Human Rights
The right of the individual to a fair trial has been made explicit in the British legal system with the incorporation on October 2nd of the Human Rights Act.
Siôn Jenkins was denied that right when he was refused the opportunity to go to the House of Lords to challenge the controversial judgement made at appeal. The refusal was made more disturbing by the fact that one of the judges had an undeclared conflict of interest, in contravention of clear High Court guidelines on the matter.
Strong concerns were expressed about this at the time. They were met by the bland indifference of a system which aparently allows the need for transparency to be optional for the judiciary, even though in all other areas of public life it is seen as essential to democracy.
- Siôn Jenkins has been wronged.
- His rights have been infringed.
- He is entitled to seek justice.
A presumption of innocence?
In defining the right to a fair trial, the Human Rights Act specifies that the individual should be presumed innocent until proved guilty.
Yet the evidence shows that in an interview ten days after the murder Detective Sergeant Ann Capon said “Siôn, we know you are the killer..” That statement reflected dangerous wishful thinking, not conclusive proof.
What does it indicate about the rigour and integrity of the police investigation?
Two years ago the trial of Siôn Jenkins ended. In the absence of compelling factual evidence about the crime, the jury was offered innuendo about the defendant. Summing up, the judge warned the jury against being influenced by the ‘strong emotions’ aroused by the case.
The case had attracted enormous publicity. The media had generated an emotionally – charged climate. How possible was it for balance and reason to prevail?
Yet the jury announced that they had – beyond reasonable doubt – found Siôn Jenkins guilty of murder.
Was a fair trial ever possible?
What has happened so far has fed an appetite for vengeance, but has not served the cause of justice.
The case of Siôn Jenkins prompts many questions abut the workings of the criminal justice system. The more closely the details are rationally examined, the more worrying the anomalies which are exposed.
The campaign goes on.
Siôn Jenkins continues to maintain his innocence. He has consistently done so ever since he was charged with the murder of Billie-Jo Jenkins. He is the victim of a deep injustice, which was compounded by the flawed impartiality of his appeal.
His legal team and his supporters remain totally committed to reversing the miscarriage of justice.
The facts still demand exposure.
Back to Top