Page 3 of 4

Re: Eddie Gilfoyle "framed by Merseyside Police"

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 8:01 pm
by woodman
koekjoumoer wrote:How so? do you info crucial to the case? In which case why did you not speak up in 1993?/
Probably following the example of a Chief Constable :wink:

koekjoumoer wrote:This looks like a case of bungling cops screwing up a crime scene. Still, twice befor an appeal court, twice the verdict was left to stand, nothing like a third bite of the cherry.
koekjoumoer wrote:hardly the simplest explanation, when compared to what Gilfoyle says: My wife committed suicide and I was wrongly accused of murder.

Do you actually have an opinion Koko? What is it? Innocent and judges and Police corrupt? or guilty cos the judges decided so?

Re: Eddie Gilfoyle "framed by Merseyside Police"

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 3:13 pm
by koekjoumoer
My opinion is based upon what I know:- Gilfoyle has been in jail for a long time for a murder he reckons he did not do. he feels that he was wrongly convicted and sets to prove that in court. he has had two bites of the cherry in appeal court but hey lets go again shall we.

If he is not guilty it will be down to poor, bungling police screwing a crime scene.

There will be no cover up, why cover up the murder of a pregnant lady......to suggest a vast cover up and conspiracy is ridiculous and unless you have some evidence you are speculating from la la land.

Trust me cock up beats conspiracy every time!

Re: Eddie Gilfoyle "framed by Merseyside Police"

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:09 pm
by woodman
I was asking for your opinion on his guilt, not a rehash of your last post, what is your opinion?

Do you think he is guilty or not guilty?

As far as I see it, if you think he's guilty the he's done his time, if you feel he's not guilty (which any fool can see, there WAS reasonable doubt against convicting him), you make light of him going to court for a third time, not nice is it?, going to get your false conviction quashed after losing 18 years of your life, using the same justice system that caused it all in the first place.

koekjoumoer wrote:There will be no cover up, why cover up the murder of a pregnant lady......to suggest a vast cover up and conspiracy is ridiculous and unless you have some evidence you are speculating from la la land.


Why cover up the murder of a pregnant lady? Is that a serious question? There'd be many people who'd want to cover up a murder. As I've said, in my opinion it wasn't murder.

Re: Eddie Gilfoyle "framed by Merseyside Police"

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:47 pm
by Prajna
Well read the CCRC Appeal. That answers some of the questions. Seems to me he was not only guilty but cynically so, based on circumstantial evidence. Then again, it seems it is only circumstantial evidence that convicted him.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2000/81.html

Re: Eddie Gilfoyle "framed by Merseyside Police"

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 9:07 pm
by woodman
From what I can see, is that he only had a ten minute window in which he could have killed her, this being between 11:15 and 11:25. It seems highly unlikely to me that as she had allegedly expressed her concerns to a workmate that she had had been persuaded to write suicide letters and she was worried about that, that she would then go along with putting a noose around her neck. There were also no signs of any struggle.

The expert who had previously testified that the letters may have not been written by the deceased but by gilfoyle, has later changed his mind. A witness also states she saw the deceased in the afternoon, stating that it was definetly her as the woman she spoke to was pregnant and not as has been suggested that her was the deceaseds sister.

I believe that there are a number of reasonable doubts and that the conviction was unsafe, I could be wrong, but if there is reasonable doubt, then there shouldn't have been a conviction.

:peace:

Re: Eddie Gilfoyle "framed by Merseyside Police"

PostPosted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 8:58 am
by koekjoumoer
Woodman, this case is going to appeal for the third time. I have said lets wait for the courts descision. Unlike you who has based his opinion, in part, on the testimony of a bloke in the back of his cab....lol

As for the rather absurd notion that it is a police conspiracy cause she was pregnant with a officers baby............I will not comment any more, just plain absurd.

Re: Eddie Gilfoyle "framed by Merseyside Police"

PostPosted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:35 am
by Prajna
ffs, Koko, do you only read the last post in the thread? I just posted a link to the full text of the Criminal Cases Review Commission Appeal. Woody read it and is making intelligent, informed comment based on a full accounting of the facts known. You, on the other hand, are still speculating based on media propaganda and institutional bias.

Read it, and then at least you will be able to make self-righteous comments based on a few facts.

Re: Eddie Gilfoyle "framed by Merseyside Police"

PostPosted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:23 pm
by koekjoumoer
woodman wrote:Many years ago, around 1995 when I was a taxi driver, I picked up a man quite regularly who told me of the time he'd spent in prison, his cell mate was Eddie Gilfoyle and this chap told me that Eddie always protested his innocence and that he used to cry himself to sleep every night, "in my mind, no guilty man does that" he used to say.


This was woodmans starting point.

I will wait for the THIRD appeal......

Re: Eddie Gilfoyle "framed by Merseyside Police"

PostPosted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:44 pm
by woodman
Cheers prajna.

koekjoumoer wrote:Woodman, this case is going to appeal for the third time. I have said lets wait for the courts descision. Unlike you who has based his opinion, in part, on the testimony of a bloke in the back of his cab....lol
Honestly, I really do hope you are not a Police Officer, I've seen enough immature, brainwashed officers lacking any real common sense to last me a lifetime and it's not really acceptable on this forum to make silly ad hominem comments that do not contribute to the debate. That may be acceptable on Police forums, but not here.

Cherry picking what I've said, again makes you look like a silly, immature individual. I've said that I've read about this case over 18 years, it is NOT just based on the comments of someone who KNEW and spent a considerable amount of time with Eddie.

The courts decision means jack shit to Eddie Gilfoyle, it may clear his name it may not, his life he cannot get back. If he is innocent then that's a tragedy. "Let's wait for that decision" is not an opinion, you either have your own mind and give your honest opinion, that's the point of a debate, or you don't and choose to accept whatever some court says.

You are someone who would think of people like, Stefan Kiszko (innocent) as a murderer, Paul Hill, Gerry Conlon, Paddy Armstrong, Carole Richardson (all innocent) as murderers, Anne Maguire, Patrick Maguire, Patrick Maguire (Son of Anne and Patrick), Vincent Maguire (Son of Anne and Patrick), Sean Smyth, Patrick O'Neill and Patrick "Giuseppe" Conlon (all innocent) as murderers, Kevin John Callan (innocent) as a murderer, Graham Huckerby (innocent) as an armed robber and Suzanne Holdsworth (innocent) as a murderer, simply because a judge and his court decided they were.

koekjoumoer wrote:As for the rather absurd notion that it is a police conspiracy cause she was pregnant with a officers baby............I will not comment any more, just plain absurd.
It's not really acceptable to use another's comment against me, please direct your argument to them.

Re: Eddie Gilfoyle "framed by Merseyside Police"

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 1:32 pm
by woodman