| Ian Thomas released
on licence - Fighting on to clear his name
Dear MOJUK,
I hope all's well with you and you're taking good care. I am writing
to let you know that I have just been released on parole licence.
We had anticipated that a formal decision was due from the parole
board, but I deliberately wanted to keep things very low key - especially
after having had so many knock-backs in other areas! We had been told
that release might be in mid-November, but again I refused to get
excited or tell anyone about it until I actually walked out of the
gate with the licence in my hand.
Anyway, it's not the way that I wanted to be released but the licence
conditions do not indicate that I have to accept or admit guilt in
any way whatsoever. On that basis I was prepared to take what I could
get, and so am now living at home with my family - at least for the
time being.
Obviously we are all extremely pleased that I am home, but disappointed
that the system still refuses to budge and acknowledge that the conviction
is unsafe. We are still taking the case to the European Court, and
I have been in contact with the legal team over that one, (although
no news as yet!). As soon as there are any developments we will let
you know.
I'll leave it there for now MOJUK as there is so much to do and so
many people to get in touch with. In the meantime, thanks again for
all your help and support. I'll be in touch again soon, take good
care,
Best Wishes,
Ian
Thomas
++++++++++++++++++
lan Thomas Campaign
for Justice
lan Thomas is the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice
lan Thomas has been convicted and sentenced to Life imprisonment twice
for the same crime on exactly the same tenuous and speculative circumstantial
evidence.
There are no confessions or admissions of guilt, no witnesses to any
crime, no medical, or psychiatric evidence, no pathological evidence,
and no forensic evidence of any sort that stands against lan in this
case.
lan was first convicted in 1992 of the murder of his partner in 1990.
In 1994, the conviction was overturned on appeal, the Appeal Court
judges accepting that lan had always maintained his innocence, that
the conviction was based entirely on circumstantial evidence, and
that vital corroborative evidence in his defence had been wrongly
kept from the jury.
A re-trial was ordered, but the jury were again prevented from hearing
that vital evidence and lan was convicted again. Appeal Court judges
at a second appeal in 1996 contradicted those in the first appeal
and upheld the conviction, so lan is now the victim of contradictory
Appeal Court rulings, and both convictions were given by juries unaware
of that vitally important Defence evidence. However, there is far
more involved in this case than what you have just read.
Why is the conviction still unsafe
Both trials resulted in convictions that were based entirely on speculative
circumstantial evidence, and both convictions were obtained only through
majority verdicts after lengthy jury retirements. At both trials,
vitally important Defence evidence was prevented from reaching the
jury. lan had originally been 'targeted' by the police, with no effort
made to investigate other potential suspects and suspicious circumstances.
In fact, the police investigation was far less than satisfactory,
with Officers admitting to bullying lan whilst repeatedly offering
a manslaughter deal - an offer that lan steadfastly refused! The prosecution
QC repeated the offer to accept a manslaughter plea, the police lost
an exhibit helpful to lan's Defence, and two senior Officers were
promoted despite them having committed perjury. Ultimately, the Appeal's
process has also failed lan, and he is now also the victim of perverse
judicial decisions.
What's happened since the 2nd conviction and appeal?
Liverpool Liberty, a group belonging to Liberty - the National Civil
Rights Group, as well as many other individuals and organisations
are actively supporting lan. The case was featured on the Channel
4 programme "Clear My Name", where fresh evidence raised
questions about the alleged cause of death, the adequacy of the police
investigation, and about witnesses whose evidence was clearly inconsistent
with the police and prosecution version of events, but had not been
disclosed to the Defence. lan's case was later referred to the Criminal
Cases Review Commission (CCRC) by the Home Office, and they subsequently
referred it back to the Court of Appeal for a third appeal against
the conviction.
Recent Developments
A third appeal against the conviction was heard at the Court of Appeal
in March 2002. Despite a positive hearing, the airing of fresh evidence,
concessions by the Prosecution, and a reappraisal of some of the earlier
arguments - all of which were in lan's favour - the Court once again
dismissed the appeal.
Such was the strength of feeling from lan's legal team, including
Michael Mansfield QC, that an application to the European Court of
Human Rights, (ECtHR), was immediately drafted.
The submission clearly states that the chronology of events have conspired
to result in an unfair trial process, and have prevented lan from
ever having a fair trial at any time in the future. It is considered
that the Court of Appeal also breached the guidelines developed under
the case of 'Pendleton' at the House of Lords in the way that they
dealt with evidence at the appeal hearing. In effect, this is a clear
breach of both Article 6, (the right to a fair trial), and Article
13, (the right to an effective remedy), of the European Convention
on Human Rights, (ECHR).
As yet a farther response is awaited from the European Court, but
lan and his supporters remain hopeful that a positive outcome will
be the result, and until then the fight against this miscarriage of
justice continues.
Important - Latest News - Important
In November 2003 lan was released from prison on Life Licence.
Although lan is now back at home, he will be on parole licence for
the rest of his life - clearly no way to live, and with the prospect
of recall to prison at any time for no real justifiable reason hanging
over him! The fight to clear his name at the European Court will go
on despite having been released - again with the full support of lan's
legal team.
Your continued support is needed now just as much as ever before.
What you can do to help?
You may feel that this is nothing to do with you and that you shouldn't
get involved. That's perfectly understandable, but please remember
that lan has done nothing wrong, and that a killer or killers are
still walking the streets.
This time it is lan in those circumstances, but next time it could
be someone you know personally, someone close to you, or maybe even
you yourself. Surely then you would want others to do their best to
help you correct any miscarriage of justice? There are several ways
that you can help;
• You can contact lan, his family, or their supporters for further
information.
• You can join the growing number of lan's supporters.
• Write to lan's MP, or write to your own MP voicing your concern.
• Publicly speak out in support of lan and encourage others
to help.
• Or, simply contact lan or his family to offer moral support.Contact
Points -
Please contact any of the following for further information.
Arthur Thomas, (lan's Father), 0151 - 734 3029
Peter Gill, Liverpool Liberty, 0151 - 733 3246, or 0151 - 231 3948
lan Thomas, [email protected]
Please copy and distribute this information.
lan Thomas
c/o 30 Bagot Street
Liverpool L15 OHT
30 November 2003
|