The Ferris Conspiracy Forum
Register  |   |   |  Calendar
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 18      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   6   Next   »
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #31 

DOUGLAS: Yes.

 

LOVE:  Well I was sitting in Barlinnie, as far as I can remember it was in the afternoon – me, John Campbell, Ronnie Carlton and I think that Frances Falloon was called over as well.   We were taken over into the solicitor’s room, and we all went into individual rooms.  I was put in with a CID officer and a prison officer was standing in there, and like he started talking – well, most of it’s in the statement, and he started making suggestions to me, that I should see this one and all that, and whatever.  But like, that wasn’t very much involvement, not what he was saying.  The next day it was Norrie Walker and McKillop that came up to Barlinnie and I saw them in the Chief’s office or something – they took us over to the Chief’s office in Barlinnie, above the gatehouse right.  And like, that’s when they started talking to me, making suggestions – what I should say, what I shouldn’t say, and like, this is the way it happened and this is the way it’s going to be, and I’ve got to make certain statements implicating this one, you know what I mean?

 

DOUGLAS: You were denying all knowledge of…

 

LOVE: I was, right up until, right up until the stage where they started making suggestions to me, I had denied all knowledge of any involvement in shooting a van or having any association with Tommy Campbell.  You know what  I mean. 

 

LISA: That is…

 

LOVE: Not having any association.  They knew that I knew him, but as far as they were… the suggestions they were making…. I wasn’t involved in any of that, you know what I mean?  I wasn’t saying that I was in a pub in the Netherfield down in Carntyne saying that these guys were sitting around tables, discussions about lighting fires and pouring petrol through doors – it never happened. It was all put into my head to see it.

 

LISA:  They suggested that you…

 

LOVE:  They suggested, any, I don’t think, all the statement I made I don’t even think there was anything in there that was the truth.  Because everything like, part of it might be the truth, but there’s a lot of lies in it, you know what I mean?  The truth wouldn’t have been implicating anybody, it was only the lies that implicated people.

 

DOUGLAS:  Have you ever had a drink with Tommy Campbell at the Netherfield?

 

LOVE:  I had a drink with him.  I’d been down at the Netherfield and I think one night, that was maybe a few weeks before.  I meant, I have been in the Netherfield with him.  I had a drink with the man, I spoke to him.  There was no, you can do this for me and all that carry on.  I spoke to the man, like I’m speaking to you tonight.  I had a pint, sat sown, wee Joe Steele was with us, wee Dinky Moore – we sat down, eh, Tom what’s his name, Thomas Grey was with us, sat down, but there was never any discussion about hurting people – we were there as mates for a drink.  In fact, I ended up going to a party, wee Joe Steele took me to a party in Carntyne after that.  We went to a party and it was just guys out for a night out, there wasn’t any discussion of hurting people or shooting vans, or pouring petrol through anybody’s doors, ever ever in that pub in the Netherfield.  In the night in question that I’ve meant, I have been there when they made the statements, I did see Tommy Campbell in the Netherfield that day but it was a Saturday afternoon, it was at dinner time.  I went in there and had a drink and I think the man came in with his wife Liz, and it was just hello, and we went away and that was it.

 

DOUGLAS:  That was…

 

LOVE:  And that, that was the last time I saw him in the Netherfield was on a Saturday afternoon.

 

DOUGLAS:  Was that the Saturday before you were arrested?

 

LOVE:  That was the Saturday before I was arrested.

 

DOUGLAS:  So that was Saturday 23rd March?

 

LOVE: That would have been the Saturday afternoon I was in there before I was arrested.

 

DOUGLAS: And that was actually the day, the same day as the assault and robbery in the scrappy?

 

LOVE:  And that’s the same night I was meant to be in the Netherfield making that statement.  I mean, I must have had a lot of hours in my day to do all that, I’ll tell you mate.

 

DOUGLAS:  So if we can just recap all that.  The idea was that you were in the Netherfield Bar on the Friday the…

 

LOVE: No, it was supposed to be the Saturday, is that not where we’re all confused here?  Was it not supposed to be the Saturday?

 

DOUGLAS: No it was two days before, in court you were asked, em, how it related to the day you were arrested, you were arrested  on the Sunday and you said that you allegedly overheard the conversation two days before your arrest so that makes it the Friday night.

 

LOVE:  So that makes it  the Friday, OK.

 

DOUGLAS:  On that night, you were, where were you exactly on that Friday night?  Can you say?

 

LOVE:  Eh, not in the Netherfield that’s for sure.

 

DOUGLAS:  You were not in the Netherfield, that’s, that’s fair enough.  You, during your trial for the eh, assault and robbery you had an alibi.

 

LOVE: Quite an alibi.

 

DOUGLAS:  Complicated abibi with lots of witnesses.

 

LOVE: Yeah.

 

DOUGLAS: Em, and nowhere you mentioned the Netherfield so you can, you know you can now, you were not in the Netherfield Bar on that night.

 

LOVE: I wasn’t in the Netherfield mate, no.

 

DOUGLAS:  So the first time you were in the Netherfield was that afternoon, Saturday afternoon.

 

LOVE:  Saturday afternoon I met Tommy Campbell and his wife Liz – they came in, all I did was say hello and that was it mate.

 

DOUGLAS:  That was it.

 

LOVE:  Yeah.

 

DOUGLAS:  Right, so if we can jump forward again now to when the police were coming to see you.

 

LOVE: Yes,

 

DOUGLAS:  Who’s idea was it to say that you’d overheard a conversation in the pub, who first came up with that?

 

LOVE: Now, it was Norrie walker who was doing all the talking to me, he was the man.  The guy McKillop who’s, I mean, the man McKillop knew that he was going to get me murdered.  Anyway, he was wanting me to go back to Garthamlock and all that, Norrie Walker, and give him information.  So the man McKillop actually told me to get on my toes – he said, listen, get off, you know what I mean?  That was a CID officer telling me to get on my toes mate and take nothing to do with it, do you know what I mean?  But he was the one that said.  Now, Charlie Craig was in on it as well, Charlie Craig had a lot to do with it but he must have been just like Walker.  There was two of them, wasn’t there – there was Charlie Craig and Norrie Walker who were really in charge of the investigations.  After Walker, after I was out, it was Charlie Craig that was doing all the talking, do you know what I’m talking about?

 

DOUGLAS:  McKillop, how do you think he was reacting to this?

 

LOVE:  I think the man knew what was going on and I think he didn’t like it, you know?

 

DOUGLAS: But he never actually said that?

 

LOVE: Never.

 

DOUGLAS: Apart from telling you to, get on your toes?

 

LOVE:  He said, get on your toes mate, and you want to get away from that mob or you’ll just end up getting yourself killed going back to Garthamlock

 

JOHN: Did you ever speak to Charlie Craig or did he ever speak to you?

 

LOVE: Oh yes, I mean, that, that morning I got out, I phoned Easterhouse didn’t I, and I said, what’s the score with you, and he’s like that, come up and see me Bill and have a cup of tea and all that crack, so I went up to Easterhouse.

 

JOHN: Is that the one you got out of Barlinnie on bail for the armed robbery?

 

LOVE:  That was Saturday, was that, would have been Friday, well this would’ve been the Saturday, the next day I went to see him.  Well Tommy Campbell and all that were down in the cells in Easterhouse, would that be right?  They were arrested at Easterhouse anyway, I think they were down in the cells, and like, he was giving me all the rigmarole, you know what I mean – don’t worry about it Bill, we’ll give you a yacht and a villa in Spain and all that, you know what I mean.

 

DOUGLAS: So they offered you, what else did they offer you, what else did they promise to do for you?

 

LOVE: Well, the promise was right, now, the position was right, I was going to get fifteen – I was going to be charged with a lot of crimes right.  I was probably going to get fifteen years.  My young sister Agnes, who was telling the truth was going to be arrested for perjury.  My sister was going to go in and say that she saw me shooting the icecream van and it was me that did it, and they were going to arrest her for perjury.  Joe Grainger got arrested for perjury – he was telling the truth but he still got arrested for perjury.  OK.  They offer us safe addresses and would have got a job sorted out for me.  I’d have been away down the other side of the country, nobody would have known me – all that, and eh, I would, wouldn’t have got my fifteen years - I’d have been alright.

 

DOUGLAS:  That fifteen year was for, would’ve been for…

 

LOVE: Probably the shooting of the van I would think.

 

DOUGLAS: What did they offer you in relation to the assault and robbery?

 

LOVE:  The assault and robbery, they were just going to get it dropped.  The charge was just going to be dropped and that would have been the end of the story, but that’s not the way it worked out, is it?  I ended up being tried for it.

 

DOUGLAS: What happened?

 

LOVE: Got not proven.

 

JOHN: When you went on trial for the assault and robbery itself though, by then you had already made your precognition on oath?

 

LOVE: Yeah.

 

JOHN: Right, so basically, you were pinned to what you’d said on oath?

 

LOVE: That’s what I’m saying.  I was pinned to what I’d said,  Now, the problem was me, I’d given them it on oath so I knew that I’d sworn the statement in front of a sheriff, so if I went back on my statement I would have been arrested for perjury anyway.  If I’d have said, that would’ve been it, you know what I’m talking about.  I would’ve been arrested for perjury and they would have just said, well he made that statement,he said this, he said it on oath – I need to put my hands up to perjury, I can’t get out of that one, can I?

 

DOUGLAS:  Did they ever threaten to implicate you in the murders themselves?

 

LOVE: Well, they would’ve arrested me for conspiracy, that was what, see that was that I couldn’t understand. They had all first class information, they were saying things to me that were accurate.  It was as if they were getting the story and they  had already spoken to somebody about the story before they came to me, do you know what I mean?

 

JOHN: Accurate in what respect? Is that about the shooting of the van?

 

LOVE: Everything, that’s it.  They were accurate in things and then like, you know what I mean.  Saying, we’ve got people to back up your story – you say this, we’ve got any witnesses that’ll like, you know what I’m talking about.

 

DOUGLAS:  How did they know it was you that shot up the van?

 

LOVE: That’s what I don’t know.

 

DOUGLAS: Because you had a mask on didn’t you.

 

LOVE:  I had a mask on.  I wasn’t even involved with anybody.  I mean really, as far as, in fact, I was very surprised the police hadn’t turned up at my house and arrested me for the shooting.  I was expecting it.  I’d expected them for a couple of weeks, you know what I mean? But I don’t know mate, I just don’t know how they knew.

 

DOUGLAS: There was only you and the driver, in the car.  Eh, you had the shotgun, the shotgun was disposed of more or less immediately.

 

LOVE: Yeah.

 

DOUGLAS: Could there have been any fingerprints, could there have been anything?  Did they say anything?

 

LOVE: Not at all mate.  I had a pair of gloves on and there’s no way they would have got my fingerprints or anything out of that car.  I stepped inside that car with a pair of gloves on and stepped out with a pair of gloves on.  I don’t know how they knew mate, I just don’t know how they knew I shot the van.

 

JOHN: At one point, your sister Agnes gave a statement, em, I don’t know whether it was during the investigation or after it….

 

LOVE: That was after it, that was after.  I mean, Agnes wouldn’t have went through with it all unless I was doing what I was doing.  Agnes was only trying to put me off what I was doing I think, that’s really all she was trying to do, know what I mean.  But definitely a lot of information came from somebody, I mean Joe Grainger couldn’t have given them that information, you know what I mean, if he was talking the way I was meant to have went through.

 

DOUGLAS: So the only thing they actually came through on for you was giving you the bail?

 

LOVE: They never had any, they never had any evidence to convict me of anything, and I know that if I had sat there and kept my mouth shut, they wouldn’t have arrested me for any vans or nothing.  OK, they might have had a witness somewhere that’s going to say he saw me doing it, but that wouldn’t have been enough. I don’t think I would have had any trouble on any crime or, if I’d kept my mouth shut.

 

JOHN: Did anybody in the Fiscal’s department or the Fiscal’s office say anything to you about your involvement?

 

LOVE: The guy that I can remember was David Spiers right, the prosecuting fiscal.  Now, there was one time I wasn;t wanting to go through with it.  Not because of the deal - it was only because of the deal, but because I was scared of what I was doing, I knew what I was doing, you know what I mean? I knew that Tommy Campbell and all that, and wee Joe Steele, and the next day their houses were going to be raided and they were all going to be arrested and then charged with murder and all that carry on.  So like, I was saying to them, no, I’m not doing that and all that, and that’s when they started putting the pressure on me, saying, well if you don’t do it and all that, we’ve got a statement here that you’ve made, you’ve this and you’ve said that – we’ve got two police officers here that heard you saying it and all that, we’ll arrest you. You know?


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #32 

LISA: You were saying that, we’re talking about suggestions that you, when Craig and Walker or whoever took you into a room and were suggesting things to you that such and such did this, such and such did that, can we go into a bit more detail about how it actually happened, if you can try and remember any detail like you’re in the room and they’re sitting there with you, who said what?

