviction.
Priority is given to prisoners who both maintain their innocence and have exhausted their legal appeals, although Cardiff
Innocence Project does also consider clearing the names of those already freed from jail.
Our practical objective is to attempt to find legal grounds in the hope that alleged innocent victims will get referrals back to the Court of Appeal or CCRC. We also aim to get the Innocence Project publicised so that prisoners, as well as the general public, know that it exists.
Innocent prisoners need to know that there is an organisation out there that will help them when they have no other choice.
Lawyers are expensive and usually not an option for prisoners. However organisations like the Innocence Network offers free investigation and lawyers working pro bono to try and help prisoners that are truly innocent.
The only definitive criteria for Innocence Projects are that they are concerned with allegations of factual innocence as opposed to allegations of technical miscarriages of justice. Innocence projects exist because innocent people are wrongfully convicted.
People reading this article may sceptically ask, ‘How do you know a prisoner is really innocent?’ The answer is, we don’t. We look at all the evidence with the help of practising lawyers and if there is any doubt at all that the prisoner is really innocent then the case will not be investigated any further.
When a prisoner has been protesting their conviction since the day they arrived in jail, and has stayed in prison for a number of years longer than they would have if they had just said they were guilty, while carrying out a number of appeals and protests then it just adds to a belief that they are innocent.
O’ Brien talks to Cardiff Volunteers
O’Brien recently spoke to students at Cardiff University. Third year journalism student, Andrea Bishop, commented after the talk: “Until I heard Michael O’Brien speak, I never realised how many people are failed by the British Criminal Justice system. It is clear that this needs investigating further.”
If you believe the BBC series The Innocence Project, students are able to look into miscarriages of justice every week in a spacious well-equipped office and get a different prisoner out of jail every week. In reality, it is a task of trawling through boxes and boxes of case files containing mixed up statements, witness comments and police reports, and even then it may take up to five years for a case to get looked at by the Criminal Case Review Commission (CCRC) and for the prisoner to be released.
It is a long and arduous process, but clearing the name of those who are wrongly convicted is a matter of great import. O’Brien’s life was shattered after his eleven-year stint in prison, it is imperative that other innocent people do not face such injustice.
Case study: Michael O’Brien
If you were to ask Michael O’ Brien, one third of the so-called ‘Cardiff Newsagent three’, whether the truth always prevails, his reply would be a definite no.
Michael O’ Brien was released from prison in December 1999 after serving the longest miscarriage of justice in Welsh legal history. After eleven years in some of the highest security prisons up and down the country, O’Brien’s case was finally quashed by the Court of Appeal.
The tale of O’Brien is one of a young, uneducated small time criminal trying to achieve justice for a brutal murder that he did not commit (even forensic evidence could not confirm his involvement in the attack). O’Brien recalls the British justice system as one that is based on the notion of guilty until proven innocent, as opposed to the other way round.
In British prisons, once a person is convicted then they should serve their time and get on with it, whether they are guilty or innocent. Prisoners are encouraged to admit their own guilt; those who admit to being guilty can go through a rehabilitation programme and potentially get out early. Those who defend their innocence by contesting their conviction and refusing rehabilitation, end up facing longer prison terms because of their refusal to comply.
O’Brien was only nineteen when he was arrested for a murder he did not commit. He had little education and no qualifications. His son was just three, his young wife was pregnant, and he had just forged a relationship with his alcoholic father after a lifetime of acrimony. In 1999, when O’Brien finally won his freedom, he was thirty-three and had only ashes to show for his life; his second child, a daughter, died in her cot when she was two months old; his wife left him a couple of months later for a string of other men; his father, broken by his son’s imprisonment, drank himself into the grave.
O’Brien says that when he was fighting for his freedom he thought that after he got out of prison he could get his life back, but his troubles were only just beginning. He believes that the years he spent in jail smashed his life to pieces.
O’Brien has received £300,000 compensation from South Wales Police and £480,000 from the home office in lost earnings. In spite of this pay out, the police officers that wrongly charged him and performed inadequate investigations, will never face disciplinary action. South Wales police are denying their liability for everything they put O’Brien through. O’Brien still seeks an apology from the officers involved in his case and would like to see them locked up.
The fight to get out of prison was a long and hard struggle for O’ Brien. But even when he was released there was no support to help him fit back into society. For people held hostage there is a rehabilitation system in place to help them re-integrate themselves into society. But innocent prisoners are just expected to fit back into everyday life as if nothing had happened.
