Michael Stone
Michael Stone's appeal against conviction was refused on 19
January 2005. We believe this perpetuates a serious miscarriage of justice, not
only for Michael but for the family of the victims.
BBC News report
Guardian
report
The continued denial of
Justice for Michael Stone
Taking the piss out of common sense
by Mark
Metcalf, February 2nd 2005
After months of preparation and two and a half days of legal argument it
took three judges less than 10 minutes to dismiss Michael Stone's appeal on
Wednesday January 19th 2005 against his convictions for murdering Lin and Megan
Russell, and the attempted murder of Josie Russell in July 1996.
Without even glancing in Stone's direction Deputy Lord Justice Rose announced
that "This appeal is dismissed" thus confirming what Stone had
clearly anticipated when at the start of the last day's proceedings he had
entered the Appeal Court, nodded at his sister Barbara and in Roman fashion
given the thumbs down sign. As he was taken away the
Fighting back the tears she admitted that "whilst it was unfortunate that
the thing we want the most" [the overturning of the convictions] would
inevitably "cause distress to Josie and her father" she was sure
"that no one would want the wrong person being locked up for such a
terrible crime" as this would mean "the murderer or murderers were
still out there." In numerous interviews that she conducted afterwards
Barbara Stone continued to argue that her brother was innocent of the crimes he
has been convicted of.
Remarkably, despite the fact that Barbara Stone was representing a man found
guilty of the brutal slaying of two people, one a young child and the leaving
for dead of another she was treated with respect. Journalists as a whole are
not noted for treating people, especially those representing convicted child
killers, with respect. Could this be that having heard the evidence in this
case they know and recognise that something is just not right’? That
Stone is, in fact, not the person responsible?
They were asked about their own opinions on the case. "Well it doesn't
look right does it" said one; "he isn't guilty said another" and
mostly "I'm not sure."
Back in Chillenden in
No one has taken a poll to see if the majority of people in
Lin, Megan and Josie Russell were attacked as they walked along a secluded path
next to a cornfield on their way home on July 9th 1996. It was a bright summer
evening and the fields and vegetation were in full bloom. Although the path
could and was used by cars it is not wide enough to allow overtaking, if two
cars were to meet then one car must reverse into a small clearing to allow the
other to pass.
At Stone's first trial in 1998 at Maidstone crown court the Prosecuting
Barrister for the Crown suggested that he had sat in his car watching the
Russell’'s cross a series of fields before walking down the path. He had intended
to rob them in order to get money to feed his heroin habit.
The Jury was taken to the scene of the crime. The trial took
place in October 1998, when the scenery and the environment are entirely
different from the month when the crimes occurred. In October you can see a
good distance.
A visitor in July wanting to see if it is possible to sit and watch people
coming from some distance away would soon see that it is not possible. The
trees are too tall, and the vegetation is too dense. It is an unlikely place
for anyone out on the rob’ to sit, and that is putting it mildly.
No person desperate for money to feed a serious drug habit, and Michael Stone
had one, would be sitting in a car on a path alongside a field in Chillenden
waiting for someone to come along. It simply defies commonsense.
Stone was arrested following a reconstruction of events on July 9th 1997 on the
popular BBC Crimewatch series. His psychiatrist rang up to say his profile
matched that of the killer or killers. From the start he protested his
innocence, he still does. His defence was a strange one, he couldn't remember
what he was doing on that day, or in fact what he was doing on many days during
the summer of 1996.
He had lived in a children’s home as a young boy in nearby
The Russell’s had been tied up with towels and bootlaces and attacked
with a hammer, the motive cited by the police as being robbery. Stone, said the
three Appeal judge’'s, was a heroin addict who kept bootlaces. Half of
Stone it was said had the habit of carrying tools in his car. Many people do,
it doesn't make them murderers.
There was no forensic evidence to link Stone with the crimes, no D.N.A samples
left behind and no witnesses to what had taken place. Josie, then nine, had
been left for dead and mercifully recovered. In time she was able to recount
some of her experiences to the police but has never been able to give an
accurate description of her attacker. At an identity parade she did not pick
out Michael Stone. Her grief must be intense; she appears to be a remarkable
young woman who now aged 17 is rightfully trying to get on with her life. After
Stone's appeal failed in January 2005 her father Shaun said, "Josie and I
have made an effort to put our memories of this terrible affair behind
us." No one can blame them for doing so.
