Barry George could be compensated after supreme court ruling

Britian’s top judges rule that Northern Irish pair who suffered miscarriage of justice are entitled to compensation Two men from Northern Ireland whose convictions for murder during the Troubles were quashed following the emergence of fresh evidence are entitled to compensation, the supreme court has ruled. In a new definition of what constitutes a miscarriage of justice Britain’s most senior judges said that Raymond McCartney and Eamonn MacDermott were entitled to compensation. The two men were convicted in January 1979 of murder and membership of the IRA but had their convictions quashed in February 2007. Millions of pounds could be paid to scores of other victims from Northern Ireland as a result of the decision. The court rejected a similar challenge by Andrew Adams, a former aircraft engineer, of Newcastle upon Tyne, who spent 14 years in jail before his murder conviction was ruled unsafe. Barry George, whose conviction for the murder of the TV presenter Jill Dando was quashed, has been fighting for years for compensation; he also joined the case. Nick Baird, solicitor for George, said after the judgment that he was encouraged and would be applying for the Ministry of Justice asking them to reconsider their refusal to give him compensation. The nine supreme court judges ruled that in George’s case where a ‘”new or newly discovered fact” had emerged which led to an acquittal at retrial “compensation should be paid to him under the scheme that had been set up by the statute”. By a narrow majority, the judges held that a miscarriage of justice had occurred “when a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that the evidence against a defendant has been so undermined that no conviction could possibly be based upon it”. The supreme court panel said: “A claimant for compensation will not need to prove that he was innocent of the crime but he will have to show that, on the basis of the facts as they are now known, he should not have been convicted or that conviction could not possibly be based on those facts.” Not all miscarriages of justice will lead to compensation. “Procedural deficiencies that led to irregularities in the trial or errors in the investigation of offences will not suffice to establish entitlement to compensation,” the judges ruled. McCartney, a Sinn Féin assembly member for Foyle, said his decision to pursue the case had been justified. “I feel totally vindicated,” he said. “This has been a long process and I want to pay due gratitude to my legal team who have been magnificent throughout this. The supreme court has allowed us to pursue compensation … [The] former lord chief justice (of Northern Ireland) Brian Kerr has stated in the course of the judgment that not only should we have been acquitted but shouldn’t have faced trial in the first place. ” This is damning indictment of the RUC’s (Royal Ulster Constabulary) interrogation techniques at the time and a damning indictment of the actions of the Public Prosecution Service at the time.” Adams said: “I welcome the fact that the majority of the supreme court has not agreed with the justice secretary’s proposal to solely compensate those people who he decides have been completely exonerated of the crime they were wrongly convicted of. “But I am bitterly disappointed that … [my case has not been] accepted for compensation within the new definition. I maintain my innocence of the murder of Jack Royal – as I have from day one.” Since 2006 the Ministry of Justice has awarded compensation to 59 applicants out of 228, according to figures given to the court. UK criminal justice UK supreme court Northern Ireland Jill Dando murder Crime IRA UK security and terrorism Owen Bowcott Sandra Laville guardian.co.uk

Posted by on May 11, 2011. Filed under News, Politics, World News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.