Scotched Justice

“Individuals can resist injustice, but only a community can do justice”
 
HomePortalFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog inScottish Newspapers

Share | 
 

 William Beck’s fight for Justice

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 399
Location : Glasgow
Registration date : 2008-09-03

PostSubject: William Beck’s fight for Justice   Sun Sep 07, 2008 7:29 pm

http://williambeck.wordpress.com/

News of the World November 16 2003

I was robbed of 6 yrs of my life

FURY OF SCOT JAILED ‘BY MISTAKE’ OVER ARMED RAID ON POSTAL VAN

BY JAMES MULHOLLAND

A Scots dad claims he lost six years of his life after being wrongly jailed for a vicious armed robbery.

William beck has spent 21 years trying to clear his name after accusing his legal team of failing to spot he was being framed.

The dad-of-two maintains he was mistakenly convicted of a violent raid on a post van.

He’s now handed his case dossier to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, which probes miscarriages of justice.

And the 42-year-old from Glasgow, blasted: “I’ve been stitched up and now I want something done about it”

Jobless William claims cops investigating the original crime :

ONLY arrested him because he was a petty thief

TOLD vital witnesses to keep quiet

INFORMED the cast-iron alibi he gave them, and

HANDED round a snap of him before a crucial identity parade.

His nightmare began in December 1981 when raiders attacked two Post Office workers with hammers escaping with 21,000 pounds.

William was arrested four days later.

He told us “The cops needed to get somebody and I was an easy target as I had previous convictions for stealing motors.

“But I’m not a violent guy - I had no record for assault at all”

He said one witness told cops the robber was aged around 40 and had a moustache.

But in the ID parade, the man picked clean-shaven William, then 20.

He blasted : “The people who witnessed the raid were supposed to come along and point out the guy responsible.

“But before the parade, officers showed them a photograph of me and said , “This is the man we have in custody”

“How can you then rely upon their evidence ?”.

William originally told officers he’d been talking to a mobile grocer called Robert Hamilton outside his Glasgow home at the time of the raid.

But cops said Hamilton refused to confirm it.

And when the case came to trial at the High Court in Edinburgh the following March, William’s legal team did not query their claim.

He was then sentenced to six years in prison.

He told us “I was absolutely horrified”

“I can remember being dragged away kicking and screaming.

“I was really angry at my defence team, which had been led by QC Bill Taylor - he also represented Lockerbie bomber Aldelbaset Al-Megrahi.

“I had witnesses who would have put me in the clear but Taylor didn’t call them”

In prison, William continued to maintain his innocence and even REFUSED parole - since he believed accepting it would be an admission of guilt.

And on his release in 1988, he began working to clear his name, swotting up on Scots Law and reviewing the evidence.

in 1993, he visited Hamilton and was shocked when the grocer told him he’d been warned by the cops to keep quiet.

William told us “I am really angry about it - this has ruined my life”

A SCCRC spokesman said last night “We are considering this case”
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.torley.org
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 399
Location : Glasgow
Registration date : 2008-09-03