The Appeal Court Judges also cited statements from a number of witnesses that
Stone often changed his car and that in the summer of 1996 he had beige
coloured car. Stone disputes this. A witness had said she had seen a beige
coloured car emerge from the path at Chillenden on the evening of the murders;
she had followed it. She claimed that a man with a blond French cropped hair
was driving. Stone is bald so even if had had a beige car it wasn't his she
saw.
Meanwhile it is known that Kent Police had stopped Michael Stone just two days
before the murders and asked him to produce his driving documents to show that
he was the owner of a white Toyota Tercil he was driving. He did this within 24
hours.
Sherry Bhatt, a friend of Michael Stone had given a statement that she had
spoken with him the afternoon of July 10th 1996 the day after the attack on the
Russell's. She said that she had asked him about blood on his t-shirt. She
claimed that he'd said he'd had a fight and yet there were no indications of
any injuries. She clearly didn't think this as being too important at the time,
as it was only Michael Stone had been arrested a year later that she approached
the police. Michael Stone denies that he had blood on his t-shirt. The t-shirt,
naturally, has never been found so it will never be possible to say if there
was blood on it and if so whose blood it was.
So at this point the case against Stone amounts to unproven claims that he
changed his car a few times, keeping tools in the boot, possessing some boot
laces, having lived as a child in a home ten miles from Chillenden and an
unproven tale from someone about him having some blood on an old t-shirt.
However
Within days of his conviction however the statement of one of the prisoners
Barry Thompson was discredited, when he admitted lying after obtaining a fee of
£5,000 from 'The Sun'’ newspaper for his story with promises of another
£10,000 if Stone was convicted. A second witness, Mark Jennings, was
known to be unreliable and was not used by the Prosecution at the second trial
in
Stone's conviction was quashed and retrial was ordered. In 2001 at
Daley, who has a long string of convictions for robbery and burglary, was on
remand in Canterbury Prison whilst awaiting trial. He was being housed in the
segregation wing. According to his statement this was because of an allegation
of violence towards another inmate. ’
On Tuesday September 23rd 1997 he claims to have verbally defended Michael
Stone when the latter was placed in the next-door cell after other prisoners
abused him for the murders of Lin and Megan Russell and the attempted murder of
Josie Russell.
According to Daley, his defence led to Stone then lying down in his cell and
using the water pipes to state, “"You’re my friend."
Stone apparently also knew Daley's surname as according to Daley's statement I
heard Stone call me by my surname’ although they clearly didn't know each
other beforehand as Daley claims he wasn't certain on September 23rd whether
his neighbour was Michael Stow or Stone.
Daley then claims that Stone told him all about the murders, that what he heard
upset him so much that he was forced to move away from the wall, but that when
he saw the Daily Mirror front page article of that day, with its details of
events in the case, he went back to the pipes to listen.
At the second trial in
Daley claims that he told Stone [or
Daley's statement, at just over 3 pages long takes approximately 10 minutes to
read. According to the records it took nearly two hours to compile as it
commenced at 17.15 and concluded at 19.12 hours. There must have an awful lot
of silences during this time.
At
Edward Fitzgerald QC for Michael Stone revealed during the appeal in January
2005 that Daley was now admitting to have used heroin heavily since 1996. As
such he had perjured himself to two juries. Fitzgerald argued that this made
all of his evidence "inherently unreliable."
Fitzgerald further argued that the Judge at the trial in
Fitzgerald claimed that the need to give the jury a warning was a point of law
"which has arisen in this case.' After the appeal was refused Fitzgerald
chose to argue that the appeal judges should allow the House of Lords to decide
whether what he was arguing was correct. They declined to allow him to do so,
thus probably cutting off the possibility of Michael Stone’s appeal case
against his convictions being taken to the House of Lords.
