Donate SIGN UP

40 Years Ago.

Avatar Image
tonyav | 19:38 Fri 21st Nov 2014 | News
50 Answers
I can hardly believe it's been 40 since the Birmingham pub bombings, and still no one bought to justice for these atrocities.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/magazine/birmingham-six-40th-anniversary-of-pub-bombings-that-led-to-one-of-the-worst-miscarriages-of-british-justice/ar-BBf1WIp
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 50rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Avatar Image
If the real perpetrators had been brought to justice I imagine they would have been released and would hold senior positions in the government of Northern Ireland by now.
20:11 Fri 21st Nov 2014
I read it through Tilly, I hadn't heard it before, thank you. I've just found Christy's, off to listen now.
Is this right Tilly2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5aLDjaLfLI
// Good job there wasn't a death sentence still available to the judge at the time of the trial. //

Oh god there were judicial assides on that one. there is at least one trial judge ( perhaps Lord Donaldosn and perhaps not ) who regretted that very thing, so they couldnt hang the now-known-to-be innocent non-bombers.

My Lord when asked twenty years later if he regretted saying it, said no

I recall those days with a shudder
sorry Tony - didn't see yours.
justice for those killed in the bombings was hampered by the corrupt police fitting up 6 innocent people. Once they were convicted, the Police could give up trying to find the real criminals.
Question Author
No problem jj, she as it in duplicate now.



Yes, doesn't bare thinking about, Peter.
-- answer removed --
Thank you both. I did find that but was hoping for a vid. of Christy himself. I don't think there is one. Never mind.
Question Author
I'm not sure about that, db.
weren't they on a train at the time?
I can't copy it for son reason, but the link says "having had their innocence proved"- which sounds like a definite no.
-- answer removed --
It's just unusual to say "proven innocent". Usually it's "not guilty"- which is very, very different.
...but wiki just says their convictions were declared "unsafe and unsatisfactory and were quashed"...
-- answer removed --
^^^^ What Pixie says!

"unsafe and unsatisfactory and were quashed"... is very different from Not Guilty. To this day I still struggle to see any innocence in any of those convicted but we pay the price for peace, roll over and release the terrorists
// To this day I still struggle to see any innocence in any of those convicted but we pay the price for peace, roll over and release the terrorists //

The Birmingham Six had their convictions quash long before the Good Friday Agreement and prisoner releases.
I agree with dive, pixie and slappy. As for the Maguire 7, I have never understood why a normal household would need an industrial-sized quantity of surgical gloves.
// Their second full appeal, in 1991, was allowed. New evidence of police fabrication and suppression of evidence, the successful attacks on both the confessions and the 1975 forensic evidence caused the Crown to decide not to resist the appeals. The Court of Appeal, constituted by Lord Justices Lloyd, Mustill and Farquharson, stated of the forensic evidence that "Dr. Skuse's conclusion was wrong, and demonstrably wrong, judged even by the state of forensic science in 1974." //

They were convicted on forensic evidence. The evidence was wrong. So with a successful conviction, the Police did not try to find the real murderers.
-- answer removed --

21 to 40 of 50rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

40 Years Ago.

Answer Question >>