 

LOVE: Right, this is what, right this is what happened right.  We were in a little room, like we’re in a room just now, the Chief in Barlinnie brought in tea and that and we were all sitting, and the guys were talking to me matter of factly that they knew, as far as they were concerned, Tommy Campbell, Joe Steele, Gary Moore and all the rest of them were guilty of this crime, and no matter how they done it, they were going down for it, and that’s the way it was put to me.  Like, I could either cooperate with them and do what they want me to say, or I can go back into fucking Barlinnie and end up getting fifteen years, and my sister will be charged with perjury.  My wife made a statement coming out of Barlinnie one day, and they were going to arrest her for making that statement because she knew, do you know what I’m talking about?

 

JOHN: What statement is that, what statement….?

 

LOVE: My wife made a statement, something like em, he’ll not be fucking going down for any cunt, and all that carry on, you know what I mean, or something like that.

 

JOHN: Do you know who she is supposed to have made it to?

 

LOVE: She made it going out of the visiting room.  I don’t know who she made it to, but one of the screws were on to it and they were right on to the cops, you know what I mean?  And my wife was arrested at Barlinnie Prison coming out of a visit the next day.

 

LISA: So the police had said to you that they believed that Thomas Campbell and the others did the crime?

 

LOVE: That’s it.  They believed that they had done it, but everybody believed they had done it, it wasn’t only them.  I mean, people, as I say, were coming up to me saying, what do you thinkof those bastards and all that, doing that and all that, you know what I mean? But….

 

LISA: Why do you think they were saying that, it hadn’t appeared in the papers yet?

 

LOVE:  I don’t know why they were saying that, I think it was, I mean, you couldn’t imagine Garthamlock could you, after that happened.  I mean, like there were 50 cops in there every day in Garthamlock visiting people, you know what I mean? I don’t know what was going on, I mean, if they were saying that with me, what were they saying to other witnesses.  They were going to people, maybe a girl on her own with two kids and saying, you say this and say that he was here that night, and he said this to you and all that, you know what I mean?

 

LISA: So were suggestions being made then that these men did it to people in the community?

 

LOVE: I would think so, yes, I would think so.  I mean, you’ve already, Joe Grainger’s already said that he never, he only made that statement through duress and all that.  His wife said she didn’t know anything about it, and I’m saying to you that I mean what I’m saying here today is the truth.  Anyway, I don’t care if nobody believes me, but I’m going to be able to go and have a good nights sleep tonight knowing that it’s going to go ahead and that I might be helping somebody if something was done, you know what I mean? Yes mate, it was like, you know what I mean.

 

LISA: So the statement that you eventually gave in court in the witness box, how did, how did you come about to make that statement?

 

LOVE: I was told what to say, I was told what to say in the statement, how I would say it – like the meeting in the Netherfield, and this one made a remark to me and this one gave me the money, and like this one gave me the gun – you know what I’m talking about.  And what was said in the Netherfield, Tommy Campbell says, I think that’s what he’s meant to have said – Fatboy’s going to get it, and all that.  But really, at the end of the day Fatboy wasn’t even important, because he wasn’t even that important enough to come into the conversation in a pub.

 

DOUGLAS: Did you know the Doyles at all before that?

 

LOVE:  I knew the boy, I knew like , what his name was – Fatboy as they called him.   I knew him, I saw him on the vans and all that.  But the guy, he was harmless, he wasn’t a problem to anybody, you know what I mean like.  I don’t think he would have ended up getting petrol poured through his door and his door set alight just for driving an icrcream van for Jimmy Mitchell.  I don’t think, I think the way they would have rather dragged him out of his icrecream van and kicked the shit out of him if that’s what they wanted to do, do you know what I’m talking about.  I mean, I don’t think that would have been the case, you know what I mean.

 

DOUGLAS: But the family themselves, they weren’t criminals or anything like that?

 

LOVE: No, they weren’t criminals, they weren’t….

 

DOUGLAS: Known hard men or anything like that?

 

LOVE: No, no.

 

DOUGLAS: Just an ordinary family?

 

LOVE: That’s it.

 

LISA: Andrew Doyle didn’t take part in any of the attacks on icecream vans?

 

LOVE: No he wasn’t, I mean, the guy only drove an icecream van and probably got £10 a night for it.  I mean, he wasn’t, he wasn’t important enough to be, when I think of it now, he wasn’t important enough for us to be sitting in a pub and saying, Fatboy’s going to get it.  It just wasn’t that, it wasn’t, like he wasn’t that much of a worry or anything like that, you know what I mean, for anybody to sit down and say that.  I don’t think Tommy Campbell or anybody would have been stupid enough to sit in the Netherfield and say….

 

TAPE ENDS AND RESTARTS ON OTHER SIDE.

 

DOUGLAS: In your opinion….

LISA: Can I just check one thing first?

 

DOUGLAS: Sure.

 

LISA: Was it the police that suggested to you the Netherfield Bar that you overheard the conversation?

 

LOVE: That was, because everybody knew that was Tommy Campbell’s local.

 

LISA: Right.

 

LOVE: And that’s where he drinks.

 

LISA: Did they suggest, did they tell you that it was supposed to have been a specific night?

 

LOVE: Well, that wasn’t important was it, that’s why it was left open and I couldn’t remember whether it was two days ago and all that.

 

LISA: It was just supposed to be a night?

 

LOVE: It was supposed to be a night, a Saturday night when we were all in there drinking, like we all go out for a drink in a Saturday so therefore it would be more believed that we would be together in the Netherfield, having a drink, you know what I mean?

 

DOUGLAS: Nobody from the procurator’s office asked to pin it down to a particular night?

 

LOVE: No.

 

DOUGLAS: They never asked you to pin it down, they just accepted that you were there at a special night?

 

LOVE: They accepted, just accepted that I was there that night or that night, and that was said and that was it.

 

DOUGLAS: In your opinion, do you think Thomas Campbell would either set fire to a door or get somebody to set fire to a door, the man that you know or knew?

 

LOVE: I don’t think so.  I don’t think he would have got involved in it.  The man has been in and out of the jail all his life, he’s seen things in Peterhead and all that, and like, I don’t think the man would’ve wanted associated with it – I don’t think the man would’ve wanted in there knowing that they’d murdered a little child and all that, and that a child had died.  No, I can’t see it.  It was like, you know the score, don’t you?  Nonces and sex offenders and people that do things like that get their throat cut in the jail, but he’s different.  No, I don’t think he would’ve associated himself with setting fire to doors.

 

LISA: Setting fire to doors, that’s usually just used as a frightener, it’s not usually used to kill anybody is it?

 

LOVE:  See, that’s what I’m saying.  The frightener, the frightener – this word the frightener right, I’ve never heard frightener used in Glasgow.  I  mean, I wouldn’t have, I wouldn’t have turned around and said, oh we’ll do that as a frightener.  Where did that word come from, it was made up anyway.

 

LISA: Right.

 

LOVE: I mean, it was like, as far as I see it, the cops were coming in to, like eh, arrested him, and he said to me, it was only a frightener and all that. You see how the word cropped in when its never been used and, we don’t talk like that in Glasgow – frighteners and all that carry on, you know what I mean.

 

LISA: But people do set fire to other people’s doors, that does happen in Glasgow and all over Britain.

 

LOVE: Right.

 

LISA: Why do people do that?

 

LOVE: Frighten.

 

LISA: But you wouldn’t call it a frightener?

 

LOVE: No, I wouldn’t call it a frightener.

 

LISA: Right.

 

DOUGLAS: What would you call it?

 

LOVE: I don’t know….

 

DOUGLAS: A warning?

 

LOVE:….a message.

 

DOUGLAS & LISA: A message?

 

LOVE: That’s it.

 

LISA: Right.  Knowing that you knew Tommy, was it his style to frighten people?

 

LOVE: No, he was, he wasn’t, I mean, he, right – I’d heard about him and that but he looked quiet to me, he was quiet and like, he wasn’t the type of man that would go to a pub and like, OK, I know he had a reputation but he wouldn’t have been the guy that would walk up to the pub and say, like I’ve seen it, men think they’re big hard men in Glasgow, and get off that seat mate, that’s for me and my woman.  He wasn’t the type of man that would do that type of thing, do you know what I mean.  Like, OK, he could handle himself and like, but he wouldn’t, like he wasn’t fucking, what you would call it, aggressive and all that like some Glasgow hard men, aren’t they, they’re aggressive, that’s how they got their name.  They just stab, put a knife in your back just for standing the wrong way at the bar mate, you know what I mean, that type of thing, but no, he wasn’t like that.

 

DOUGLAS: How did you feel when you were giving that testimony when you were on the stand, if you can remember, eh, how did you feel, did you feel like?

 

LOVE: I felt like a traitor mate, I felt like a traitor.

 

JOHN: Were you telling the truth?

 

LOVE: No.

 

DOUGLAS: Not one bit of truth in it do you think?

 

LOVE: No, I don’t think so.  There might have been a few truthy bits, you know what I mean, but like, there was no, there wasn’t any truth that was going to incriminate, the incrimination was all the lies.  The truth was, it didn’t matter whether it was the truth or not, you know what I mean.

 

DOUGLAS: Did you tell anybody at all that you were lying?

 

LOVE: I’ve never.  I told my wife the first time in eight years what really happened there, about three days ago.  And she’s the only one in eight years that I’ve ever spoke, sat down, apart from when you came down to see me.

 

JOHN: Were you surprised when you were believed, or apparently believed?

 

LOVE: Surprised, I don’t think that was the word for it.  Shocked, I think, that anybody could believe me with the character I’ve got, and take my story, and take my word for anything anyway in the first place, you know what I mean.

 

LISA: Did you think someone would break your story down?

 

LOVE: I was hoping that the men would have got out and that, they would have got a not guilty, and maybe after a few years, they, OK, they might have spent three months on remand or whatever they would have spent.  I was hoping that they maybe would have got a not guilty and I could have maybe got my result and gone to England and just, the would’ve been end of story, but that’s not the way it turned out, is it?

 

DOUGLAS: Did you think that somebody would, would be able to pick holes in what you had said on the stand?

 

LOVE: Well I though, like I didn’t think my story was like, that strong.  I thought  with the experience, I mean, when I walked in there and there was, I think, they had two, two QC’s each I think, at the trial.  I thought, if this mob can’t break me down man, what hope is there.  That somebody like me, standing there on my own and like, everything I was saying was lies, and I don’t know how many witnesses were in before me who had probably told lies as well, they could stand there and actually no pick – I thought they would have slaughtered me.  I was very surprised that they, they, they weren’t more aggressive towards me, and I think, I mean like, I would have wanted to turn around and that they would have got a little gap in it and maybe destroy me, you know what I mean mate.  I might have been arrested for perjury or whatever, but at the end of the day, the guys are out on the street, you know what I mean.

 

DOUGLAS: Did you think it would be the dates?  I know you can’t re….

 

LOVE: I thought, I thought, it was the dates that I thought they would’ve maybe like, but that’s what I’m saying, it was like the dates were mixed up weren’t they?  They couldn’t like, I mean, I was saying I was there, and was under arrest for armed robbery.  I don’t think they realised you know, that it was corresponding  to the same day as the armed robbery.  I never even realised it until you pointed it out to me here.

 

LISA: That was just by chance that you said it was that night?

 

LOVE: I didn’t.  Now this is the first time that you are talking, I mean, I’ve heard you saying before that you were in such and such but now that I’ve listened to what you’ve got to say and I’ve seen the full story and that, I didn’t realise that the night I committed the armed robbery I was meant to be in the Netherfield.

 

DOUGLAS: Did you know that you were going to be the star witness for the prosecution?

 

LOVE: No, I never. I, I mean, as far as I knew that people were being spoken to more than me, that’s as far as  I knew, you know what I mean.

 

DOUGLAS: What was your reaction at the end of it all you realised you were….?

 

LOVE: Well, I didn’t really know what was happening.  I went in and gave my evidence and I never saw anybody. I was in Perth 24 hours day protection, a screw with me all the time.  I never saw anybody else, I never saw any papers, I didn’t know what was happening, I never had  radio, you know what I mean.  I never knew what was happening.  All I know is that I was in the court that day, gave that evidence and I was whipped away back to Perth.

 

DOUGLAS: So you were in, you were in prison at the time of the trial?

 

LOVE: I was in Perth prison.

 

DOUGLAS: For another charge?

 

LOVE: For another charge, driving while disqualified.  It was a holding charge, so I never fucked it up.

 

DOUGLAS: And they brought you down from Perth to Glasgow High Court for that?

 

LOVE: That’s right.

 

DOUGLAS: Did anybody say anything to you at all about the trial?

 

LOVE: Well I mean, I had cops bring me down from Perth, like the CID that were involved in it and that, and they were like coaching me on the way down.  What was going to be said, who was doing this and who was doing that and all that, that’s the way it was happening.

 

JOHN: Do you know the names of any of those policemen?

 

LOVE: I don’t know the names there Mr Carroll.  They were like, seemed as if it was three strangers, you know what I mean.  Like before that I had, I know that I had Willie Kelly, I knew Willie Lewis and I knew that, what’s her name with the blonde hair in the serious, the Scottish Crime Squad, the woman?  You know her?  Well, it was those three all the time that used to come up before that, but at the trial, it was only them that took me down for the trial, you know what I mean.  But that would only have been because Willie Kelly and all that would’ve been a witness.