1. CTD
Excellent- no more anti-irish republican miscarriages of justice! And Muslims are the new irish- can be shot and murdered with immunity as long as you are black and happen to read the Koran. Or even Brazilian. Police State?
2. Mark
You don’t go to London much, do you? If the Police arrested or shot every Muslim who tried to travel on London public transport then the morgues and cells would fill up pretty quick.
The Police are doing an incredibly difficult job in incredibly dangerous circumstances and the Politicians are trying to figure out how to protect democracy without destroying it and the Courts are in the middle trying to safeguard everyone, especially the individual, while the press and the people want to be protected at all costs and also want everything to go on as normal. And if anyone makes a mistake anywhere along the line, regardless of the difficult circumstances and intolerable pressures placed upon everyone from everyone then people act surprised.
You said in a post on another thread that ‘everyone makes mistakes’ and that ‘the ends justify the means’. Being someone who believes in democracy, freedom and capitalism I did not agree with you. People do, of course, make mistakes. The means do not justify the means. Granted the Police are going to pay closer attention to people of Middle Eastern origin, but the fight against terrorism isn’t going to be won by PC Plod getting lucky but by our first class intelligence and security services and they’re record on tracking and preventing thousands of attacks and arresting or killing hundreds of terrorists in their history speaks for itself.
We are going to win this war against Islamic Fundamentalism, but we will do without becoming a Police state and by working with the moderate, law abiding Muslim community (which, thankfully, is 99% of British Muslims). People like you who just see a passing bandwagon and jump on completely uniformed are clearly not helping the situation.
3. CTD
So mark, having read what you said, you are suggesting that 99% of muslims are happy with the way the Ummah is being treated by English Legal System? I never jump on bandwaggons ever- my beleifs are motivatd by the desire to see justice flowing like streams of water throughout our nations. So Trevor Phillips calls for groups like the BNP not to receive the oxygen of publicaity yet you argue in favour of doing this for the BNP, as does Gair Rhydd by the way. MCGB argue against these new so called anti-terror laws, yet you twist these facts to your own advantage and claim ridiculously, that 99% of muslims agree with you. Are you denying that racism had anything to so with the recetn shootings of Muslims/ ‘coloured’ people? And our friends in Thames House are ppl who abuse human rights and carry out action that are deemed by civilised nations to be border ing on terrorsim. For example, the SAS murder of the Loughall martyrs in Eire. The history of the SB/MI4/5 is that of terror tactics and evidence palnting- that’s why so many irish ppl were falsly arrested. And Muslims are the new irish. Commnder Blair should go- he has no brains, and he has no balls, no integity whatsoever. Again, a police state.
latest cow updates www.freewebs.com/cardiffwelshrepublicans
4. Mark
“So mark, having read what you said, you are suggesting that 99% of muslims are happy with the way the Ummah is being treated by English Legal System?”
I Wouldn’t presume to speak on behalf on all British Muslims, I just said 99% were ;aw abiding.
“yet you argue in favour of doing this for the BNP, as does Gair Rhydd by the way.”
I believe in freedom of speech. It’s up to Union to give the BNP or another other political party a place to voice their views or not and it’s up to the Police and the Courts to ensure that everthing that was said was within the law, as long as all those groups are happy then Mr Griffin can spout whatever rubbish he likes and, for the record, I’ll detest him and what he stand for as much as you and what you stand for.
“MCGB argue against these new so called anti-terror laws, yet you twist these facts to your own advantage and claim ridiculously, that 99% of muslims agree with you.”
No, I didn’t mention anti-terrorism laws. I said that 99% of Muslims are law abiding and that we will not win this war without them.
“Are you denying that racism had anything to so with the recetn shootings of Muslims/ ‘coloured’ people?”
Which shootings would these be?
“And our friends in Thames House are ppl who abuse human rights and carry out action that are deemed by civilised nations to be border ing on terrorsim.”
Such as? And no, citing something that happened on ‘Spooks’ doesn’t count.
“For example, the SAS murder of the Loughall martyrs in Eire.”
They were terrorists and they were lawfully killed. They may well have been ‘martyrs’ to some, but that is irrelevant. If I am a soldier and I kill an enemy combatant within the confines of the Geneva Conventions then I have not committed murder, likewise if I am a Police Officer who kills an illegally armed terrorists engaged in criminal acts then it is not murder. Get that into your head.