As such probably the only legal avenue currently available, unless new evidence
can be unearthed, is for Michael Stone to take his case to the Criminal Cases
Review Commission. Meanwhile as Barbara Stone said on Friday January 21st
"my brother is innocent" and "no matter how long it takes we
shall prove that."
Meanwhile Stone languishes in prison for having killed Lin and Megan Russell
and attempting to murder Josie Russell.
In Stone's case there is: -
· No evidence linking him to
the awful crimes
· No D.N.A linking him to the
scene of the crime.
· No witnesses to the
crime.
· No body has picked him out
of an I.D parade
· No-one has been found who
saw him in the Canterbury area on the day of the crime
Alongside which stands: -
· Unproven claims that
he swapped his car a few times
· An unproven claim that he
had blood on an old t-shirt the day after the murders took place
Meanwhile he has always protested his innocence.
And whilst
· Yes, he did live at one
time at a children's home nearby.
· He did keep tools in the
boot of his car.
· He may even have owned some
bootlaces.
These don't prove someone murdered two people and left another for dead.
And neither does the say-so of a convicted criminal who Barbara Stone correctly
said outside the Court of Appeal on Wednesday January 19th has "laid his
way through two trials."
Michael Stone's convictions for the murder of Lin and Megan Russell, as well as
the attempted murder on Josie Russell literally takes the piss out of common
sense’
Mark Metcalf, February 2nd 2005
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Messages of Solidarity/support to Michael can be sent to:
Michael J Stone
RN2980
HMP Full Sutton
Moor Lane
Stamford Bridge
York YO4 1PS
Birthday June 7th
Inquiries/further
information:Barbara Stone
|
|
Convicted by a 10-2
majority on 23 October 1998 of the murders of Lin and Megan Russell, Michael
Stone continues to maintain his innocence. Even as the verdict was delivered by
the foreman of the jury he declared from the dock that he hadn't committed this
heinous crime.
The prosecution openly admitted
that there was precious little evidence against Michael Stone (see BBC News 19 Oct 98), and its case resolved around
alleged confessions made by Stone to a fellow prisoner whilst he was on remand
(see BBC News 27 Oct 98 and BBC News 26 Oct 98).
On 6 February 2001 Michael Stone
won his appeal - see Guardian articles: Key
witnesses were police informants / 'I told
the jury a pack of lies' / Stone wins
appeal.
See also:
Appeal
Court judgement
On 8 February 2001 the court of
appeal then quashed his convictions and ordered that he be held on bail pending
a retrial - see BBC News 'Stone to face retrial'
and from the Times 'Fair trial impossible, argue
lawyers'
Update:
At his retrial at
See also:
In-depth article at Scandals in Justice - Michael Stone
Stone to face retrial
The man jailed for life in 1998 for
killing Lin Russell and her daughter Megan in a country lane is to face a
retrial.
At a hearing in
Lord Justice Kennedy, sitting with
Mr Justice Maurice Kay and Mrs Justice Hallett refused to accept the defence's
claims that Stone could not receive a fair second trial.
Stone's defence counsel, William
Clegg QC, argued that the huge amount of negative publicity surrounding the
case meant it would be impossible for him to get justice.
But prosecution lawyer Nigel
Sweeney QC said any jury in
After listening to legal
submissions for most of the day the judges took just five minutes to make their
decision.
No application for bail was made
and Stone was remanded in custody.
Lord Justice Kennedy said:
"For reasons which we will give in full at a later date, probably
Wednesday next week, this appeal will be allowed and there will be an order for
re-trial."
Following the decision Michael
Stone's sister, Barbara, who has campaigned for his release since his
conviction, said: "At least he has got a chance to prove his innocence now
and we are thrilled to bits that his conviction has been quashed."
The judges announced on Tuesday
they were "minded to allow" Stone's appeal against his conviction
after doubts arose about a key witness at his trial, Barry Thompson.
Left for dead
Stone, from Gillingham in Kent, was
jailed for life for the murders of 45-year-old Lin Russell from north Wales,
her six-year-old daughter Megan, and the attempted murder of her other daughter
Josie, nine.