 

JOHN: Did any of them have anything at all with them, any documents or papers with them or anything of that kind?

 

LOVE: Well, when I, when I was getting shipped out, the guy Willie Kelly actually was sitting reading a statement in the car, in the front of the car, and it was my, my , my statement on sworn oath – the one that was made on precognition.  And like other police officers that actually could tell me what was said in my statement and what I was saying and all that carry on, do you know what I mean?

 

JOHN: Was Kelly reading this….?

 

LOVE: He was reading….

 

JOHN: Was he reading it out loud or what?

 

LOVE: He was reading it to himself and was sitting in the front, and the woman was sitting there in the back with me, and Willie Kelly was driving, not Willie Kelly, Willie Lewis, and like, the guy Kelly was sitting there with my precognition statement, reading through it and whatever and talking to me about it.

 

JOHN: Talking to you about the contents?

 

LOVE: Talking to me about the contact, content of the statement, eh, and other police officers that were taking bits out of my statement, but saying to me, you said this and all that, and like, you know what I mean.

 

JOHN: Did anybody give you any information about what was happening during the actual trial?

 

LOVE: Nothing at all mate.  Oh yes, I got bits and pieces – I knew, like, I was getting impeached and all that and like this one was getting called, you know what I mean?

 

JOHN: How did you know that?

 

LOVE: I knew Joe Grainger was a witness.  I knew they had got Joe Grainger and like, as far as I know, Joe Grainger was staying in a house in Ayrshire or somewhere at the time.  They got him a house in Ayrshire, him and his wife, and like he was saying a lot more, just as much as me.


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #33 

JOHN: Who provided you with that information?

 

LOVE: This was the guy Kelly, he was the one doing all the talking….

 

JOHN: Kelly told you about Joe Grainger’s involvement?

 

LOVE: …Detective Sergeant Willie Kelly.

 

LISA: Did he tell, when did Grainger give his evidence, before or after Billy?

 

JOHN: Can’t remember.

 

LISA:  I’m just trying to find out whether he’s told you about, he said Grainger was saying all of these things, was it before or after you gave your evidence?

 

LOVE: That’s what, that’s what I was trying to find out.  I don’t know if Joe Grainger was seen before me or after me.

 

LISA: Uh huh.

 

LOVE: I mean, if Joe Grainger was saying the same as I said, and he was said, seen before me, then it’s only obvious that that all mine is made up then, isn’t it?  If Joe Grainger was said and asked to say it beforehand, you know what I mean.

 

DOUGLAS: So at the end of the trial, em, you were surprised then that….

 

LOVE: That they were all found guilty.

 

DOUGLAS: Yes, surprised that they’d accepted your word?

 

LOVE: Well that’s what I, that’s what I couldn’t understand – they had accepted my word and found them guilty.  I mean I thought, I thought there must have been more to it than that.  I thought there must have been fucking…. You know what I mean.

 

DOUGLAS: Why do you think they were after Thomas Campbell and Joseph Steele and the rest, why?

 

LOVE:  I don’t think they were after Joseph Steele, Joseph Steele just happened to be tied in and it didn’t matter whether he went down.  But Tommy Campbell I think was the one they wanted, do you know what I mean.  I don’t think Joe Steele and Gary Moore and me and all that were important, you know what I mean.  I think it was more or less Tommy Campbell I think was the important one.  Joe Steeele because we were running about together and whatever, you know what I mean.  And like, it was an easy way to get maybe 8 or 7 bodies off the street isn’t it, because they knew they didn’t want that.

 

DOUGLAS: Just as simple as that, just wanted Tommy Campbell off the street?

 

LOVE: As simple as that.  They just wanted bodies off the street and like, that was the best excuse for it.

 

DOUGLAS: Did they always say to you, did they say Tommy Campbell was guilty, he did it?

 

LOVE: Well that’s it, but their opinion was, you’re not fucking letting these cunts go running about out there Billy, and all that, and they’ve done this mate, you know what I mean, and all that carry on.  Well that was their attitude, their attitude is Tommy Campbell, Joe Steele, Gary Moore eh, and whoever else was arrested, all done that murder and at the end of the day, whether it be telling lies or not, no matter what, they were getting them and they were going down.  They were getting them and they were going down for it, and that’s the way it was. That’s the way I’ve always seen it all over the years.  I’ve never ever had any solid evidence in front of me to say that those guys committed that murder, never ever have I had anbody come and say to me, that one was there and I saw him doing it, never.

 

DOUGLAS: What about in your own mind eventually, did you say well they must be right….?

 

LOVE: Over the years with hearing right, the attitude that I’ve got now is how the fuck do I know?  I don’t know whether they did it or whether they know, but one thing I do know is there were a lot of lies told and if anybody went into that court and told lies against men, they’re entitled to be acquitted and let out because that’s they way it is, that’s the law.

 

DOUGLAS:  But at that time did you believe they were guilty?  You know like you had no evidence…

 

LOVE: No I didn’t believe they were guilty because like that’s not the type of person, I’ve always had doubts.  How the hell, I mean, like, if anybody came and said to me, look, that’s the reason they did it, there’s the evidence, it’s a hundred per cent, I probably still wouldn’t believe it because I would still always have doubts, because I never saw it with my own eyes, do you know what I mean mate.  I’d never do that, I’ve always had doubts all the years – I’ve always sat back and I think I can honestly say every day I’ve sat back and said, did they do it or not, I don’t know.

 

DOUGLAS: So it preys on your mind ever since?

 

LOVE: Every day mate, every day I’ve thought of Tommy Campbell and Joe Steele, and asked myself whether they did it or not, and I’ve never had an answer.

 

DOUGLAS: You, in 1988 you told this story for the first time, eh why did you decide then, what made you decide then to tell the truth?

 

LOVE: Oh that’s the time that you came down to see me and that would have been 1988, 198…

 

DOUGLAS: The Glasgow Herald….

 

LOVE: 1984 right, that’s when it happened, 1983.

 

DOUGLAS: In the Glasgow Herald office.

 

LOVE: Well it was just getting too much for me.  I’d had four years by that time and like, I just wanted to get it all out into the open man and clear my system, clear my mind, and I know that at the end of the day, I might have done wrong beforehand, but I’d put it right and I might be able to go away and settle down with my wife and kids.  I can’t do that just now until it’s all sorted – I’m never going to be able to settle with my wife and kids, and give myself peace of mind and be able to go out and have an honest job, and not be standing there thinking of an hour of Thomas Campbell and whether he be guilty and him lying in prison and all that carry on, do you know what I mean. 

 

JOHN: In 1989 I saw you in Pentonville Prison, spoke to you in Pentonville Prison with Mr Ashman and Mr Cobb and there was an interview then, a tape recorded interview.  After that, you sent a letter to Glasgow, to my office in Glasgow saying basically that you retracted it and, could you tell me why you did that?

 

LOVE: Well after I saw you right, like a liaison officer, I think that’s what they call it, is it? A what officer?

 

DOUGLAS: Liaison, liaison.

 

LOVE: They’ve got one of them in Pentonville and he came to see me, and said to me, who was it that saw you and all that, because they know all about me.  Everywhere I go Mr Carroll, I’ve got a fucking folder that high mate and its stamped right on the tope of it man, supergrass, I’m telling you mate, everywhere I go.  I told them the day, if I’m arrested anywhere in Britain mate it comes up on the computer that I’m a supergrass – I was involved in this and all that, and the cops try the naughty coming in and all that, give  us this and all that.  We he, he was, he said to me to watch what you’re doing and all that, like you know what you’re up against and all that and like, if these people get out and all that carry on, you just don’t know the half of it mate, you don’t know the half of it.

 

JOHN: So the liaison officer came and spoke to you…?

 

LOVE: Spoke to me, that was just after you left,  That was the afternoon you left, came and spoke to me and that’s what made me write the letter.

 

JOHN: When you wrote the letter retracting….

 

LOVE: Yeah.

 

JOHN: You, you made some reference in that letter to threats or whatever?

 

LOVE: Well, that’s them isn’t it?  That’s the reason, isn’t it?  But it was never any threats made against us, there never has been any threats made against me ever, know what I mean.

 

LISA: Liaison officer suggested that things might happen to you if you go ahead with what you told Mr Carroll?

 

LOVE: That’s it. That’s it.  I mean, there’s no doubt in my mind that where I’m staying just now, I’m out on bail for like, trying to murder police officers and all that in Ealin.  I mean, they don’t fucking like me just now, but when this gets out man, they’re not going to be very fucking happy, you know what I mean, know what I mean.  So like, I’m arrested for, me and my mates got arrested for murder on the Ealin, so it’s going to get hot there for us, I know the crack with them.  I mean, I’m on, I’m on the seat now and can tell you what happens and all that in cop stations and how they operate.  You haven’t been in it mate, you’re not experienced – I’ve twenty years experience with the cops in Glasgow and down here, you know what I mean.  It’s murder mate.

 

JOHN: Are you on to any threat just now?

 

LOVE: No, I’m not under any threat whatsoever just now.  I came here voluntarily – I got the bus from my house in Northolt the day in Greenford and I came over here to see you voluntarily.

 

DOUGLAS: Why have you decided to do it again?

 

LOVE: So I could come off the drugs man.  It saves me taking them doesn’t it. I might be able to have peace of mind without drugs now – it’s been a lot on my mind in eight years, it is man.  I mean, it’s alright me sitting here talking and all that, but I went through a lot in my mind, you know what I mean.  And like, it’s done a lot of damage to my relaltionship with my wife and all that, maybe sometime I get a little bit depressed and I’m sitting there and like, I’m dead….  If I start to go a bit agitated dead easy and all that carry on, you know what I mean, I never used to be like that, know what I mean never used a bit of violen… never lifted my hands to anybody in my life man, all this.   

 

DOUGLAS: And have you thought it through, have you thought through the implications of what you’re doing?

 

LOVE: I thought through the implications and I weigh them all up and at the end of the day it can’t be any worse than what it is, can it.

 

DOUGLAS:  You said that there’s a file with Supergrass stamped on the front, has it ever worked out in your favour that this has come up on the computer would you say?

 

LOVE: No, I fucking don’t think so man, I don’t think so mate.  I think their attitude will always be they can’t be seen to be helping you because their attitude is, that if they get, if you get, well Mr Carroll there gets light that they’re helping me, Mr Carroll’s in with the bite – wait a minute, you’re doing this for him and all that.  That’s why I never got my house, that’s why they never sorted me out with my house and my job and settled us down anywhere, because they couldn’t afford, they couldn’t be seen to be helping me.

 

DOUGLAS: Because Mr Carroll’s investigating and….

 

LOVE: Becau… I mean, they must of, I mean, let’s put it this way, you know what I was involved in, what would, what would you have expected them to do for us?  What would you have expected, as you know what I was up against and what I did in court, what would you have expected them to do?  Would you have expected them to sort us out with a safe address and settle me down somewhere?

 

JOHN: Did they ever give….

 

LOVE: Why did they not do it, why did they not do it, did they have something to hide?

 

JOHN: Did they ever give you some form of protection?

 

LOVE: Nothing at all mate, nothing at all.  The only protection I got was in prison and you’ve seen the protection yourself.  You could’ve walked into Perth hospital mate, and done that with a gun and shot me.  I mean, OK, you might have got 15 year and not out of Perth Prison, but you could still have done it.

 

JOHN: When you first saw me in Perth Prison, em, at the hospital unit in Perth Prison, what was the first thing that went through your mind?

 

LOVE: I wasn’t too sure.  I mean I never, I wasn’t, I mean I don’t even think my mind was fully functional anyway because like I was fucking in that tank – you saw it, didn’t you – 24 hours a day and like, the screws were animals man, fucked you about and all that, you know what I mean, but I didn’t really know what was happening, I don’t think I was too sure of what was happening, I think.  At the end of the day, I don’t trust anybody, what they did to me – it didn’t matter who came to me.  I mean, you’re very lucky, it took me a while to get to trust people again – I wouldn’t trust anybody and that’s the way it’s been for 8 years.  I’ve trusted nobody, that’s why I’ve not wanted to speak to anybody coming near me – I’ve always kept them at a distance, I didn’t want to trust them, you know what I mean.  I think actually it was, I think it all boiled down to trusting people, but they had done that, and I didn’t want to trust anybody and I didn’t want any more complications and all that.

 

LISA: Did the police ever threaten you if you went back on your story, on the statement that you made in court….?

 

LOVE: Yes, well, that was going to happen if I went back on my statement.  I would have been charged with attempted murder, conspiracy to murder and all that carry on and all sorts.  And they had the robbery sewn up as far as I was concerned – that would have been another 10 year or something for me, for the armed robbery and than that, so I probably would have ended up with maybe 20 year.

 

LISA: That was at that time, what about since then, like in the last 8 years since it happened, they never said to you don’t ever go back on this, don’t ever tell what actually happened?