PostSubject: Wullie's Conviction   Tue Sep 09, 2008 1:56 am

http://williambeck.blogspot.com/
Basically i was convicted in 1982 of Assault & Robbery in Livingston.
I was convicted on the evidence of Two Positive Identifications, One of whom just happened to be an Off-Duty Policeman?
Convicted by a Majority of 8-7
I have protested my Innocence from day one and continue to do so.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/425979886/
When the SCCRC was set up i was advised to go to them by John Carroll Solicitor.
After giving them numerous competent Arguable Grounds of appeal i was shocked to find they did not interview pertinent witnesses and even had the cheek to dismiss their evidence as Hearsay without ever speaking to them.
I have a tape recording which should be on You-Tube Soon of Robin Johnston Assuring me that Solicitor Shaw was sent a copy of his own ID Parade report when clearly this was never done by them while they investigated my grounds.
After they concluded my appeal to them and refused to refer i supplied them with a copy of the tape recording and it was only after hearing this, that they actually Sent Shaw his own ID Parade Report. Watch You-tube for this.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/424531923/
The Evidence for conviction
Muckle and Ashford, Nigel Muckle said in court he saw two men getting into a blue ford Granada car hands clasped in front of them concealing something, They both got into car at same time, The driver took his hood down and he saw his face, Claimed i was the driver.
All other witnesses said they could not recognise them as they were wearing Balaclavas.
All other witnesses said they had split up and entered the car at different times.
Steven Clark said he chased them to Newbridge and still could not identify them as they were wearing Balaclavas, His wife was also with him.
Ashford said in court: He was round the corner from Muckle and saw the car Leaving the Riggs and it passed him by, there was only the driver and again he said this was me, there was nothing suspicious about the car and nothing to attract his attention to it ,But he wrote down the Registration No of the car.
In his statement which is consistent with the other witnesses he states: He was chasing a man with an Attache case 18in by 18in on this he cannot be mistaken, This guy smashed his window, and he chased him into Raeburn Rigg where he saw someone shouting out the Reg No of the car.
If this is true then his evidence in court was lies SCCRC would not entertain this argument. indeed they have never asked Ashford about this, Even after i supplied them with his Address.
The only witnesses they interviewed were ones they could get to uphold their evidence and keep conviction safe.
They did not appear to want to interview or indeed entertain fresh evidence because this would make Taylor look incompetent. Dont forget Taylor sat on their Board and also defended the Lockerbie Bomber, Would they investigate defective Representation grounds against him? I never thought so from the Beginning.
Evidence the Jury never heard.
David Livingstone, in his Crown Precognition states the driver was forty years old with brown hair and Moustache (Exact Description of one of the Robbers)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/425979872/
Donald Shaw Solicitor,
He wrote on his ID Parade report that witness 11 (Muckle) had No 2 out his mouth without turning to view the parade. He was cited as a witness because of this and Taylor never called his evidence even though he now concedes, It would certainly raise a large Question Mark over Muckles evidence
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/425979884/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/424593705/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/424593741/
When i challenged Mr Taylor for not calling this evidence he said he Did Not Want To Be Seen To Be Calling The Police LIARS, Is that not his Job?
He even now has the Audacity to say he never knew about thwe lawyers evidence even though he was on the witness list and his Report was available.
Mr Shaws recent statement to SCCRC makes great reading but still SCCRC do not refer case and say it could have made the jury think Muckle was more positive in his Identification of me (Bullshit) You Decide
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/424609023/
Allan Beck.
On his Crown Precognition Keegan wrote (This also proves Keegan had Crown Witness statements at the time of my trial) Took one of the hammers to house of W Beck night before i was arrested, This would mean that it was not in my possession at the time of the Robbery, Which Crown sought to convince the Jury of by producing two hammers found in my house.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/498237244/
Forensic Evidence.
I claimed my defence team were negligent and defectively represented me by not calling this Crucial Forensic evidence SCCRC never asked any of them why they never called this see case of Hemphill V HMA
http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/82_67.html
See also the Forensic report in my case were the hammers were checked for hair and blood and nothing was found.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/498283951/
I would also argue that it is uncommon for people not to have more than one hammer in their house.
SCCRC agreed with me that the judge had no right to direct Jury to only consider the evidence of Louise Morris and Myself as she was the only person to see me between 1 and 6pm.
Witnesses spoke of seeing me and Louise at St Enoch Square Glasgow about 5.15.
When i argued this point with SCCRC they agreed but said it would only take Half an Hour to travel from Livingston to Glasgow Cross, Although the make no reference of having consulted an expert on these timings.
I further argued that this timing is impossible by todays road standards never mind Back in 1982 when there was frost on the Roads.
I further argued that there was no evidence of this happeniong in my case. Steven Clark chased the stolen car from Livingston to Newbridge Roundabout and it was then dumped in Kirkliston which is nowhere near Glasgow. I expected SCCRC to consult an expert on these timings and instead they just said the timings were before the jury at my trial.
This was not the case as no one at trial spoke of ever having travalled these places one after the other.
The evidence trail Died at Kirkliston and there was no evidence that after dumping the car in Kirkliston that the two robbers ever went to Glasgow nor was there any evidence of another Vehicle being used.
John MacManus of MOJO has said the times could not have been done but SCCRC should have sought expert opinions like they do with other cases. The simplest check is Google and by todays road conditions Livingston to Glasgow Cross cannot be done in Half An Hour.