The family were attacked as they
walked home from school in Chillenden, near
Mrs Russell and her youngest
daughter were bludgeoned to death with a hammer but Josie, although left for
dead, survived and has made a miraculous recovery.
Josie, and her father Dr Shaun
Russell, have since moved back to north
Stone has always protested his
innocence. The court ordered that he should be rearraigned within two months.
The retrial is unlikely to be in
A Kent Police spokeswoman said:
"In light of there being a retrial we will not be making any comment about
today's hearing."
Fair trial is impossible
argue
Stone's lawyers
By Ian Cobain, Steve Bird and Frances Gibb
Michael Stone may yet not face a
retrial. The fresh hearing ordered by the Court of Appeal yesterday will go
ahead only if the new trial judge decides at the time that a fair hearing is
still possible.
There were more than four hours of
legal submissions yesterday over whether the nature of the publicity that
followed Mr Stone's original conviction would prevent him receiving a fair
retrial.
William Clegg, QC, for the
appellant, said: “Michael Stone can't now receive a fair trial, such has
been the wealth of prejudicial material adverse to him and inadmissible in any
criminal trial.
“No jury could try his case
fairly, and any conviction resulting would inevitably be unsafe.”
Mr Nigel Sweeney, QC, for the
Crown, said: “We invest juries who try cases with good sense, good
judgment and an ability within the trial to put out of their minds anything
they might have heard before.”
The man accused of the murder of
Lin Russell and her daughter Megan, and the attempted murder of Josie Russell,
was told that the guilty verdicts at his trial in October 1998 were now
considered to be unsafe. Argument by his defence team that he should be freed
were rejected by the court.
Lord Justice Kennedy, sitting with
Mrs Justice Hallet and Mr Justice Kay, said that they would give their reasons
for overturning the conviction, and for not releasing Mr Stone, at a hearing to
be held next week.
Mr Stone, 40, was accused of
battering to death Mrs Russell, 45, and Megan, 6, as they walked along a
country lane near
Mr Stone, unemployed, from
Mr Stone, a pale and stocky figure
in a white polo shirt and dark trousers gazed around a packed courtroom on the
second day of his appeal. He will remain in custody until his trial. If the
trial judge believes that media publicity surrounding the high-profile case
jeopardises the chances of a fair trial, then Mr Stone will be freed.
His sister Barbara, speaking on the
steps of the High Court in
“As the case is now sub
judice, we will make no further comment.”
Josie's father, Dr Shaun Russell,
was informed of the court's decision by a Kent Police officer who has been
staying at the family's new home in the
The Court of Appeal uses the
yardstick of the “interests of justice” in considering whether to
order retrials.
Before the Criminal Appeal Act
1988, it could order a retrial only on the basis of “fresh
evidence” presented at the appeal. This was widely criticised as
“too restrictive” in a series of cases which later turned out to be
miscarriages of justice.
The 1988 Act broadened the test so
that a retrial can be ordered “where it appears to the court that the
interests of justice so require”.
Appeal judges take account of
factors such as the gravity of the charge, the evidence and also the length of time
since the offence.
They may order a retrial for the
same offence which they have already quashed, another offence on the indictment
or an offence which was put as alternative but which the jury did not have to
reach a verdict on because of the conviction.
Retrials may be ordered despite the
rule that offenders cannot be tried twice for the same offence. That rule,
known as the “double jeopardy” principle, applies only where an
offender has been acquitted and not where he has been convicted.
The rule is currently under review
by the Law Commission, the law reform body for
The Government is expected to back
such proposals which are also supported by the Conservatives. In cases of
murder, for instance, this could mean that an offender could be tried a second
time if compelling new evidence - such as DNA material - came to light.
The Law Commission is also looking
at stronger prosecution rights of appeal against a judge's rulings that there
is “no case to answer”.
Retrials can be and are regularly
ordered by the Court of Appeal where the original conviction is not regarded as
“safe” .
Sheila
Bowler, a music teacher from
Equally the Court of Appeal has
ruled the media publicity can prejudice the right to a fair trial.