“And Muslims are the new irish.”
Yes, they are. And, as with the Irish, we are only going to win our war against terrorism with the help of their community. We wouldn’t have defeated Irish Terrorism without the aid of the Irish Government and people on both sides of the border. We will not win this war without the aid of the Muslim population and that is something that all parties have agreed upon, including the Muslim Council of Great Britain.
“Commnder Blair should go- he has no brains, and he has no balls, no integity whatsoever. Again, a police state.”
Firstly if this were a Police State then one of the most senior Police Officers in the land would hardly be subjected to such media and Parliamentary critiscism, would he? Please try and think before you type.
Secondly I agree that Sir Ian Blair should go, he should do the honourable thing and fall on his sword and offer his resignation to HM the Queen. However he has decided and publically stated that he will not do so and it is up to those than can throw him out-ie the Government, possibly the Mayor of London, Parliament, etc to do so. I think he should go, but if everyone lacks the balls to remove him then who are we to argue?
5. Rasputin
“So Trevor Phillips calls for groups like the BNP not to receive the oxygen of publicaity yet you argue in favour of doing this for the BNP, as does Gair Rhydd by the way.”
—gives up—
You just can’t see sense, can you?
I don’t know if you can call the police racist as such, but I am very concerned by what is essentially anti-asian surveillance. In a lot of cases it’s not so much “closer attention” as an assumption of criminal intentions. But you’ll be reading more of that soon…
6. chris white
“In a lot of cases it’s not so much “closer attention” as an assumption of criminal intentions.”
Like that poor lass banged up for writing shit poetry last week…
7. Mark
“I don’t know if you can call the police racist as such, but I am very concerned by what is essentially anti-asian surveillance.”
Why? Given that the terrorist threat we face comes from a specific ethnic and religious demographic then it’s perfectly understandable that the Police and Security Services are going to pay more attention to that group of people in regard to anti-terrorism operations as opposed to Mexicans and Poles.
“In a lot of cases it’s not so much “closer attention” as an assumption of criminal intentions.”
But the law hasn’t changed and terrorist suspects are still subject to the same protections as the rest of us, it is still the burden of the Crown to demonstrate guilt beyond all reasonable doubt to a jury of 12 people.
8. chris white
“But the law hasn’t changed and terrorist suspects are still subject to the same protections as the rest of us, it is still the burden of the Crown to demonstrate guilt beyond all reasonable doubt to a jury of 12 people.”
Yes… and no.
At the minute terrorism suspects can be locked up for 28 days without charge, which looks likely to increase to 56. Eight weeks is a long time to be in the nick if you’re innocent.
And in any case, even if found not guilty they can still be subject to a control order, which is effectively house arrest, without a court having decided that they’ve broken the law.
I can only speak for myself here, but I know I wouldn’t want to be forbidden from working, confined to a one-square-mile area, subject to an eight-hour curfew and electronically tagged. Certainly not after being acquitted by a court.
9. Mark
Yes I don’t like the whole control order idea much either. With the 28 day limit (I wouldn’t like to see it raised to 56 either!) it is important to note that, regardless of what the Guardian says, the process does have judicial oversight, I believe after the usual 48 hours the police have to keep going back to a Magistrates Court in order to keep them locked up under the anti-terrorism act.
10. Rasputin
Why? Given that the terrorist threat we face comes from a specific ethnic and religious demographic then it’s perfectly understandable that the Police and Security Services are going to pay more attention to that group of people in regard to anti-terrorism operations as opposed to Mexicans and Poles.
A reasonable enough point, except that it seems to act as an excuse for liberties to be taken. Again, this’ll make more sense once the article is up, but if closer attention should be paid to said demographics then it should be a case of terrorist possibly = Asian/Muslim, not Asian/Muslim = terrorist. I’m not sure how practical it is to mistrust one group over another, and it’s certainly discomforting. Still, I can see this is largely a matter of opinion, and I can’t pretend I’m not slightly influenced by reasons that will become clear.
And yes, the detention orders are a big pile of bollocks.
11. Mark
“I’m not sure how practical it is to mistrust one group over another, and it’s certainly discomforting.”
If it makes you feel any better than I’m sure the intelligence and secuirity services are still keeping a close eye on the thoushands of known Irish terror suspects (both Republican and Loyalist) who are, I think it’s fair to say, are all white and christain.