SCCRC and Current Law
http://www.sccrc.org.uk/legislation/sccrc-current-law.htm
Even though they agreed that the conduct at my ID Parade was not what one would expect today,
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/424549189/
They refuse to apply their Current Law Policy to this.
I also complained that the police should not have shown Photos of me directly before my ID Parade. SCCRCs answer is as follows
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/424564797/
Now by their own standards Above, every rule in the book was broken at my ID Parade.
They showed photos before during and after my ID Parade, See the Following.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/426006708/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/426006708/
Clark and Callan also spoke in court of photos being shown, (I will eventually link all these via flickr along with every page of SCCRC statements of Reasons) But their statements are available.
Another one available which Taylor never called was Hugh Wilson.
Hugh Wilson States that he was shown photos and he also states Ashford ran into Raeburn Rigg Livingston.

All the above from Livingstone to Wilson represent evidence which should have been heard by the Jury meaning i was Defectively represented.
Hemphill won his appeal on Forensic evidence alone not being called.
SCCRC also referred the cases of Kidd and Gair which are similar to mine in respect of withheld Crown evidence Material to their cases. yet mine with more evidence is not Referred by them.
I would challenge them to answer this but they will refuse to do so as they have with most of my grouds already.
Lastly Appeal In 1982.
I was told by Appeals Manager Tom Higgins that you only have one chance at Appealing Indeed my recent Appeal to Lodge Grounds outwith time in March 14th 2006 it was refused on the premise that i have already had an appeal in 1982
This is far from the truth even conceded by Tom Higgins who agrees that my hearing in 1982 was merely only an application for leave to Appeal and wasn't actually an appeal.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/498453037/
http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2006hcjac35.html
This being the case i should now be allowed to lodge Grounds outwith time.
See also letter from Ross Harper from 1982 supporting my Leave Application and not an Appeal. I have never had an Appeal as such.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/498430506/
The following is what Tom Higgins told me was the interlocutor from my appeal in 1982
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/488368176/
Legal aid.
Everyone charged with serious crimes is entitled to be legally represented in court.
This right was denied me because after I sacked Taylor he told Legal Aid Board that i had no Grounds of Appeal and legal Aid was refused. For proof of this read.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/425979891/
What right did he have to do this?
Anyway this resulted in me having to conduct my own Application For leave to appeal which in turn resulted in me being dragged out of Court screaming at the Judges when they would not let me speak and kept dismissing me with a wave of their hands.
After being dragged out screaming i expected to be taken back into court when i had calmed down and allowed to finish my arguments, This did not happen and i was dragged straight back to Saughton Prison. So much for Equality of arms eh? Shocked
SCCRC also agreed that my case was similar to Granger Maxwell And Boner who were all denied legal aid and won their appeals to European Court.
But they have applied the wrong test to my case. They went on to say that although my case is similar my grounds of appeal should be considered.
My Grounds of appeal are Irrelevant here on this argument because had i been granted legal aid another QC might have found the grounds that are now available but being denied the chance to argue in court because of The SCCRCs dodgy views and their covering up for Taylor

Haggerty Case
Please find link to this case which i Submitted to SCCRC that my case was similar
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/425979875/
I told them that Ann Callan said in court she was shown photos of me before my ID Parade, See charge to Jury
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/426006723/
She also said in her statement that she was shown photos,
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/426006708/
I also told them that the two Arresting officers Dickson and Peacock had participated in the running of my ID Parade with one assisting with Witnesses, See ID Parade Report,
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/425979877/
This should have been enough in my opinion, for referral by SCCRC of my case to High Court.
At least another three witnesses said in court that they had been shown photos.
SCCRC have never answered me on this Haggerty case. They Just Point Blank Refused and have never Mentioned this submission.
Can SCCRC continue to try to convince people they are there to cure Miscarriages of Justice after refusing to refer my case? I Really dont think so

Wait for my Judicial Review where i will be able to challenge all their decisions.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.torley.org
 
William Beck’s fight for Justice
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Justice: Leonor Cipriano's lawyer is going to request the annulment of today's court session
» William and Kate at Big Cats Movie Premiere
» Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC
» Justice Barnes I had a dream. Delusions of Grandeur
» Honorable Justice Barnes - I might have some questions ?

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Scotched Justice :: Scottish Miscarriage of Justice Cases-
Jump to: