Barry George cleared of Jill Dando murder

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 01 Aug 2008, 23:29

Amazed this guy was ever convicted,there seemed little evidence against him. i think the police didn't have a clue who the killer was and with such a high profile case had to get a conviction.hence the local patsy,Barry George who apparently was quite slow.he'll now be in line for a few bob compo and it's unlikely the killer will ever be caught.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7536815.stm

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 02 Aug 2008, 07:36

There's a fine line between "not guilty" and "innocent".

The guy probably did do it.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 02 Aug 2008, 10:24

Surely not guilty and innocent are the same thing?

If he did it, then he's guilty but as there wasnt enough evidence he was found not guilty and thats that I guess.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 02 Aug 2008, 11:25

Cue Romero saying he should burn in hell and did it.

grim_tales wrote:Surely not guilty and innocent are the same thing?

Nope. Not guilty can mean there wasn't enough evidence but the person did it. Innocent means they didn't do it.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 02 Aug 2008, 12:29

Ahh I see what you mean Brad fair enough.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 02 Aug 2008, 12:43

What Brad said...

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 02 Aug 2008, 13:04

usually these verdicts hinge on a technicality,this didn't there was very little evidence on Him. a speck of gunpowder on an overcoat that could have come from elsewhere and one witness saw him in the street hours before the murder.well he lived round the corner so that wouldn't be unusual. this is a person of extreme low intelligence and i find it hard to believe the police couldn't have easily tied him in knots in interrogation.but they got nothing.he was a patsy just like Stefan Klitko years before.

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 02 Aug 2008, 13:08

bradavon wrote:Cue Romero saying he should burn in hell and did it.

you are totally wrong.Romero has posted on dvdforums thread about this case ,the documentaries he has seen on this case have convinced him he is "innocent beyond words"

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 02 Aug 2008, 23:49

A rapist and stalker of women who fantasised about violence and liked guns.

You can see why he was a suspect.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 03 Aug 2008, 09:14

True. He said the reason he couldnt have killed Dando was because he was stalking another woman at the time, apparently. Shouldnt he now be charged for that (although he's now said he no longer stalks women).

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 03 Aug 2008, 10:38

Markgway wrote:A rapist and stalker of women who fantasised about violence and liked guns..

don't think he was convicted of actual rape. no-one said he was a nice guy but that doesn't make him guilty.

Markgway wrote:You can see why he was a suspect.

his background was perfect for a patsy.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 03 Aug 2008, 17:43

Maybe. If it wasn't him I hope they catch whomever it was - though I doubt they ever will now. I'm not gonna shed any tears over his time behind bars because he was a scumbag clearly. He should count it as time served for the rape. I know they have to give him comp but I hope it's the minimum amount available. Then we never hear from him again.

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 03 Aug 2008, 18:57

He already did the time for the attempted rape (1982)

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 03 Aug 2008, 19:59

"He was initially charged with rape but because of a dispute over forensic evidence, the police reluctantly accepted his plea to attempted rape, partly to spare the victim from giving evidence."

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/arti ... sorry.html