By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Unfortunately there are loads of people on here who try to make a case about the Police protecting themselves. However the facts show otherwise. The police arrested the 3 officers and put the case to the CPS. Due to the serious nature it was not considered by the CPS locally. They rejected the case put as not being strong enough to be put to a jury. It wasn't the police or local CPS who made that decision it was at the very top level.
As far as lack of evidence is concerned the chain found in the house had paint matching the paint in Morris house. He denied this was his chain and got a cousin to be a similar chain to show that. When put to him by his legal team that the police had evidence this was his chain he changed his story and claimed he had left it there the day before the murder when he had sex with Mandy Power. The phone records show that at the time he claimed to have had sex with her he was in the house making a phone call to his girlfriend. The family say she would never go near him let alone have an affair. She was petrified of him.
The programme reckons that 3 people put the Lewis family in the area. According to a taxi driver the 2 brothers were walking towards the house about 1/2 mile away on what is quite a busy street with loads of houses. If you know the area it is the main road from Clydach Mond to Graig Cefn Parc. The woman concerned who claimed to have seen the brother put her evidence to the first trial. She claimed to have never seen him before except they went to the same gym. His brief decided not to make the same mistake for the 2nd trial and the BBC questions why was she wasnt put forward. Clearly Mansfield thought better of it. The third witness has now come forward 20 years later. He admits being in trouble with the law. He claims to have seen this person at 4am whilst Lewis was walking up the mountain.
Trampie and others claim Morris had no motive. There was also no motive for Alison Lewis who was in a happy relationship with Mandy. In fact, Mandy had told friends she was the happiest she had ever been since being in this relationship. Yet people have tried to suggest Alison Lewis had murdered Mandy.. There was no evidence against her.
Much of the police suspicion revolves around the behaviour of Stuart Lewis on the night of the murder. He was the Inspector in charge and left his post on finding out who had been murdered and never disclosed his whereabouts. By that time the fire brigade were already on the scene and had found the 4 bodies. The Regional Crime Team took over the investigation.
My mother and sister had been speaking to Mandy 2 or 3 days before this happened. Mam was a friend of Doris and my sister had known both Mandy and Mandy Jewell since schooldays. They saw her on the Mond in Clydach.
In the days and weeks following te murder there was an awful lot of misinformation. There were rumours of others involved who hadnt been mentioned here but the police cleared them.
Trampie says that nobody saw Morris. There was a witness who actually gave evidence to the court that she had seen someone of Morris description in the area that night so yet again it is another false statement.
I rarely read your posts anymore, they are so long and boring.
Was Mandy in a relationship with Morris ?, did the prosecution think Mandy was in a relationship with Morris ?
Were the children out with Mandy on the night of the murders ?
Who saw Morris in the area that night, a few people seen what looke like the other suspects, where was Morris seen, was he bloodstained or carrying a large pole by any chance ?
[Post edited 25 Oct 2020 11:59]
For your first question only he can answer that. I have given you a possible scenario which you reject. There were other possibilities but as I say only he can answer that.
For your second point the family have already said no and the police didnt think so either. Morris didnt bring it up either. He only brought the sex issue up when it became clear they had evidence linking the chain in his house to him and that was just before the first trial. Up until then he had denied it was his chain and the sex claim wasnt made
Yes they were. As I understand it they were at her cousins house who dropped them off. He was a met office policeman who also was the person who had to identify the bodies. Not that any of this matters.
It was a girl who lived locally and she gave evidence. I wasnt there. I dont know whether he was bloodstained and I very much doubt he was carrying a pole considering it was left at the property. The court heard the girls evidence and obviously the jury believed it. The woman in the film who claimed to have seen Lewis was found not to be reliable. Read Mandy's sisters account. One guy has now come forward after 20 years and I find his story unbelievable. The other one claims to have seen 2 brothers 1/2 mile away on a road where traffic passes.
For your first question only he can answer that. I have given you a possible scenario which you reject. There were other possibilities but as I say only he can answer that.
For your second point the family have already said no and the police didnt think so either. Morris didnt bring it up either. He only brought the sex issue up when it became clear they had evidence linking the chain in his house to him and that was just before the first trial. Up until then he had denied it was his chain and the sex claim wasnt made
Yes they were. As I understand it they were at her cousins house who dropped them off. He was a met office policeman who also was the person who had to identify the bodies. Not that any of this matters.
It was a girl who lived locally and she gave evidence. I wasnt there. I dont know whether he was bloodstained and I very much doubt he was carrying a pole considering it was left at the property. The court heard the girls evidence and obviously the jury believed it. The woman in the film who claimed to have seen Lewis was found not to be reliable. Read Mandy's sisters account. One guy has now come forward after 20 years and I find his story unbelievable. The other one claims to have seen 2 brothers 1/2 mile away on a road where traffic passes.
