Comments:Stefan Millar to appeal Liam Aitchison murder conviction

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

Start a new discussion

Contents

Thread titleRepliesLast modified
True Justice for Liam019:22, 23 December 2013

True Justice for Liam

Edited by 2 users.
Last edit: 19:22, 23 December 2013

It is hard to imagine a bigger failure of our judicial system than, convicting and sentencing to Life imprisonment, persons not guilty of the crime. You could say its a treble whammy. No justice for the victim. No justice for the accused. No justice for society, whose tax payments have been wasted on a botched process which really has achieved nothing, but succeeded in causing yet more damage.

While the media and most onlookers made much of the guilt and of the evil two convicted for this heinous crime, no one really has seemed to cast any critical eye over the police investigation, and also the verdict of the jury. Norman Crosby wrote: "When you go into court you are putting your fate into the hands of twelve people who were not smart enough to get out of jury duty" Was true justice served here? Are the right people really in jail? Another question- Anyone prepared to put their mortgage on the safety of this conviction?

The Jury had to be sent away for the weekend at one point as it could not come to a majority.(under scottish law a simple majority of one is sufficient). In the end the jury did find the two guilty. But I do wonder if the jurors who said guilty were posed a different question, how then they would have responded. The question is thus- Would you the jurors who said guilty, be prepared to put your house on your decision to convict? Its a valid question to ask. And heres why. Jurys are meant to convict as they are satisfied the accused are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Beyond a reasonable doubt. Were they properly instructed at all? FACT- there is not one single piece of hard evidence which points to the guilt of the accused. Not one. If there was I would not feel the need to write this.

There are quite a number of substantial curiosities about this case which really do point to considerable doubt. A truck load in fact. Too much to deal with completely here. This is a miscarriage of justice. Detailed analysis of the case demonstrates this. The police investigation was botched. It failed to provide any hard evidence. It was a shoe-horning exercise plain and simple. The two convicted were the last to be seen with Liam. That was their extreme bad luck.

The prosecution did offer some forensic evidence against one of the accused. Some of his red blood cells where found on a sock of the deceased. But there is a perfectly innocent and very credible explanation for this. The deceased had arrived at the accused's house that night and with others drinking commenced. The deceased was given dry clothes by the accused including socks while wet foot-ware dried?. One of the accused had cut himself verifiably in front of witnesses and blood got everywhere. This is a fact. The accused handed Liam dry clothes. Chance for transfer certainly.Forensic analysis of the house confirms there was blood everywhere - The blood of the accused. We know for a fact the deceased changed out of wet clothes.Highly lightly also that if the deceased clothes were as wet as to warrant dry replacements, it follows his footware was also wet. High chance of them being on a radiator?? I think so. If the deceased walked on the floor at all before putting shoes, transfer of blood was highly lightly.These facts are extremely hard to ignore as both a credible and probable explain nation for the accused's blood being on the deceased's sock.

As for the other traces of the accused found at the disused building, well he did himself use that house himself for drinking and courting women. Im only surprised they did not find more traces of him there. He also had verifiably cut his hand there when he punched a window in. 

A question- Are we as a society content that we can and will send the wrong people to jail- does real truth and justice matter or are we happy to convict the nearest 'best fit' like the two who are now serving Life

If I'm right which I am- who does it serve to have these men in jail, while the real killers go free to perhaps kill again? Does it serve Liam? It most certainly does not you will agree. Does it serve truth or Justice? The Northern Constabulary no doubt had a good drink and awarded medals on the back of this conviction, which can be at best described as a stain on Scottish Justice. Someone needed to be convicted. It didn't really matter who? Just getting a result was all that mattered?

I pray that the truth will come out about this. For I believe two things. Firstly the two boys did not do this. Secondly the conviction is a miscarraige of justice. First we have the grotesque murder of an innocent young man. Then we cap it off by convicting the wrong people for it. Robert Frost wrote: "the jury consists of twelve people chosen to decide who has the better lawyer". The procurator fiscal certainly did his job well. But the whole process has got us no further to the truth.

Delphioracle12 (talk)16:19, 21 December 2013