In 1991, the court allowed an
appeal against conviction by the two sisters, Michele
and Lisa Taylor, convicted of murdering Alison Shaughnessy, a bank
clerk.
Come in, come into
our reception
by Michael Stone
Come
in, come into our reception
We will soon change your perception.
Thought out in civvy street you were a Mr. Nice?
We’ll soon make you as cold as ice.
We will use you,
we will abuse you.
We will confuse you,
By then we will amuse you!
You will laugh if you see others cry.
You will have hysterics when others die.
We are gonna change you,
Into a mean, mean guy.
We can’t have you out there in the gutter.
Come in, you’re our bread ‘n butter.
A sign by our door says, ‘we’re impartial’.
True! We’ll make anyone into a right rascal!
We will assess you.
We will test you.
We will molest you.
By then we will impress you.
You’ll see the life of a
bully is grand.
We’ll get you to join our band.
Exploit the vulnerable, pick on the weak.
We’ll prepare you for civvy street.
We can’t have you running around free.
Come in, you provide our tea.
A sign by our door says,’we’re not prejudiced’.
True! We’ll make anyone into a recidivist!
You aint seen the likes of us perform.
We’ll soon make you conform.
We’ll degrade you, hurt you in everyway.
You’ll become more like us everyday!
You’ll cheat, steal and lie.
That’s it lad, ‘stab him in the eye’.
‘Kick him in the throat’.
‘Put a mars bar down his boat’. You will hate us while we love you.
You will love us while we hate you.
We’ll make you mentally unstable.
Coz you put the food on our table.
Come in, come into our reception.
We wanna change you perception.
Watch us drive the weak to suicide.
See how after, the truth we hide!
Lad, do you know what a deaf eye is?
How about a blind ear?
Go and cut a nonse,
Or bash a queer, that’s the way my dear!
Throw boiling water over a grass.
Or if he’s pretty, gang rape his arse.
But don’t get caught calling the chaplain a tart.
Instead wait till Sunday church and let out a big fart!We will cage you.
We will outrage you.
We will re-arrange you.
By then we’ll have deranged you.
We can’t have you out there a success.
Come in, you’re soon become a mess.
Thought out in civvy street you’re a Mr Right?
We’ll soon teach you how to fight.
First you find the ideal opponent.
Someone old, fragile or weak.
Make sure he has no help or mates.
Then attack him as he sleeps.
For dinner your gonna have goo.
For ya tea, some more too.
You’ll hate us through and through.
We’ll make a monster out of you!
Come in, come into our reception.
We will soon change your perception.
Thought out in civvy street you could go straight?
One way or another we’ll get you through our gate!
We’ll soon make you into a repeat offender.
Smoke some gear lad, go on a bender.
If you’re guilty of a crime, we’ll give you a right good time.
Luxuries, rewards, privileges and incentives lad.
See life’s so bad.
You just make sure you’ve left plenty of people out there real sad.
If you did no wrong that’s okay.
We’re still make sure you stay.
For someone else’s wrong you’ll pay.
In fact we like it better that way!
Coz you feel more tormented.
We’re make you even more demented.
No telly, no steaks, you’ll do it rough.
Time we’re through, you’ll be super tough.
Come in, come into our reception.
Come and learn the art of deception.
Come and learn the tricks of the trade.
See how many beasts we’ve made.
We will fill you with venom.
We will fill you with bitter hate.
Oh, we’re proper shape you up ready for the gate.
Give us your body.
Give us your heart.
Give us your mind.
We’ll make you one of our kind.
Come in, come into our reception.
We’re gonna change your perception.
Callous, cold and ruthless you’ll soon be.
Your better nature we’ll soon make History!
Copyright
Michael Stone
RN2980
H M Prison
Full Sutton
York YO41 1PS
|
|
'I told the jury
a pack of
lies'
By Audrey Gillan
Criminal who
claimed Michael Stone admitted Russell killings says he never expected his
story to lead to conviction
When Barry Thompson told police
what he thought was a silly little story about Michael Stone, he never expected
to hear from them again, let alone appear as a key witness in a murder trial.