No motive, no DNA, no witnesses (you are claiming one witnesses now, show me link so I can see what the context is - location, bloodstained, armed with weapon etc)
Continually being banned by Planet Swans for Porthcawl and then being reinstated.
No motive, no DNA, no witnesses (you are claiming one witnesses now, show me link so I can see what the context is - location, bloodstained, armed with weapon etc)
Perhaps instead of just making statements you look fully into the court case but even then many things arent actually printed which is why I trust those that were there rather than a book or TV programme. I have doubts over anybody who claims to be able to recognise someone in the early hours when its dark whether they claim to have seen Morris or the Lewis. You are in a house and you happen to see someone clearly or you are simply passing in a car on an unlit road and remember that person 20 years later. Given the route Morris allegedly took there wouldnt have many people would have witnessed him. I still find it unbelievable that 2 experienced cops would have gone by bus or car and walked along a road with quite a bit of traffic for 1/2 mile . I would have expected them to park somewhere quiet and close and have an easy get away rather than supposedly one walking 4 miles over a country road. Smells very fishy to me but then you believe what you like. The jury are the key people and they have found him guilty twice,
Yes, and that was why it was pointless you asking who was killed first!
He still could have killed them first as they came in, the granny was in bed, if he killed the granny first (experts think she was killed first but this wasn't focused on at trial), then experts don't think he would have had time to have done the crimes per their timeline.
[Post edited 25 Oct 2020 13:26]
Continually being banned by Planet Swans for Porthcawl and then being reinstated.
That is the whole point Perch, he might have done it, he might not, but he was convicted, should he have been convicted beyond reasonable doubt, that is why the fuss.
Continually being banned by Planet Swans for Porthcawl and then being reinstated.
He still could have killed them first as they came in, the granny was in bed, if he killed the granny first (experts think she was killed first but this wasn't focused on at trial), then experts don't think he would have had time to have done the crimes per their timeline.
[Post edited 25 Oct 2020 13:26]
You keep talking about experts ie the ones in the programme. What about the others who think differently. What about the UKs leading barrister in miscarriage cases. He decided not to question it and neither did the QC in the original trial who has acted in many murder cases. You just dont want to believe Morris did it and are trying to find excuses just like the programme. Do you also think Jack The Ripper wasnt a man but a woman. The guy who wrote this book has written another book claiming that as well.
You keep talking about experts ie the ones in the programme. What about the others who think differently. What about the UKs leading barrister in miscarriage cases. He decided not to question it and neither did the QC in the original trial who has acted in many murder cases. You just dont want to believe Morris did it and are trying to find excuses just like the programme. Do you also think Jack The Ripper wasnt a man but a woman. The guy who wrote this book has written another book claiming that as well.
Morris is a nutter, I'm not making excuses for him, my reason for passing comment is there doesn't seem to be enough evidence against him for this crime to warrant a guilty verdict in a murder case, yet a guilty verdict was achieved, other major cases over the decades I've heard about where there has been a conviction and I've thought crickey how did they arrive at that verdict has nearly always been overturned the last one being the Ched Evans case, this one I would not put money on being overturned because of the police involvement.
Do you understand people's views that have been expressed on here as well outside this board that they are uneasy about the outcome ? Do respect their position to hold that view and that in lots of cases they have no agenda, for or against anybody or any group they just think the verdict is suspect.
Continually being banned by Planet Swans for Porthcawl and then being reinstated.
His record is outstanding though in overturning cases whatever your thoughts on him. Wasnt he the guy behind the Birmingham pub bombers getting over turned, The Guilford case, The Lynette White case but he failed to do that here.
Morris is a nutter, I'm not making excuses for him, my reason for passing comment is there doesn't seem to be enough evidence against him for this crime to warrant a guilty verdict in a murder case, yet a guilty verdict was achieved, other major cases over the decades I've heard about where there has been a conviction and I've thought crickey how did they arrive at that verdict has nearly always been overturned the last one being the Ched Evans case, this one I would not put money on being overturned because of the police involvement.
Do you understand people's views that have been expressed on here as well outside this board that they are uneasy about the outcome ? Do respect their position to hold that view and that in lots of cases they have no agenda, for or against anybody or any group they just think the verdict is suspect.
I respect anyone's right to an opinion but I would expect those like yourself to look at everything and not focus on something. The TV programme was biased. It showed a one sided opinion as did the book. It didnt for example show why the woman wasnt used in the second trial. From Mandy's sisters statement it is clear she was shown as an unreliable witness so the defence rightly didnt put her up the second time. Some bloke is dragged up 20 years later without any real questioning. It didnt mention a woman claimed to have see Morris or someone like him near the scene. It didnt mention his version has no support. It didnt challenge his claim to have had sex when the phone records showed he was at home.