 

LOVE: I’ve never really seen them, have I?  I’ve never really seen any of them, you know what I mean.  The only I’ve had is when I ended up down here after the trial, they gave us all… this is what they did.  I ended up in Dundee, I was staying in Dundee with my wife.  Now, they made all the promises.  Well what they did was they took me to Queen Street Station mate and fired me out on my toes and said, bye, and that was it – I was on my own


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #34 

JOHN: Who provided you with that information?

 

LOVE: This was the guy Kelly, he was the one doing all the talking….

 

JOHN: Kelly told you about Joe Grainger’s involvement?

 

LOVE: …Detective Sergeant Willie Kelly.

 

LISA: Did he tell, when did Grainger give his evidence, before or after Billy?

 

JOHN: Can’t remember.

 

LISA:  I’m just trying to find out whether he’s told you about, he said Grainger was saying all of these things, was it before or after you gave your evidence?

 

LOVE: That’s what, that’s what I was trying to find out.  I don’t know if Joe Grainger was seen before me or after me.

 

LISA: Uh huh.

 

LOVE: I mean, if Joe Grainger was saying the same as I said, and he was said, seen before me, then it’s only obvious that that all mine is made up then, isn’t it?  If Joe Grainger was said and asked to say it beforehand, you know what I mean.

 

DOUGLAS: So at the end of the trial, em, you were surprised then that….

 

LOVE: That they were all found guilty.

 

DOUGLAS: Yes, surprised that they’d accepted your word?

 

LOVE: Well that’s what I, that’s what I couldn’t understand – they had accepted my word and found them guilty.  I mean I thought, I thought there must have been more to it than that.  I thought there must have been fucking…. You know what I mean.

 

DOUGLAS: Why do you think they were after Thomas Campbell and Joseph Steele and the rest, why?

 

LOVE:  I don’t think they were after Joseph Steele, Joseph Steele just happened to be tied in and it didn’t matter whether he went down.  But Tommy Campbell I think was the one they wanted, do you know what I mean.  I don’t think Joe Steele and Gary Moore and me and all that were important, you know what I mean.  I think it was more or less Tommy Campbell I think was the important one.  Joe Steeele because we were running about together and whatever, you know what I mean.  And like, it was an easy way to get maybe 8 or 7 bodies off the street isn’t it, because they knew they didn’t want that.

 

DOUGLAS: Just as simple as that, just wanted Tommy Campbell off the street?

 

LOVE: As simple as that.  They just wanted bodies off the street and like, that was the best excuse for it.

 

DOUGLAS: Did they always say to you, did they say Tommy Campbell was guilty, he did it?

 

LOVE: Well that’s it, but their opinion was, you’re not fucking letting these cunts go running about out there Billy, and all that, and they’ve done this mate, you know what I mean, and all that carry on.  Well that was their attitude, their attitude is Tommy Campbell, Joe Steele, Gary Moore eh, and whoever else was arrested, all done that murder and at the end of the day, whether it be telling lies or not, no matter what, they were getting them and they were going down.  They were getting them and they were going down for it, and that’s the way it was. That’s the way I’ve always seen it all over the years.  I’ve never ever had any solid evidence in front of me to say that those guys committed that murder, never ever have I had anbody come and say to me, that one was there and I saw him doing it, never.

 

DOUGLAS: What about in your own mind eventually, did you say well they must be right….?

 

LOVE: Over the years with hearing right, the attitude that I’ve got now is how the fuck do I know?  I don’t know whether they did it or whether they know, but one thing I do know is there were a lot of lies told and if anybody went into that court and told lies against men, they’re entitled to be acquitted and let out because that’s they way it is, that’s the law.

 

DOUGLAS:  But at that time did you believe they were guilty?  You know like you had no evidence…

 

LOVE: No I didn’t believe they were guilty because like that’s not the type of person, I’ve always had doubts.  How the hell, I mean, like, if anybody came and said to me, look, that’s the reason they did it, there’s the evidence, it’s a hundred per cent, I probably still wouldn’t believe it because I would still always have doubts, because I never saw it with my own eyes, do you know what I mean mate.  I’d never do that, I’ve always had doubts all the years – I’ve always sat back and I think I can honestly say every day I’ve sat back and said, did they do it or not, I don’t know.

 

DOUGLAS: So it preys on your mind ever since?

 

LOVE: Every day mate, every day I’ve thought of Tommy Campbell and Joe Steele, and asked myself whether they did it or not, and I’ve never had an answer.

 

DOUGLAS: You, in 1988 you told this story for the first time, eh why did you decide then, what made you decide then to tell the truth?

 

LOVE: Oh that’s the time that you came down to see me and that would have been 1988, 198…

 

DOUGLAS: The Glasgow Herald….

 

LOVE: 1984 right, that’s when it happened, 1983.

 

DOUGLAS: In the Glasgow Herald office.

 

LOVE: Well it was just getting too much for me.  I’d had four years by that time and like, I just wanted to get it all out into the open man and clear my system, clear my mind, and I know that at the end of the day, I might have done wrong beforehand, but I’d put it right and I might be able to go away and settle down with my wife and kids.  I can’t do that just now until it’s all sorted – I’m never going to be able to settle with my wife and kids, and give myself peace of mind and be able to go out and have an honest job, and not be standing there thinking of an hour of Thomas Campbell and whether he be guilty and him lying in prison and all that carry on, do you know what I mean. 

 

JOHN: In 1989 I saw you in Pentonville Prison, spoke to you in Pentonville Prison with Mr Ashman and Mr Cobb and there was an interview then, a tape recorded interview.  After that, you sent a letter to Glasgow, to my office in Glasgow saying basically that you retracted it and, could you tell me why you did that?

 

LOVE: Well after I saw you right, like a liaison officer, I think that’s what they call it, is it? A what officer?

 

DOUGLAS: Liaison, liaison.

 

LOVE: They’ve got one of them in Pentonville and he came to see me, and said to me, who was it that saw you and all that, because they know all about me.  Everywhere I go Mr Carroll, I’ve got a fucking folder that high mate and its stamped right on the tope of it man, supergrass, I’m telling you mate, everywhere I go.  I told them the day, if I’m arrested anywhere in Britain mate it comes up on the computer that I’m a supergrass – I was involved in this and all that, and the cops try the naughty coming in and all that, give  us this and all that.  We he, he was, he said to me to watch what you’re doing and all that, like you know what you’re up against and all that and like, if these people get out and all that carry on, you just don’t know the half of it mate, you don’t know the half of it.

 

JOHN: So the liaison officer came and spoke to you…?

 

LOVE: Spoke to me, that was just after you left,  That was the afternoon you left, came and spoke to me and that’s what made me write the letter.

 

JOHN: When you wrote the letter retracting….

 

LOVE: Yeah.

 

JOHN: You, you made some reference in that letter to threats or whatever?

 

LOVE: Well, that’s them isn’t it?  That’s the reason, isn’t it?  But it was never any threats made against us, there never has been any threats made against me ever, know what I mean.

 

LISA: Liaison officer suggested that things might happen to you if you go ahead with what you told Mr Carroll?

 

LOVE: That’s it. That’s it.  I mean, there’s no doubt in my mind that where I’m staying just now, I’m out on bail for like, trying to murder police officers and all that in Ealin.  I mean, they don’t fucking like me just now, but when this gets out man, they’re not going to be very fucking happy, you know what I mean, know what I mean.  So like, I’m arrested for, me and my mates got arrested for murder on the Ealin, so it’s going to get hot there for us, I know the crack with them.  I mean, I’m on, I’m on the seat now and can tell you what happens and all that in cop stations and how they operate.  You haven’t been in it mate, you’re not experienced – I’ve twenty years experience with the cops in Glasgow and down here, you know what I mean.  It’s murder mate.

 

JOHN: Are you on to any threat just now?

 

LOVE: No, I’m not under any threat whatsoever just now.  I came here voluntarily – I got the bus from my house in Northolt the day in Greenford and I came over here to see you voluntarily.

 

DOUGLAS: Why have you decided to do it again?

 

LOVE: So I could come off the drugs man.  It saves me taking them doesn’t it. I might be able to have peace of mind without drugs now – it’s been a lot on my mind in eight years, it is man.  I mean, it’s alright me sitting here talking and all that, but I went through a lot in my mind, you know what I mean.  And like, it’s done a lot of damage to my relaltionship with my wife and all that, maybe sometime I get a little bit depressed and I’m sitting there and like, I’m dead….  If I start to go a bit agitated dead easy and all that carry on, you know what I mean, I never used to be like that, know what I mean never used a bit of violen… never lifted my hands to anybody in my life man, all this.   

 

DOUGLAS: And have you thought it through, have you thought through the implications of what you’re doing?

 

LOVE: I thought through the implications and I weigh them all up and at the end of the day it can’t be any worse than what it is, can it.

 

DOUGLAS:  You said that there’s a file with Supergrass stamped on the front, has it ever worked out in your favour that this has come up on the computer would you say?

 

LOVE: No, I fucking don’t think so man, I don’t think so mate.  I think their attitude will always be they can’t be seen to be helping you because their attitude is, that if they get, if you get, well Mr Carroll there gets light that they’re helping me, Mr Carroll’s in with the bite – wait a minute, you’re doing this for him and all that.  That’s why I never got my house, that’s why they never sorted me out with my house and my job and settled us down anywhere, because they couldn’t afford, they couldn’t be seen to be helping me.

 

DOUGLAS: Because Mr Carroll’s investigating and….

 

LOVE: Becau… I mean, they must of, I mean, let’s put it this way, you know what I was involved in, what would, what would you have expected them to do for us?  What would you have expected, as you know what I was up against and what I did in court, what would you have expected them to do?  Would you have expected them to sort us out with a safe address and settle me down somewhere?

 

JOHN: Did they ever give….

 

LOVE: Why did they not do it, why did they not do it, did they have something to hide?

 

JOHN: Did they ever give you some form of protection?

 

LOVE: Nothing at all mate, nothing at all.  The only protection I got was in prison and you’ve seen the protection yourself.  You could’ve walked into Perth hospital mate, and done that with a gun and shot me.  I mean, OK, you might have got 15 year and not out of Perth Prison, but you could still have done it.

 

JOHN: When you first saw me in Perth Prison, em, at the hospital unit in Perth Prison, what was the first thing that went through your mind?

 

LOVE: I wasn’t too sure.  I mean I never, I wasn’t, I mean I don’t even think my mind was fully functional anyway because like I was fucking in that tank – you saw it, didn’t you – 24 hours a day and like, the screws were animals man, fucked you about and all that, you know what I mean, but I didn’t really know what was happening, I don’t think I was too sure of what was happening, I think.  At the end of the day, I don’t trust anybody, what they did to me – it didn’t matter who came to me.  I mean, you’re very lucky, it took me a while to get to trust people again – I wouldn’t trust anybody and that’s the way it’s been for 8 years.  I’ve trusted nobody, that’s why I’ve not wanted to speak to anybody coming near me – I’ve always kept them at a distance, I didn’t want to trust them, you know what I mean.  I think actually it was, I think it all boiled down to trusting people, but they had done that, and I didn’t want to trust anybody and I didn’t want any more complications and all that.

 

LISA: Did the police ever threaten you if you went back on your story, on the statement that you made in court….?

 

LOVE: Yes, well, that was going to happen if I went back on my statement.  I would have been charged with attempted murder, conspiracy to murder and all that carry on and all sorts.  And they had the robbery sewn up as far as I was concerned – that would have been another 10 year or something for me, for the armed robbery and than that, so I probably would have ended up with maybe 20 year.

 

LISA: That was at that time, what about since then, like in the last 8 years since it happened, they never said to you don’t ever go back on this, don’t ever tell what actually happened?

 

LOVE: I’ve never really seen them, have I?  I’ve never really seen any of them, you know what I mean.  The only I’ve had is when I ended up down here after the trial, they gave us all… this is what they did.  I ended up in Dundee, I was staying in Dundee with my wife.  Now, they made all the promises.  Well what they did was they took me to Queen Street Station mate and fired me out on my toes and said, bye, and that was it – I was on my own


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #35 

JOHN: After the trial, after you actually gave evidence, did you ever see McKillop or Walker?

 

LOVE: Oh yes, I mean I was, I mean the day I got out mate, I was taken to Pitt Street Police Station where we had a meeting with Norrie Walker, who was there, Charlie Craig and all that.  All just great congratulations and all that carry on and then just blanked me.

 

JOHN: The day you got out of where, out of the High Court?

 

LOVE: That was, that was the day I was released from, the day I was actually, I gave my evidence and I was on remand as I said, in Perth at the time.  Well the day I was actually released was from the Sheriff Court in Glasgow and it was for a driving while disqualified, and I got a year deferred sentence OK, and back a year later, they gave me 12 month imprisonment for it mate.  They let me off there and then and then took me back and gave me 12 month.

 

JOHN: It was after you got your 12 months when you got out, is that when you saw Walker and McKillop or was it after the deferred sentence?

 

LOVE: No I saw them, the time I got out, well the driving while disqualified that they were holding me on in Perth before, during the time of the trial, the Doyle murder trial right, they took me down to Perth Sheriff….Glasgow Sheriff Court and appeared for it, then I was given a years deferred sentence.