But when he got into the witness
box, Thompson assumed the swagger of a man comfortable with the surroundings of
a crown court. As he gave evidence his manner was casual, his answers sharp,
and he would have no truck with suggestions that he was a liar. He had no
reason to make anything up, he said. "I don't even know the man."
Stone, he said, had threatened him
and said: "I made a mistake with her [Josie Russell], I won't make the
same mistake with you." But the day after Stone was given three life
sentences for murder and attempted murder, Thompson, a convicted criminal who
now works as a builder in Basildon,
Thompson now claims that he fabricated
the threat and lied under oath because he considered his own evidence so slight
that it would not make a difference. He has even claimed that he was under
pressure from police to say what he did.
For some reason Thompson wanted to
get his lies off his chest. The day after Stone's conviction he began ringing
round tabloid newspaper newsdesks.
Having been rebuffed by the Sun, he
phoned the Mirror, which called in its court reporter, Adrian Shaw, to deal
with the case. At a meeting in
He told Mr Shaw: "Stone never
said the words I attributed to him. I told the jury a pack of lies. I did not think
I would have to go to court after I made my statement to the police. When I was
told I was to be called as a witness I did not want to attend court, but the
police took me there and brought me home. Even when I gave evidence I thought
the case against him was so thin that he would be acquitted anyway."
The claims that Thompson lied
became the focus of an investigation by Hampshire police into the working of
the
The report findings have not been
made public but
Thompson, who had been serving a
two-year sentence for dishonesty and intimidating witnesses, gave evidence on
the fifth day of the trial at
He said he had worked as an orderly
in the segregation unit of Elmley prison in Sheerness, where Stone was on
remand, preparing breakfast and dinner for the prisoners and cups of tea for
the warders.
Threat
"The first time I see Michael
Stone he was coming down the stairs to get his breakfast or dinner and I said
to him, 'So, you're the one . . .' He said, 'I'll see you on the wing and talk
about it' and I said 'That'll be fine.' I served him his breakfast or dinner
and he went back up to his cell.
"I see him the following day
in the exercise yard. He was on his own. I was in the kitchen making tea. I
called him over to the window and asked him what he had been arrested
for."
Anne
Asked if Stone had had anxieties,
Thompson said: "He was saying he was going to an ID parade on Friday and
the police were rushing forensic tests through and not to judge him until the
results had come back. I said 'I am not judging you'."
Thompson claimed that the next day
Stone approached him. "He said, 'I made a mistake with her, I won't make
the same fucking mistake with you'." He now says that what Stone really
said to him was: "You and me are going to fall out."
In the original trial, Stone's
counsel, William Clegg QC, suggested that Thompson had made the whole
conversation up, and that if it had in fact happened a prison officer would
have overheard it.
"If something had been said to
the effect of 'I made a mistake with her, I won't make the same fucking mistake
with you,' isn't that something that in the ordinary course of events you would
expect a prison officer to hear?"
Thompson responded that there was
no prison officer within 50 yards. Mr Clegg then asked: "If you are right,
nothing passed between you before the conversation you have told us about that
could be interpreted as aggressive."
Thompson: "It doesn't pay to
be un-nice to people in that situation. Inevitably, they all go back on the
wing."
Mr Clegg later asked: "You had
done nothing to provoke a threat?" Thompson, who seemed annoyed at the
suggestion, replied: "Quite sure, yes."
Mr Clegg, who later told the jury
Stone had been "fitted up by a bunch of convicts", asked: "You
are quite sure you are not trying to get in on the bandwagon, making things up
about Stone?"
Thompson: "Definitely not, it
would be very detrimental to me. I don't particularly want to be here."
Asked what his motive was, he said:
"None whatsoever, apart from the fact that I found it very strange that he
would say them sort of words. It was very strange, and the way he looked at
me."
When Mr Clegg suggested to Thompson
he had made up the conversation, he replied: "You are entitled to suggest
that."
Mr Clegg suggested that the entire
jail population knew Stone was accused of the murders and he could not safely
turn his back, adding: "If you cannot get him one way, you can get him
another."