Sadly many blame the Police as it was one of theirs involved. No doubt the behaviour of the Inspector has fuelled some's belief and the way they were originally questioned was a major police error.
However the bottom line is whether Morris committed the murders not whether the Lewis family did and those that saw his evidence were totally convinced as 2 guilty verdicts prove .
There is much you and I dont know. The fact he claimed never to be upstairs in the house but his chain was found there being just one example. You keep saying there was no motive but there clearly was. You go on about DNA. Forensic scientist were questioned by defence and prosecution as were other witnesses. It was a 11 week trial far longer than most others.
Programmes like that are always biased.It's the reason they make such programmes,viz,to fuel speculation that will resonate . There was no further evidence whatsoever presented in this programme ,none, but it did the job of keeping the pot boiling . There will never ever be a BBC programme commending anything Police do but always there will be those that feed on controversy.
I respect anyone's right to an opinion but I would expect those like yourself to look at everything and not focus on something. The TV programme was biased. It showed a one sided opinion as did the book. It didnt for example show why the woman wasnt used in the second trial. From Mandy's sisters statement it is clear she was shown as an unreliable witness so the defence rightly didnt put her up the second time. Some bloke is dragged up 20 years later without any real questioning. It didnt mention a woman claimed to have see Morris or someone like him near the scene. It didnt mention his version has no support. It didnt challenge his claim to have had sex when the phone records showed he was at home.
Sadly many blame the Police as it was one of theirs involved. No doubt the behaviour of the Inspector has fuelled some's belief and the way they were originally questioned was a major police error.
However the bottom line is whether Morris committed the murders not whether the Lewis family did and those that saw his evidence were totally convinced as 2 guilty verdicts prove .
There is much you and I dont know. The fact he claimed never to be upstairs in the house but his chain was found there being just one example. You keep saying there was no motive but there clearly was. You go on about DNA. Forensic scientist were questioned by defence and prosecution as were other witnesses. It was a 11 week trial far longer than most others.
I read somewhere the 2 brothers were suspects and under investigation for an extended period and it was only after 21 months that they looked at Morris. I’d have thought that while they were investigating the brothers and the ex wife, the murder squad would have put forensic teams through the brothers houses, cars, work place, police cars the lot. If they did t, then surely given the horrific injuries the victims suffered there would have been some DNA on their clothes, cars , chairs etc. If they found the sum total of zilch, that suggests to me the brothers etc werent involved.
I respect anyone's right to an opinion but I would expect those like yourself to look at everything and not focus on something. The TV programme was biased. It showed a one sided opinion as did the book. It didnt for example show why the woman wasnt used in the second trial. From Mandy's sisters statement it is clear she was shown as an unreliable witness so the defence rightly didnt put her up the second time. Some bloke is dragged up 20 years later without any real questioning. It didnt mention a woman claimed to have see Morris or someone like him near the scene. It didnt mention his version has no support. It didnt challenge his claim to have had sex when the phone records showed he was at home.
Sadly many blame the Police as it was one of theirs involved. No doubt the behaviour of the Inspector has fuelled some's belief and the way they were originally questioned was a major police error.
However the bottom line is whether Morris committed the murders not whether the Lewis family did and those that saw his evidence were totally convinced as 2 guilty verdicts prove .
There is much you and I dont know. The fact he claimed never to be upstairs in the house but his chain was found there being just one example. You keep saying there was no motive but there clearly was. You go on about DNA. Forensic scientist were questioned by defence and prosecution as were other witnesses. It was a 11 week trial far longer than most others.
I respect anyone's right to an opinion but I would expect those like yourself to look at everything and not focus on something. The TV programme was biased. It showed a one sided opinion as did the book. It didnt for example show why the woman wasnt used in the second trial. From Mandy's sisters statement it is clear she was shown as an unreliable witness so the defence rightly didnt put her up the second time. Some bloke is dragged up 20 years later without any real questioning. It didnt mention a woman claimed to have see Morris or someone like him near the scene. It didnt mention his version has no support. It didnt challenge his claim to have had sex when the phone records showed he was at home.
Sadly many blame the Police as it was one of theirs involved. No doubt the behaviour of the Inspector has fuelled some's belief and the way they were originally questioned was a major police error.
However the bottom line is whether Morris committed the murders not whether the Lewis family did and those that saw his evidence were totally convinced as 2 guilty verdicts prove .
There is much you and I dont know. The fact he claimed never to be upstairs in the house but his chain was found there being just one example. You keep saying there was no motive but there clearly was. You go on about DNA. Forensic scientist were questioned by defence and prosecution as were other witnesses. It was a 11 week trial far longer than most others.