 

JOHN: Right.

 

LOVE: Is that what you call it yes?

 

JOHN: Deferred sentence for 12 months….

 

LOVE: Yes.

 

JOHN: Were you released from the court then?

 

LOVE: I was released from the court,eh, that’s what I’m fucking saying mate, there was fucking screws from Perth Prison to take me down and listen to this – 8 screws man, taking me in a transit van from Perth Prison with a Serious Crime Squad car at the front of it, with a fucking car with a blue light all the way down the road mate.  We met some more police cars at fucking, you’ll not believe this man, I’m telling you, they mey two police cars at the roundabout when you come through Dunblane, you know the roundabout?  There was another two sitting there, who came onto the convoy of the van, got me to Glasgow Sheriff Court, I got a year deferred sentence, took me up to Pitt Street, gave me my train fare home to Dundee and flung me out at Glasgow Queen Street.

 

LISA: Is that when you phoned Mr Walker?

 

LOVE: That’s when I went up, I saw them, I went up and saw them didn’t I?  He took me back to Pitt Street and that, and whatever, know what I mean?  Just blanked us.  Took us to Queen Street and flung us out.  I said, what’s the score with you and that, Willie Kelly it was, and the woman said, it’s nothing to do with us and all that carry on, know what I mean?

 

LISA: So you had gone in there to say to them, right well I’VE KEPT MY half of the bargain, where’s my house, where’s my job…?

 

LOVE: Well that’s right…. They just blanked me.  They just took me in a car and dropped me off at Glasgow Queen Street and said, bye, you’re on your own mate.

 

LISA: So will you tell me again, who, who were the police officers that told you the story to tell in court?

 

LOVE:  It was the man called Norrie Walker, now…. I don’t know who the other man is but I think his name is McKillop.  I don’t know, I’m not sure, that’s only me people hearing that his name was that, I’m not sure, but like, I could recognise him again and say that was him.

 

LISA: Craig didn’t eh, suggest anything?

 

LOVE: Oh he was in on it.  He had me up at Easterhouse Police Station telling that I was to say this, and I was saying this, and everything would be alright….

 

LISA: So it was Walker, Craig and another officer?

 

LOVE: That’s it, yes.

 

JOHN: How many times did Craig have you at Easterhouse Police Station?

 

LOVE: Twice.  He had me there like, the day after I got out on bail and then a couple of days later he had me there.

 

JOHN: Did they ever have you at any other Police Station, or other location?

 

LOVE: Yes, Pitt Street.

 

JOHN: How many times did he have you at Pitt Street?

 

LOVE: I think I was at Pitt Street maybe three or four times in the, all the time that I was, I was also actual…actually at eh, the old Central Police Station, you know the Central at….

 

JOHN: At Turnbull Street, the Central District Court building….?

 

LOVE: That’s it, the Central Courts are in it…. Yes, I was in there a couple of times as well.  That’s where they used to take me when I was seeing…. Like it just depends.  I used to go to this Fiscal’s office and that or they would take me to a cop station first and like, you know what I mean.

 

JOHN: You were at Easterhouse a couple of time, Pitt Street…

 

LOVE: …a couple of times, maybe three or four times….

 

JOHN: …couple of times, three or four times….

 

LOVE: Then I was at Central maybe twice or something….

 

JOHN: …Turnbull Street….twice.  Any other locations?

 

LOVE: No, no other locations.

 

JOHN: And was all this prior to your giving evidence in the Doyle trial?

 

LOVE: It was prior to me going to court and giving evidence in the trial.

 

DOUGLAS: When it comes up on the computers down here when you’re arrested, how do the Police in London and England react to what you’ve done?  Are they impressed?

 

LOVE: I mean, they’re reaction is that they want fucking more, they’re greedy cunts… they don’t know when to stop man.  Are you on the bandwagon like that, “Bill, come on now man, just sign that there mate and we’ll sort it out in the morning, you’ll get bail”.

 

DOUGLAS: How do they… when they find out that eh, the law in Glasgow didn’t fulfil their promises….?

 

LOVE: But that’s what I’m saying.  Now when I was arrested in Ealin and all that other day there right, the cops and that in Ealin because it comes up now and they contacted up the road just to make sure and all that right, that I wasn’t….  Now, the guys were sick, the guys were sick that they had to go back to that fucking address at the house in Northolt and all that and they knew what was happening because I told them.  I said, “listen mate”, I said, “see all them up the road, they’re all just dirty fucking scum mate”, I said, “I don’t want to help them”, know what I mean.

 

JOHN: Are you talking about the police?

 

LOVE: This is the police in Ealin and I’m telling them what’s going on and I’m saying “listen mate, I don’t want to help them up there”, and all that, you know what I mean, I said I’m not interested.

 

JOHN: Them up there, who would “they” be?

 

LOVE: That would be the cops in Glasgow.

 

DOUGLAS: Had they suggested  that you help them out up there or something?

 

LOVE: Oh yes.  I mean they, I mean they, they would still have had me in Garthamlock just now if they could have gotten away with it – giving them information and telling them what this is and that, you know what I mean.  I mean, they fucking had me marked, they sent me back to Garthamlock after I had Norrie Walker sent me back to Garthamlock….after Tommy Campbell had been arrested and all that.  And wanted me to go back into Garthamlock and find shotguns and drugs and all that carry on.

 

JOHN: Did you know anything about shotguns and drugs?

 

LOVE: I didn’t know anything about shotguns and drugs.  I had only seen one in my life.  That was the first time I think I had seen a sawn off shotgun in my life.

 

JOHN: Is that the one you used at the icecream van?

 

LOVE: That’s the one I used, yes.

 

DOUGLAS: Did you go back to Garthamlock?

 

LOVE: Yes.

 

DOUGLAS: Did you do that?

 

LOVE: For a day.  Then I fucked off down the road, down here with my wife and that.  Then like, I had cops…. I ended up in my stepdad’s house in Ivy Bridge Estate, that’s Summerwood Road, not that address but a different address on the same road.  And like, I actually had a fucking cop tracking me down man, I was fucking, I walked out of my fucking unc… my stepdad’s  man, and there was a big cop station there.  He says “Billy Love”, I said, “You’re fucking kidding man”.  I fucked off with the intention of just blanking them and not giving them evidence.  I was wanting to get off man, on my toes, but they tracked me down again.  And then, this is what they did.  I ended up back in Dundee and they nicked me for a driving while disqualified because they knew I was fucking off didn’t I?  I kept trying to move and all that….

 

JOHN: Are you saying that you were trying to avoid being available to give evidence?

 

LOVE: I mean, if they hadn’t of got me, I wouldn’t have given evidence in the trial, as simple as that.  I wouldn’t have turned up.

 

DOUGLAS: And you’re willing to sign statements and affidavits based on your previous conversation with Mr Carroll?

 

LOVE: That’s it, that’s it.

 

DOUGLAS:  And just to recap.  Nobody has threatened or offered you any inducements at all?

 

LOVE: Nothing at all, no.  A cup of tea, I got.

 

DOUGLAS: A cup of tea, yes…

 

LOVE: In a nice hotel room.

 

DOUGLAS: I think that’s it, right.  Thanks very much.

 

JOHN: Do you want to date that Doug….

 

DOUGLAS: Oh yes, its eh, Saturday the twenty second February….

 

JOHN: It’s nineteen ninety two and it’s my birthday.

 

SATURDAY 22ND FEBRUARY 1992.


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #36 

Examining injustice
Numerous miscarriages of justice have come to light in the last 15 years, but have changes to the law made fresh tragedies impossible or is there a need for a more radical and fundamental reform of the criminal justice system?

Audio  Watch Chris Summers’ report   Real 56K
Quicktime

FULL DISCLOSURE OF EVIDENCE

 

Non-disclosure of evidence has been a fatal flaw in ALL, if not most Miscarriages of Justice.

 

This allows a 10 to 15 year safety net for all concerned to be either retired or dead, thus leaving the innocent incarcerated and the Police and Prosecution to have ample time to cover things up.

 

In some cases, the conviction is due largely to the testimony of police so-called 'Supergrass evidence', that the police will claim that if they made this information public, would put the informers lives at risk.

 

In any event, they still call them as witnesses and claim reward money, blood money, from the Judicial system that put the innocents behind bars in the first place.

 

(This practise is known as the 'Ten Year Itch').

 

 

 

 


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #37 

A miscarriage of justice can result from non-disclosure of evidence by police or prosecution, fabrication of evidence, poor identification, overestimation of the evidential value of expert testimony, unreliable confessions due to police pressure or psychological instability and misdirection by a judge during trial. Since 1984 two pieces of legislation have been introduced in an attempt to prevent further miscarriages.

 

The Police And Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) gave detectives rigid rules on how long they could question suspects for and insisted interviews be taped to ensure there was no mistreatment or undue intimidation. The Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act was also introduced in an attempt to make sure police or the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) disclose to the defence everything which could be relevant to their case. However a recent review of disclosure undertaken by the Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate found the CPIA did not have the "confidence of criminal practitioners".

 

Adversarial system under attack Paddy Hill, one of the Birmingham Six, is sceptical such legislation is enough. Mr Hill, who has set up his own pressure group Miscarriages Of Justice Organisation (MOJO), told BBC News Online: "Justice is something that is not on this government's curriculum." He said the criminal justice system needed a radical overhaul to make it "more open and accountable". Mr Hill would like to see: The adversarial system replaced with a continental-style inquisitorial system, where the driving motive behind any police investigation is the search for the truth.

 

 Juries forced to give their verdicts in writing, to amplify on their reasons and guard against the danger of "perverse" verdicts. Judges and other judicial officials being elected, rather than chosen by "the establishment". Changes in the law to ensure police officers who break the law are convicted and sent to prison. Kevin Christian, whose brother Derek is serving a life sentence for a murder he denies committing, is a member of the pressure group Innocent. He told BBC News Online: "The biggest problem seems to be the Court of Appeal and its lack of willingness to recognise and correct errors.

 

The Guildford Four is a prime example. Even after the Balcombe Street Gang had admitted they were responsible for the Woolwich bomb, the Court of Appeal would not even entertain the possibility that the Guildford Four were innocent. "The adversarial system means that the criminal justice system can easily turn into an upmarket local dramatic society with the two main protagonists being the prosecuting and defence counsels, the difference being that the defence counsel may not have had time to learn his lines before the curtain goes up.

 

" Mr Christian favours the French system of investigating magistrates or the Staatsanwalte in Germany, in which the prosecuting lawyers are involved from the outset. "A mixture of circumstantial evidence and tenuous or contentious forensic evidence can be very tempting to a jury. Many miscarriages result, ironically, from weak prosecution cases. Where there is very little in the way of a prosecution case to dismantle, it is very difficult to mount a cogent defence case," he said.

 

Investigating alleged miscarriages The Criminal Cases Review Commission was set up by the last government in an attempt to investigate alleged miscarriages of justice properly. It is an independent body responsible for investigating alleged miscarriages in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The commission has 14 members including chairman Sir Frederick Crawford, barrister Jill Gort, former chief constable Baden Gitt and journalist David Jessel, former presenter of Trial and Error and Rough Justice.

 

 Critics say it is under-funded, understaffed and not sufficiently independent. It currently has a backlog of 1,200 cases (about a third of all applications to date). Chris Mullin MP, a former journalist for TV's World In Action, said: "Miscarriages of justice can occur under any system and I have no doubt they will occur in the future." But Mr Mullin, nowadays a junior minister, told BBC News Online: "We should never be complacent.

 

The system has improved considerably since the big miscarriages of the mid-1970s. PACE, which came in in 1983, had regulated interviews and improved the treatment of suspects and just about all interrogations are now recorded. But the most important change is that people who believe they are the victims of miscarriages of justice have somewhere to go: the CCRC." He admitted the CCRC had a backlog and "could do with speeding up its handling of cases" but said it had a good track record.

 

 Mr Mullin said: "73% of cases which have been referred back to the Court of Appeal by the CCRC have resulted in quashed convictions." Mr Mullin admitted the adversarial system had flaws and said: "There is a strong case for a system which finds the truth, rather than a contest between skilled adversaries. But you should realise that the continental inquisitorial system had also led to miscarriages of justice.

 

" Police role 'exaggerated' The Chief Constable of Kent, Sir David Phillips, is the Association of Chief Police Officers' spokesman on criminal justice and he admitted the system is not perfect. "It's not safe. Far too many guilty people are acquitted to the danger of the public.

 

We are too often strangled by a system of rules and interpretation, which prevents us getting to the truth," he said. "While trials are contests, there is a high level of acquittals, which must mean either the police or the courts are getting it wrong. Very often the whole case is not heard. Juries are not able to put the whole picture together." Sir David does not believe the adversarial system needs replacing but he would like to see changes. He said: "The defence should have to disclose their evidence so the court can take control of it.

 

There is no reason why the defence should be able to keep evidence secret so it can be used in an ambush." He believes there should be less of an emphasis on advocates' skills and more on the evidence. "Let the jury see the evidence. I am in favour of them seeing tapes of defendants being interviewed so they can make up their own minds," he said. As for the police's role in miscarriages of justice, Sir David believes it has been exaggerated. "In the CCRC's annual report they said that where things had gone wrong it was rarely the police's fault.

 

 It was usually the defence or the prosecution." When it comes to police officers who fabricate evidence to secure a conviction, he said ACPO was keener than anyone to see them prosecuted and convicted. "If people are going to tell lies about how they obtained evidence, you are going to have difficulties. Most cases of police corruption are discovered by the police and corrupt officers are one of our highest priorities to root out and prosecute," said Sir David.


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #38 

Long history of corruption, racism and ciminality

by Hassan Mahamdallie

THE MORRIS inquiry is the latest in a series of investigations that should have exposed endemic racism and corruption in the Metropolitan Police.

Murders, armed robberies, drug dealing, “fitting up” innocent people, pocketing millions in “dirty money”, high level cover-ups and the activities of the freemasons have been the hallmarks of the “finest police force in the world”—as it likes to be known.

A new book, Untouchables—Dirty Cops, Bent Justice and Racism in Scotland Yard, describes a world in which Flying Squad officers and armed robbers are fused together into one violent and corrupt body.

 

ferrisconspiracy : VIEW

 

If you are thinking of becoming a POLICE OFFICER to change the way for a better society that has no place for corruption in its rank & file then you may want to take up the offer below.

 

You can only change the problems within the circle and we can criticize it from our knowledge of past and present POLICE OFFICERS who have tarnished the reputation of STRATHCLYDE POLICE.

 

The article below may be of some assistance to you:

 

Strathclyde Police Recruitment Information Day

Force Training and Recruitment CentreSunday 23 April 2006
11.00am to 3.00pm
Force Training and Recruitment Centre, Eaglesham Road, East Kilbride

Strathclyde Police is holding its first ever recruitment information day at the Force Training and Recruitment Centre on Sunday 23 April 2006.

This information day is designed for anyone who is interested in becoming a police officer, cadet, special constable or a member of the force support staff.

Throughout the day, there’ll be presentations and an opportunity for you to talk to members of the recruiting and training staff. They will be able to answer your questions and give practical advice about any of these roles.

For anybody interested in becoming a police officer there will also be a demonstration of officer safety techniques.

Force support staff perform a variety of essential roles, including administration, communications, human resources, forensic science and IT.

Representatives from the Strathclyde Police Contact Centre and the Information Resources Department will be on hand to provide specific advice for people who may be thinking of applying for a job in these areas.

For further information, please contact the Recruitment Team on 01355 566362 or 566364.


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #39 

ferrisconspiracy : UPDATE/F.O.I.

 

The Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (http://www.hmso.gov.uk) gives a general right of access to all types of recored information held by publiic authorities, sets out exemptions from that right and places a number of related obligations on public authorities including publication schemes and records management. The Act applies to any records held by the authority no matter when they were created.

From January 2005, any person who makes a request to a public authority for information must be informed whether the authority holds that information and, subject to exemptions, supplied with that information.

Individuals already have the right to apply for information about themselves under the Data Protections Act 1998. To assist you with this type of request, brief details about making an application are included in the Data Protection Section.

As far as public authorities are concerned, the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act will extend this right of access to non-personal information. Public authorities will be required to adopt and maintain a publication scheme, setting out the classes of information that are available, The manner in which they intend to publish the information and whether a charge will be made for the information.

The purpose of a publication scheme is to ensure that a significant amount of information is available without the need for specific request. Schemes are intended to encourage organisations to publish more information proactively and to develop a greater culture of openness. Chief Constables required to have an approved publication scheme in operationby June 1st 2004.

Scottish Information Commissioner

The Act will be enforced by the Scottish Information Commissioner. The Scottish Information Commissioner deals only with Scottish Public authorities as defined by Section 3 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

The Office of The Scottish Information Commissioner
Kinburn Castle
Doubledykes Road
St. Andrews
Fife
KY16 9DS
Tel: 01334 464 610

http://www.itspublicknowledge.info

 

Information Commissioner for England and Wales

Enquiries relating to public authorities in England and Wales are covered by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and are enforced by the Information Commissioner for England and Wales. Queries under the Data Protection Act 1998, including those relating to Scotland, are dealt with by the Information Commissioner.

TheInformation Commissioner
The Information Commission Offices
Wycliff House
Chesire
SK9 5AF
Tel: 01625 545700

http://www.dataprotection.gov.uk


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #40 

On this page
Where are people bullied? | What is bullying?
Recognising a bully | How does bullying cause injury to health?
On another page
Why me?
Why have my colleagues deserted me?
Answers to frequently asked questions on bullying

Where are people bullied?

  • at work by their manager or co-workers or subordinates, or by their clients (bullying, workplace bullying, mobbing, work abuse, harassment, discrimination)

 

  • at home by their partner or parents or siblings or children (bullying, assault, domestic violence, abuse, verbal abuse)

 

  • at school (bullying, harassment, assault)

 

  • in the armed forces (bullying, harassment, discrimination, assault)

 

  • by those in authority (harassment, abuse of power)

 

 

 


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #41 

INTERVIEW WITH THOMAS TC CAMPBELL

02/04/2006

LOCATION: HOME OF THOMAS TC CAMPELL

PRESENT: THOMAS TC CAMPBELL, THE FERRIS CONSPIRACY TEAM & MRS KAREN PACKER CAMPBELL

 

T.C: This is Thomas Campbell, with regards to Ice Cream Wars, so called trial.

F.C.T: Tommy, can you just run us through what happened when you were arrested?

T.C: When I was arrested, I think it was 12th May 1984, eh, I was awakened by banging at the door, I tried to answer the door - took the first lock off and the rest of the door was pushed in, jamming my toes. Police barge in, eh, hustle me into the living room, eh, begin to tear the house apart. I’m asking them what, what the charge is, what it’s about and all they’re saying is, conspiracy, conspiracy. I asked them what conspiracy, but they wouldn’t tell me anything. Eh, just tearing the house apart, eh, just emptying drawers out and tipping them onto the floor - not even searching them, they’re just wrecking the house, as if to say, eh, you know, we’re searching this, although they haven’t searched it, so just pulling drawers out, emptying the contents out onto the floor and moving onto the next drawer and so on. Eh, eventually I get them to tell me what the charge is, and at that time, they say attempted murder.

 

 Eh, the only thing they had taken from the house, I think it was £260, em, and from there that was it, from there into the police car. I turned around and said to the people in the house, “I’ll see you later on today”, as I thought I’d be back later on that day, eh, and from there to the police station, I see other people there, I see Thomas Lafferty there, Thomas Lafferty Junior, and his mother, my sister Agnes. I thought they were there because Thomas had done something, some kind of juvenile naughtiness or something, and that she was there with him. It turns out that they were my co-accused; they were also charged. Eh, the first charge at that time was conspiracy to further business aims, with no specific detail, eh, and then I saw Thomas McGraw, Thomas Gray, yeah I think that was everybody… and, Thomas Lafferty Senior.

F.C.T: So after you’re arrest, and you’ve been charged, were you charged with the murders at that time?.

T.C: No. That was eh… the papers… the day I was arrested, although I didn’t see the papers, later on that night, one of the police showed me a newspaper and the newspaper was saying that I had been arrested for the Doyle murders, although I hadn’t been charged, and it wasn’t anything to do with my arrest.

F.C.T: So when was the first time that you would have known that you were charged in relation to the Doyle’s?

T.C: Eh, later on that night, I was charged with something like fourteen charges - breaching the peace - nothing that was anything to do with me, eh, and the most serious charge about it was the shooting of an ice cream van. That was the, eh, it wasn’t until, I think, ten days later that I was taken down to the Sheriff Court…

F.C.T: Is this while you’re on remand?

T.C: I was on remand. Taken down to the Sheriff Court, eh, and pulled into a side room, and asked, in effect, to fit up Thomas Lafferty Junior. Eh, the officer said to me… I’m trying to remember his name - a well know name as well. Anyway, the officer said to me that eh, there were two options here. He had been given his instructions from the Procurator Fiscal. Either I sign this statement, or I myself, will be charged with murder. That eh…the statement was effectively saying that Thomas Lafferty had asked me for money, eh, to go on the run because he had murdered the Doyle family, had set fire to their door, and he wanted me to sign the statement saying Thomas Lafferty had asked me for money and had said this to me, and it wasn’t true - none of it was true, so I refused to sign it. At the point, quite agitated, telling me either I sign that statement or I’ll be charged.

 

Started counting down, ten, nine…a minute, I think they gave me a minute - counting it down. Eh, it was just arguing back and forward, and at the end of that he said, “bring that other bastard in here”. Brought in Thomas Lafferty and charged us with murder. He asked if we had anything to say, and I said, “No reply”. I said it out loud to let Thomas Lafferty know not to say anything. He said “No reply” as well. At that, he started scribbling on his clipboard. “No reply, no reply, you bastard - I’ll give you no reply”, as he’s scribbling down. So I realise he’s scribbling down a verbal, eh, and you can imagine the horror of that - you’ve just been charged with six murders, and if that’s not horrifying enough to realise that you’ve been falsely verballed for six murders, it means you might go to prison for it - you might actually be convicted for it if he puts down false verbal. So it was a bit of a panic at that point, eh, noticing that one of the people at the door had changed his weight - like a guard standing at eh, ‘at ease’ position, changing his weight from one foot to another and at that point, I barged through the door. Eh, another officer, Wiley, grabbed a hold of my jacket, and I dragged him out into the corridor into the Sergeant’s bar, eh, reached over the Sergeant’s bar, grabbed a hold of the inner rim. “Sergeant, Sergeant I’ve just been charged with murder.

 

 I want it noted that I made ‘no reply’”. The sergeant wrote down, ‘OK, you’re Thomas TC Campbell, isn’t it?’. That’s what he said, “Thomas TC Campbell, isn’t it?”. ‘CC’ he wrote down - I was watching him upside down - CC, I later found out that meant Capital Crime - and then he noted the time and ’no reply’.

F.C.T: Can you identify what Police Station that was Tommy?

T.C: This was Glasgow Sheriff Court, the old Sheriff Court.

F.C.T: You were actually taken to the Court buildings?

T.C: Yes, we were taken down from Barlinnie to court in regards to the first petition, so this was to see whether we were getting bail on the first petition. I mean, they were saying to me at the court, the police were saying to me, eh, no doubt you’re expecting to go home today, and that will be true - that is true. Because none of the charges related to me.

 

I mean, they really didn’t relate to me, eh, so it signified me going home. I think that was the seven days petition warrant up, eh, two, two or three days in the cells before that, so probably about ten days later.

F.C.T: Just to go back to that deal that the Police had offered you to fit up Thomas Lafferty, was it you exclusively that was offered that deal?

T.C: Oh no, no no. Everybody was offered that deal. Eh, Joseph Steele was offered that deal, eh, Gary Lane Moore was offered that deal, Thomas Gray was offered that deal - not just with Thomas Lafferty. Eh, the fit up with Thomas Lafferty wasn’t happening, eh, those deals reverted to me, so the people were being asked to say that I had said this and that I had said that, so Thomas Lafferty was taken out of the equation and I was put into his place.

 

It was quite common at the time - everybody spoke about the deals that they had been offered, and what it was that the police wanted them to say, and it was all pretty extreme stuff - it was all verbal confessions to another prisoner, verbal confessions to another criminal.

F.C.T: Can you define what it was that they were asking you to do in relation to all the fit ups and the deals?

T.C: What they were asking me to do, was to sign a statement - a statement already written eh, for me just to sign, to say that it was me that said it. The statement says that Thomas Lafferty approached me and asked me for money, eh, to go on the run. When I asked him what he wanted to go on the run for, he said he had set fire to the Doyle’s house, and that the police were coming after him, and he needed to escape before the police caught up with him.

F.C.T: How did you know the contents of the document?

T.C: They handed it to me to read. It was pinned to a clipboard and they turned the clipboard round for me to read, then handed me the pen for me to sign. If I sign this, I’m going straight out the door - all charges dropped and I’ll be used as a witness against Thomas Lafferty.

F.C.T: On the clipboard, did you identify whether it was typed or handwritten?

T.C: It was a police statement handwritten, eh, I asked, for instance, years and years later, I asked, I told the Commissioner about this, and said this police statement must be registered - it must be numbered. One of the things that they found was that some of the police statements were photocopied. I mean, there was another point in time, it was at Baird Street Police Station, eh, where they showed me two statements - again, they were police statements.

 

 I mean, formal police statement with handwritten statements on them, and these statements were effectively destroying Thomas Lafferty’s alibi, and this was the police trying to convince me that Thomas Lafferty had killed the Doyle family - Thomas Lafferty Junior had killed the Doyle family and his alibis were false, they could now prove his alibis were false. Well obviously, I know enough to know that these police statements are registered and numbered OK, and if somebody writes on a police statement, then that police statement must be accountable - they must be able to trace that statement and find it and put it in its order of number.

 

 So when you tell investigators about this, and they traced the statements, what they came back with was that there had been an enquiry into two statements, in a case, where two statements had shown up with the same number. This revealed that the police were photocopying blank statements, writing on them, and whatever one they got to work, they were destroying the others OK?