There has been a few TV programmes about it and apparently some books, I haven't seen any books. I read press reports at the time.
I look at everything but you don't, you just look at Morris and think he has done it (that's your right and he might have done it) but you don't look at the other suspects, that is why I've said to you from the get go there were others in the frame who's stories don't add up and they have stronger motives and they have DNA at the scene, between Mandy's legs wasn't it ?, it was years before Morris was done for it that tells you something in itself, it was not clear cut.
If you think this case is a clear cut case of who done it you are mistaken and there is little point in conversing with you.
The issue is if all cases are judged to the same standard there is going to be an awful lot of innocence people in prison for crimes they did not commit, as no witnesses, no DNA, no motive but still found guilty will result an an awful lot of innocence people being jailed - do you understand that ?
Do you accept that if society jail's people for murder when there is no witnesses to the murder, no DNA, fingerprints and no motive then there are going to be lots of miscarriages of justice - forget Morris, I'm not talking about Morris here, it's right and correct that people question this verdict as the big picture if all cases were similar to this society would have a big problem.
Continually being banned by Planet Swans for Porthcawl and then being reinstated.
There has been a few TV programmes about it and apparently some books, I haven't seen any books. I read press reports at the time.
I look at everything but you don't, you just look at Morris and think he has done it (that's your right and he might have done it) but you don't look at the other suspects, that is why I've said to you from the get go there were others in the frame who's stories don't add up and they have stronger motives and they have DNA at the scene, between Mandy's legs wasn't it ?, it was years before Morris was done for it that tells you something in itself, it was not clear cut.
If you think this case is a clear cut case of who done it you are mistaken and there is little point in conversing with you.
The issue is if all cases are judged to the same standard there is going to be an awful lot of innocence people in prison for crimes they did not commit, as no witnesses, no DNA, no motive but still found guilty will result an an awful lot of innocence people being jailed - do you understand that ?
Do you accept that if society jail's people for murder when there is no witnesses to the murder, no DNA, fingerprints and no motive then there are going to be lots of miscarriages of justice - forget Morris, I'm not talking about Morris here, it's right and correct that people question this verdict as the big picture if all cases were similar to this society would have a big problem.
I refer you to Major above. It is basically about banging heads. They fully went through the Lewis house phone records cars etc and found nothing. you say Morris didnt have a motive. he had the same motive as the Lewis family. What motive did they have. None. Was any of their possessions there. none. Was Morris possessions there. Yes his chain which he all along denied was his. I agree with Major it is a waste of time arguing with you. You would find him not guilty even if he was there with the bar in his hand. The jurors must be bent. All 24 of them along with the press who attended. I am not wasting any more time aruing with someone who has made arguments consistantly had them disproved. Let the legal people decide as One says there was nothing new and Morris will remain guilty.
I refer you to Major above. It is basically about banging heads. They fully went through the Lewis house phone records cars etc and found nothing. you say Morris didnt have a motive. he had the same motive as the Lewis family. What motive did they have. None. Was any of their possessions there. none. Was Morris possessions there. Yes his chain which he all along denied was his. I agree with Major it is a waste of time arguing with you. You would find him not guilty even if he was there with the bar in his hand. The jurors must be bent. All 24 of them along with the press who attended. I am not wasting any more time aruing with someone who has made arguments consistantly had them disproved. Let the legal people decide as One says there was nothing new and Morris will remain guilty.
Can you see that the level of proof of guilt in this case that led to a guilty verdict if the same level of proof in other future cases was replicated over and over then there would be miscarriages of justice ?
Continually being banned by Planet Swans for Porthcawl and then being reinstated.
His record is outstanding though in overturning cases whatever your thoughts on him. Wasnt he the guy behind the Birmingham pub bombers getting over turned, The Guilford case, The Lynette White case but he failed to do that here.
Michael Mansfield, also got the miners at Orgreve off from the trumped up police charges after the battle there
Yep,anything involving the downtrodden masses is meat and drink to working class hero Mike. Great with IRA innocents too.
Nobody truly KNOWS part from Morris.
Any court system will never be infallible but barristers make obfuscation into an art form.
As I say,it s about trusting the Police.You either do or do not. If you do not,then it matters what the offence. They will always be innocent,almways not guilty-until someone kills one of your family whicb I why I feel for the victims family here.
May i just put this out there for those who are under the perception that Morris was 'high on drink and drugs'. Whilst technically true, taking amphetamine sulphate makes you very aware, and more than capable of paying extreme attention to detail. Even if you've drunk 8 pints.
Oh shut up Gary, it doesn't make you a forensics specilalist, love how phet made him wipe all his DNA off the chain bar his.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