F.C.T: With regards to the statements Tommy, nobody is professing that you’re an angel - you have been involved in things in the past and you know police protocol….

T.C: Yes, I do understand that.

F.C.T: Would that be a key factor in you knowing exactly what the statements were, based upon the knowledge…

T.C: Yeah, yeah. Based upon the knowledge that the police had made five attempts in the past to fit me up for various things, and so therefore, I know… I’ve got a wider awareness of what the police are capable of - the way they plant evidence, the way they verbal people and the way they can bully people into signing false evidence and things like that, so I had a wider awareness of that, than most people.

F.C.T: So if this deal, that is readily available and you’ve got the experience to note these things, how tempted, or how intimidating would it be for someone that’s never had that experience?

T.C: For someone who has never been in that situation before, who would never expect these kind of things to happen, it’s, it‘s… the… total belief. The police say, “sign this statement and you walk free. Don’t sign it and you go to prison for thirty years”. Total believe that, and you must totally believe that - if you don’t totally believe that, you’re going to go to prison for thirty years. The way I looked at it was, they had tried these kind of things in the past and failed, and if anybody could reveal what they have done in this case, it would be better me doing it than my nephew because my nephew was so naïve, he would fall for every dirty trick they could do.

 

 Really at that point, I still did not believe that they would go through to fit people up. I knew they would fit people up for bank robberies, fit people up with drugs, fit people up with guns, fit people up for anything, but I did not believe - I was still naïve enough to believe that they wouldn't fit somebody up for murder.

F.C.T: You mentioned Thomas Lafferty Junior. Has he got a nickname?

T.C: No.

F.C.T: It’s just Thomas Lafferty Junior?

T.C: It was just Tommy, Thomas or Tam.

F.C.T: Why do you think he was the subject of the police fit up? Why was he targeted?

T.C: I think he was targeted because he’s an easy, he’s an easy target. He’s an easy target - he tells a lot of tales, tells a lot of fairy tales and things like that. He’s really quite naïve, eh, not the sharpest tool in the box, and I think the fact that he was related to me, me with an ice cream van, makes it easier, you know, for that connection.

 

I think he was just an easy target, he was somebody who was easy to manipulate - easy for them to manipulate. I mean, at one point, Thomas would say, for example, they’ve arrested his mother, arrested his father, arrested his uncle, me, and at one point Thomas had said to us, eh, “the police had said to me that if I sign a statement saying that I done it, they’ll get the charge reduced to culpable homicide, I which case I’ll get four years and with remission be out in two. Do you think I should sign it, because if I sign it, it means that my Uncle Tommy is going free, it means my Mum is going free and it means that my Dad is going free”.

 

So he thinks that he’s doing a good turn, you know. He’s in a position where he thinks he can do everybody a good turn - everybody will walk free if he confesses to something that he didn’t do, and they convince him that it’ll be a short sentence, you know, eh, so I mean the answer to that was Tam Gray said, “Did you do it?”, and he answered that, “No I didn’t fucking do it” - that kind of way, and Tam said, “Well sign fuck all then”. He doesn’t care whether he’s going free or not - he doesn’t want Thomas to sign a statement that isn’t true. His father says to him, eh Thomas Lafferty, Shadda Lafferty, eh, that’s where they made the mistake. They were talking about ’young Shadda said this, young Shadda said that’. They’ve got witnesses saying ’young Shadda’ but they never called him Shadda - his father was Shadda, not the son. So that was the fundamental mistake they made as far as I was concerned.

 

 So his father said to him, “What did your mum say to you?”. “My mum said don’t sign anything that’s not true just to get her free”, because they often do that. They often arrest the mother to put pressure on the child, eh, to, force the child to conform. In that case, the mother was aware of what they were capable of doing and she was just telling the son, don’t fall for that.

F.C.T: So at a very early stage, Thomas Lafferty was the focus of attention?

T.C: Thomas Lafferty was the focus of attention, eh…

F.C.T: When did that focus of attention directly focus on you?

T.C: I think when eh, let me see….it must have been because I wouldn’t go along with the fit up. It was at the point where I wouldn’t go along with it, eh, and of course, there was a lot, they were trying to do a lot of things with Thomas Lafferty, they were trying to do a lot of different things from a lot of different angles, and they later discovered that it didn’t come through.

 

So they were trying to get a lot of false statements from people, and they actually created the statements, and the people alleged to be responsible for the statements had gone to the police with their lawyers to make complaints that the police were writing down things, putting things in their mouths that they had never said, so all that fit up material regarding Thomas Lafferty was beginning to disintegrate, fall apart.

F.C.T: Were these complaints ever lodged?

T.C: They were lodged at the police station and with the withdrawal of the charge against Thomas Lafferty, they didn’t go any further.

F.C.T: If we could move on a bit Tommy, whilst you were on remand, you have all realised that you’ve been charged with murder, mass murder, wiping out a family - what was the impression between you all with regards to knowing that there was deal on the table, knowing that you’ve been fitted up - what was the feeling amongst you all?

T.C: It’s hard to describe… it’s like shock, it’s like something that can’t sink in to you, you just…. It’s like something that is happening to somebody else beside you, but you know, surely this didn’t really relate to me is going through your head. You can’t get it to sink into your head, it’s so hard to accept, and of course, with so many people charged all around about you, you really… you must think, they must know more than they’re saying.

 

 But they’re thinking the same thing about you. It’s like… I call it ‘pariah syndrome’, you know - eh, if you’re charged with ten child molestations, you can’t be charged with ten if you haven’t at least done some of them, right, so the poison is in the pariah syndrome and sets in against you - everyone looks at you as a pariah. So therefore when there’s people round about you…. I mean, I’m charged with six murders, you know - men, women and children - charged with six murders, nobody believes you.

 

 Nobody believes you and nobody wants to hear you. I mean, I’ve heard it - so many times that people have been charged with things, and nobody believes them if they try and say they’re innocent. So therefore, there are people round about you saying they’re innocent, it’s difficult to believe them as well, and so therefore you can understand how people outside that find it difficult to believe you.

F.C.T: How was the reaction with the cons and the prison staff in relation to the fact that there was a loss of life of…

T.C: I think in our case, it was a bit more unique than you would expect. I mean, it is quite a unique case, but it’s more unique in many ways than people expect. You would expect that people would stand against you - in any situation, the prisoners would stand against you, prison staff would mistreat you, things like that, but from the day that we entered Barlinnie, must have been dozens of prisoners, were approaching us and telling us what the police had done - the police had offered them deals for their drugs charges, to say that this one had said that, or Thomas Campbell said this or Thomas Lafferty said that.

 

 They were offering people to drop charges, serious charges - I mean even rape for God’s sake, you know. A man charged with rape is going to get the charge dropped if he says that TC says to him, you know, eh, I need to get a few quid together, I need to jump the country, they’re coming after me for murdering the Doyles - these kind of things. Mad verbals like that. I mean, there were too many prisoners that had been asked to do it, and nobody believed anything anymore. So when William Love did do it, the rest of the prisoners were aware of what happened, you understand? I wasn’t aware of what had happened. When I went into Barlinnie, it was the prisoners who told me what had happened, you know what I mean? In a situation like that, you would be expected to be treated like a pariah by other prisoners, but this situation wasn’t quite like that because they knew what was happening.

F.C.T: So you’re first involvement and understanding that Billy Love had accepted a deal, what was your understanding of it? Was it against you, or was it against Thomas Lafferty?

T.C: Well to me, when people are saying to me, people saying to me in the exercise yard and shouting down from the galleries, “Billy Love‘s fitting you up, Billy Love’s fitting you up”, and I’m saying, “Who’s Billy Love?”, and it turned out six months later when I saw him in court, I did recognise his face but I didn’t know his name before that. So when people are saying “Billy Love, Billy Love”…. someone can’t fit you up if you’ve never met them and you don’t know them, this is what I’m thinking is impossible.

 

As hard as he might try to fit me up, as hard as might co-operate with the police to fit me up, he can’t do it if he doesn’t know me. He’s got to know something about me to make his evidence credible, so I could not get it in my head. But then, people like Tommy Lafferty (Shadda) and Gary Moore would say things, “You’ll know him when you see him, you’ll know him when you see him”, you know, and I did know him when I saw him, but I just didn’t know that this guy was Billy Love. So my first eh… It’s hard to get into my head that this guy has been fitting me up, so I thought he was fitting me up for something, but I didn’t know he was fitting me up for the murders - I thought he was trying to fit me up for the Ice Cream war, but I didn’t actually know he was fitting me up for the murders.

F.C.T: When was the first time that you read Billy Love’s statement?

T.C: That would have been after receipt of the Indictment, I would say, about two weeks before going to court, before the trial started.

F.C.T: Can you tell us your reaction to it?

T.C: I was absolutely horrified, it was absolute horror. Let me explain something. There was a point where, with my Counsel and my Solicitor, where they read out the statement of a police officer, a Sergeant Ferguson, who used to be in the Serious Crime Squad.

 

Now they read out his statement and the statement covered about ten years of mayhem right, regarding Campbell, eh, regarding me, and it talks about all these crimes where I was followed at this point and under surveillance at that point - names all the dates, times, places of the surveillance and all the things I was thought to have done, or accused to have done, and there must have been a 35 page statement of crimes that I was alleged to have committed and never been convicted for. And when that statement was read to me by my Counsel, I couldn’t help but laugh, right, now all of a sudden my Counsel is horrified because these are serious crimes here, right, that he is talking about, so my reaction to that was, sorry, I know it’s not funny but the funny thing to me is, is that I was serving a ten year sentence throughout that period, right.

 

 All these times that he has mentioned, all these times and places where I was followed and seen, I was actually in prison serving a ten year sentence as a Young Offender. So all this was absolute pure garbage, and you can understand why I am laughing, because I can see it’s garbage and I could see it so easily disproven.

 

 Right, now, in the same strength when you get the statement of Billy Love, it’s so alien, right, like all these….like this statement of all the things I’m supposed to have done, and so alien, that it seems to you to be totally unbelievable, that surely it isn’t going to go anywhere - it can’t go anywhere. I mean, it’s horrifying to hear and see somebody saying this, you know what I mean? It’s horrifying and it’s frightening - it’s terrorising, right, but at the same time, you’ve got a…like a drowning man will grasp at a straw - psychologically, there’s something there that tells you, don’t worry about this because it’s not true, it can’t happen, you know what I mean? It’s not true, it can’t come into reality - it can’t enter the dimension of reality, it must remain as a fantasy and you know, something protects you psychologically from the shock, if you know what I mean.

F.C.T: So the police surveillance report, and your laughter, with regards to the fact that you were spending a ten year sentence throughout the duration of this timescale, was that ever used in evidence?

T.C: The officers called in evidence was cross-examined but wasn’t examined on it, wasn’t questioned on it, so that meant that that statement was lodged as evidence but the Crown did not ask him the questions. I think, eh, Counsel’s first duty is to the Crown - I think Counsel had said to the Crown, “If you take this further and you will be in trouble because look at his previous convictions, and see how it matches up with what he is saying in previous convictions but not a ten year sentence at a certain point in time”, so although he was called, he wasn’t asked to go into anything to do with this but what I was annoyed about was the statement was lodged as evidence.

F.C.T: So if we go back to the Billy Love statement, when were you first made aware of that? Was it Counsel that read it out to you….?

T.C: This would be… Counsel read it out about two weeks before the trial, eh, and it seemed like rubbish anyway, I mean, it seemed like a piece of false verbal, eh, one person upon another and it wasn’t any kind of strong evidence at all. I mean, it’s horrifying and frightening to look at and it blackens your name, eh, but we were, I was confident that when we went to court and he said these things he would be caught out, he would be shown up to be a liar, and in fact, he was shown up to be a liar.

 

 But that was kinda…although he was shown up to be a liar, that was destroyed by the Trial Judge - the Trial Judge boosted his credibility in saying how brave, how terrific a person and witness he was and all that.

F.C.T: If we could just jump forward to Billy Love’s actual statements that he retracted to your Solicitor John Carroll, he gives an impression of the pressure he was put under with regards to the statement. Was this similar to deal that you were speaking about earlier?

T.C: It’s the same thing that they do to all people in these kind of situations - if they’ve got case… I mean, one time, the Serious Crime Squad was known as the Serious Fit Up Squad. If the ordinary local police or CID cannot convict somebody, or cannot get an arrest for a serious crime, they call in the Serious Crime Squad - they don’t need to call them in if they can solve the crime themselves, but if they can’t solve it, they call in the Serious Crime Squad because the Serious Crime Squad are the people who do the fitting up right, so they’ll get someone who has the weakest alibi and with previous convictions, and just plant the evidence on them.

 

 Right, now, in the same way, if you take somebody, if you take somebody who is trapped in a corner - he’s maybe got two children, or he’s maybe getting married or his girlfriend’s pregnant - you know, he’s got a domestic crisis. I mean, putting them in prison creates a domestic crisis - he might be going to get married, he might have two children, Christmas might be coming up and he’s going to go away for 20 years - let’s say for armed robbery or something, maybe ten years. Eh, ten years is a long time for somebody, for anybody at all, so to be taken away for ten years and locked up, and somebody comes and says to you, “Sign this paper and you walk free”, it’s you know, it’s the devil’s deal isn’t it? I mean, as the Devil says, sign here, sign the contract and you get your life back, and people go for it - they’ve got to go for it.

F.C.T: In relation to Billy Love’s statements and the police visits, to Billy, on a canvassing mission, were they were actually saying that everybody in there were asking the same questions….?

T.C: Yes. There are people…I mean, we’ve got dozens of statements that were taken into the police station - people were approaching me and telling me they were taken into the police station - the police were asking them to say that I said this, or I said that, and these charges and that charge would be dropped, and people would be out on bail. Now people in the prison themselves, in the prison, were also taken up one by one and again given same deal - their charge would be dropped, their charge would be reduced, these kind of things, and it was all to do with verbals, it was all to do with saying this one said that… it was all usually me - say that TC Campbell said this or TC Campbell said that, that incriminates me and your charge will be dropped.

F.C.T: So the background of all this, and the information that you gleaned before the trial, what was your impression Tommy, with regards to what was going on?

T.C: Well I was horrified. I mean, I can see this as normal - this is the way the police normally carry on, only it was much heavier than normal. But it was the same system they were using - the same fit up situation, only they were given more leeway, they were given no restrictions upon them - all that had been lifted, so they could beat people up all they like. I mean, it wasn’t uncommon to take people in for six hours, move them to another police station, then move them again to another station - effectively kidnap people - moving them for six hours, actually taking them in the back door and not registering them at the Sergeant’s desk, so when people came looking for them, they move them to another police station. They do that on odd occasions, but in this case, they were doing it universally.

F.C.T: The first time Tommy, that you sat down in the dock and the charges were read out, how did you feel then?

T.C: It feels as if somebody has hit you with a bucket of shit. It’s horrifying - it’s frightening and it’s horrifying. I don’t know if I’ve got the right to say it, but to me it’s like an insight into a rape victim - how a rape victim must feel to be violated. It felt like violation, you know? It felt as thought your soul was being soiled and violated. It was just absolute horror… just horror and disgust right through, right into the soul, you know. And rage, I mean… You can be pushed so far, you can be horrified so far, until it touches a point where they’ve gone beyond, all semblance of decency and normalcy. It touches a rage in you that just makes you angry.

F.C.T: The first day is crucial, purely because of, first of all, what you’ve experienced, then you’re removed from court, then you’re taken back to Barlinnie on remand, what was your first thought that night of the start of the trial?

T.C: Pantomime. Before I went to court, I went downstairs to the court to the cells to go into the van to be moved to Barlinnie, I knew I was in serious trouble - because I knew that I could get a fair trial at the High Court right. It’s not always easy, but I knew it that it could be done, with the right Counsel, fighting for your rights, as it could be done - you can get a fair trial. As I was going down the stairs, I thought, this is a pantomime - it’s not a trial, it’s a pantomime. This is nothing but tricks, this is nothing but playacting, this is eh, this is a farce - this is not a trial going on here, this is a farce and everybody knows it.

F.C.T: Could you sum up the public feeling and perception due to the media that was flying out?

T.C: Well, the media has me down as the Ice Cream War Baron, Ice Cream Killer… I mean, I remember a time where a girl, I think she was about nine or something reading a newspaper and it said something about ‘Ice Cream Killer Thomas TC Campbell’ and she looked at me with pure hatred in her eyes and asked, “Did you murder ice cream?”, because the headline has said ‘Ice Cream Killer’. “Did you murder ice cream?”. Now, that’s a child’s reaction, the adult…I mean, the general public would have just shot me. The kind of press that I was getting, I would’ve been executed on sight. If I had of walked out of that court, I would have been strung up by a mob, because, I mean… tried and convicted in the press before it went to court, it turned me into a monster before I even appeared in court.

F.C.T: The jury, although meant to be impartial, do you think they were affected by public opinion?

T.C: Absolutely. They were affected by the press, without any doubt about it. The press were writing a different trial, to me they were writing a different trial - I mean, I’m watching a trial , and reading it in the papers the next day, and it’s not the same trial. So it was totally prejudiced, totally warped, and something totally different.

ferrisconspiracy: UPDATE - Next installment will be available to read next Friday at 6pm.


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #42 

(POSTED BY SAMBO)

This case (The Doyle family murders) makes me feel sick at the mention of it, young Tony was my mate aged 14 when he was killed, i don't know how any remaining family members would feel about this all getting brought up again, OK Tommy and TC have been cleared and compensated, the whole world know this was corruption.

 

The true guilty ones will get it some day. Everyone knows of the set ups and corruption of this case and personally i would never like to hear about it again, i know this defeats the purpose of such a site but is this just a personal thing or does anyone else feel this way.

 

(ALSO POSTED BY SAMBO)

 

Point taken hammer, Hang the coppers and McGraw (The murderer) that's never going to happen, its just always been an uneasy thing to hate Tommy and TC for so long for this, then find out it was a fit up, I don't hate them now but would still find it hard to ever eyeball them in public, sorry Tommy and TC the forces of evil made me hate you's for 20 years just so that they could be seen to be efficient in this case.

 

The coppers know who they are McGraw knows what he done. ROT IN HELL SCUM. eternal justice will do me fine.


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #43 

corruption cartoons, corruption cartoon, corruption picture, corruption pictures, corruption image, corruption images, corruption illustration, corruption illustrations


__________________
POLICE ANTI-CORRUPTION SQUAD


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,362
Reply with quote  #44 

‘Noble cause corruption’

Paul Condon, head of the Metropolitan Police during most of the 1990s, was protected by both Tory and Labour governments—despite massive scandals, including the Stephen Lawrence affair, that rocked the Yard.

It was Condon who coined the phrase “noble cause corruption”. This was the idea that some police justifiably “bend the rules” to get a conviction when officers “knew” the accused was guilty, but had no proof.

Condon was saying that the corruption at the heart of the Met had “noble” intentions. It was a green light for his officers to continue to “fit up” the innocent.

 

*********************************************************

ferrisconspiracy : UPDATE/POLICE

 

Officers are obliged to disclose an existing...  

158 Police Officers have criminal records

 

Police dismay as figures show 1 in every 100 officers convicted of a crime

Two inspectors and nine sergeants of Strathclyde police have records

Chief police officers vow to establish national vetting procedures

 

(P.S.You can also use this link: You can apply for Basic Disclosures online.)

Key quote "You cannot have someone who has been convicted of drink-driving arresting a member of the public for the same thing" - senior police source

Story in full AT LEAST 158 serving police officers in Scotland have convictions for offences ranging from assault and drink-driving to attempting to pervert the course of justice.

 

The figures - obtained under the Freedom of Information Act - reveal six of Scotland's eight forces employ officers convicted of criminal offences, including inspectors and sergeants.

Politicians and police board members yesterday expressed their surprise at the high figure and pledged to ask questions of chief constables. And senior officers told The Scotsman of their concerns that some forces were being too lenient on some crimes committed by their staff.

The Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (ACPOS) is so concerned by the issue it is now drawing up a set of national vetting rules which is likely to list convictions that will automatically bar someone from joining the service.  

Deputy Chief Constable Pat Shearer revealed another 24 serving officers in Grampian have convictions for offences committed before and during their police career, but insisted the force had introduced stringent new vetting procedures to weed out unsuitable candidates.But the figures obtained show the issue goes far further than one force.

 In Strathclyde, 82 police officers have records - 24 of whom had convictions before joining the force. Of the 82, two are inspectors, nine are sergeants and 71 constables, including six "specials".

Lothian and Borders would only give details about officers who had gained convictions since 2000, of which there are nine - three of whom were guilty of assault and six of breach of the peace.

Scotland has about 16,000 police officers, which means about one in every 100 has at least one criminal conviction. In at least 38 of the 158 known cases, the convictions were gained prior to the officer joining the service. At the moment, while every police officer is obliged to declare a criminal conviction, each of Scotland's eight police forces takes its own decisions on recruiting officers and for discipline if an offence is committed while serving.

A senior source within one force said: "We take pretty much a zero-tolerance attitude towards officers who are guilty of drink-driving. You cannot have someone who has been convicted of drink-driving arresting a member of the public for the same thing. Other forces may not take quite such a clear approach."

Jean McFadden, the convener of the Strathclyde Joint Police Board, said she was alarmed that police officers convicted of assault were still serving, and pledged to raise the matter with Chief Constable Willie Rae. She said: "I'd be very surprised if someone convicted of assault isn't dismissed from the force. What I say to new recruits when they are sworn into the service is that a higher standard of conduct is expected of them than in other jobs, both on and off duty."

Kenny MacAskill, the SNP's justice spokesman, said: "It does seem a very high number. There are some offences where it would be very surprising if officers were able to serve, but a degree of discretion for more minor offences should be shown."

Deputy Chief Constable Garry Sutherland, chairman of the ACPOS professional standards business area, said that when considering applicants, forces must "take a balanced view and consider each individual on their merits".

  • Law and Order

     

     

     

    Related topic: ferrisconspiracy : ARCHIVE

     

    Types of Disclosure

    There are three types or levels of Disclosure available from Disclosure Scotland

     

    Basic Disclosures

    A Basic Disclosure (termed as a "criminal conviction certificate" in Part V of the Police Act 1997) is the lowest level of Disclosure and is available to anyone for any purpose, on payment of the appropriate fee.  It contains details of convictions considered unspent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 or state that there are no such convictions.  This type of Disclosure is only issued to the applicant.  It is not job-specific or job related and may be used more than once.

    You can apply for Basic Disclosures online.

    Standard Disclosures

    The intermediate level of Disclosure is the Standard Disclosure (termed as a "criminal record certificate" under Part V of the Police Act 1997). This includes convictions held on central records and records both spent and unspent convictions. This means that even minor convictions, perhaps dating from years ago, are included on the Disclosure.  The Standard Disclosure is available on payment of the appropriate fee, subject to the application first being countersigned by a registered person (usually the potential employer or voluntary organisation, that is, the Registered Body).

    The main categories of occupations etc. for which a Standard * Disclosure may be required are:-

    • those involving regular contact with children and adults at risk*;

     

    • those checked in the interests of national security;

     

    • those involved in the administration of law;

     

    • those applying for firearms; explosives and gaming licences;

     

    • professional groups in health, pharmacy and law;

     

    • senior managers in banking and financial services.

    A Standard Disclosure is sent to the applicant and a copy is also sent to the person who countersigned the application on behalf of the Registered Body.

    If the post being applied for is a childcare post, please ensure that the word "Childcare" is inserted at the beginning of your response to Question C2 (Position Applied For) on the Disclosure application form.  The new application form, which should be in use from June 2006, will have a tick box which will be used to identify a childcare post.

    Enhanced Disclosures

    The highest level of Disclosure is the Enhanced Disclosure (termed as an "enhanced criminal record certificate" under Part V of the Police Act 1997).  In addition to the details included in Standard Disclosures, Enhanced Disclosures may contain non-conviction information which a Chief Officer or Chief Constable may choose to disclose if they believe it to be relevant to the position in question.

    This type of Disclosure is available to -

    • those who apply for work that regularly involves caring for, training, supervising or being in sole charge of children or adults at risk;
    • applicants for various gaming and lottery licences;
    • those seeking judicial appointment;
    • applicants for registration for child minding, day care and to act as foster parents or carers.

    If the post being applied for is a childcare post, please ensure that the word "Childcare" is inserted at the beginning of your response to Question C2 (Position Applied For) on the Disclosure application form.  The new application form, which should be in use from June 2006, will have a tick box which will be used to identify a childcare post.

    Applicants for Standard & Enhanced Disclosures are only permitted to apply for those occupations, professions, offices, etc. which are covered by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exclusions and Exceptions)(Scotland) Order 2003.

    For those applying for Standard * & Enhanced Disclosures where the position involved is a childcare position, then the Disclosure will also include details of inclusion of the applicant on the list of individuals Disqualified from Working with Children (DWCL) in accordance with the Protection of Children (Scotland) Act 2003 (POCSA).  POCSA also enables Disclosure Scotland to access similar lists held in England & Wales.  Further information on POCSA is available from:-

    *  The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 carries with it a number of implications for the Disclosure Service.  One of the major changes is the necessity for an Enhanced Disclosure to be obtained wherever an individual is working with children or adults ar risk.  As a result, there should be no confusion about the applicable level of Disclosure required by a Registered Body.  It is likely that legislation which will enact this part of the Act will be implemented by summer 2006.

    Application forms and further information on the Disclosure process can be obtained by contacting us and helpful hints on completing the application form can be found here.
     

     


  • __________________
    The TRUTH is out there...........
    hammer6

    Avatar / Picture

    Moderator
    Registered:
    Posts: 8,362
    Reply with quote  #45 

    Paul Ferris talks to BBC News Online
    "You'll never eradicate (police) corruption, just as you'll never eradicate crime."


    __________________
    The TRUTH is out there...........
    Previous Topic | Next Topic
    Print
    Reply