Yesterday that assumption turned
out to be right, as Thompson's account was indeed "wholly unreliable".
|
|
Key witnesses in Russell
case were
police informants, appeal court told
By Audrey Gillan
Michael Stone, the man found guilty
in 1998 of the murders of Lin Russell and her daughter Megan, and the attempted
murder of her other daughter Josie, yesterday began his court of appeal bid to
plead his innocence.
The 40-year-old only replied to his
name as appeal court judge Lord Justice Kennedy, sitting with Mr Justice
Maurice Kay and Mrs Justice Hallett, began listening to the evidence.
They were told that one of the key
witnesses in the original trial was a perjurer and may even have been a police
informant. Stone's counsel, William Clegg QC, said that Barry Thompson had now
changed his story. "What he says is completely contrary to the evidence he
gave at the trial. He now says Stone made no confession of any kind to him and that
his evidence at
Stone, who has spent much of his
life in prisons and institutions and has had addictions to heroin and alcohol,
has steadfastly denied any involvement in the killings. At his original trial,
Mr Clegg said Stone had been "fitted up by a bunch of criminals".
In the lead up to his three-week
trial at
Stone was given three life sentences
for the murders of Lin Russell and Megan, 6, and the attempted murder of Josie,
then 9, near their home at
Before the appeal began, Stone's
sister, Barbara, 38, said: "Michael has always maintained his innocence.
We have waited a long time to be able to prove to the courts that this is so.
We are very hopeful of the convictions being quashed and that the British legal
system proves to be just."
The full opening of the appeal was
delayed while the court dealt with moves on Stone's behalf relating to taped telephone
conversations between a national newspaper journalist and the witness Barry
Thompson.
After the legal argument, the
judges ordered that the tapes, transcript and manuscript notes should be
disclosed to the defence.
Mr Clegg is expected to begin
opening the case proper this morning.
|
|
Stone wins appeal over
Russells
murders
Staff and agencies
Michael Stone today won his court
of appeal challenge to his convictions for the murders of Lin and Megan
Russell.
Three judges in
Stone, 40, of
Today's drama unfolded on the
second day of Stone's appeal before Lord Justice Kennedy, sitting with Mr
Justice Maurice Kay and Mrs Justice Hallett at
Stone was given three life
sentences at Maidstone crown court in 1998 for the two murders, and the
attempted murder of Megan's sister, Josie, near their home at
Sitting in the dock, flanked by
security officers, Stone turned to his sister Barbara and smiled, and she then
punched the air in delight.
He could be free later this week if
the court does not order a re-trial.
The appeal court's decision
followed the revelation that the prosecution could no longer rely on one of its
key witness, Mr Thompson, as a "witness of truth".
Stone's counsel, Mr William Clegg
QC, told the three judges that just "moments ago" he was handed a
document by the crown. Mr Clegg read out from the document.
The prosecution stated in the
document that having considered all the material now before the court for the
purpose of the appeal, the crown "cannot seek to rely on Barry Thompson as
a witness of truth".
Thompson, who told the jury that
Stone had confessed to the killings while in prison, reportedly said just days
after the conviction that he had told the jury "a pack of lies" when
he claimed Stone had threatened him and referred to the murders.
He has claimed in newspaper
articles that he and another key witness against Stone at his trial were
"paid police informants".
It was shortly after this
announcement that Lord Justice Kennedy said the court was "minded" to
allow the appeal.
The court has not formally quashed
the conviction and Lord Justice Kennedy warned that the proceedings were still
"live" and there was a realistic possibility of an order for a
re-trial and that therefore nothing to Stone's detriment may be published in
the interim.
Yesterday, Mr Clegg said that Mr
Thompson had now changed his story. "What he says is completely contrary
to the evidence he gave at the trial," Mr Clegg said. He now says Stone
made no confession of any kind to him and that his evidence at
Another prosecution witness, Damien
Daley, also gave evidence that Stone had confessed to the killings in prison.
Stone, who has spent much of his
life in prison and institutions and has had addictions to heroin and alcohol,
has steadfastly denied any involvement in the killings.
|
|
Stone lodges appeal
A lawyer representing Michael Stone
has formally lodged an application to appeal against his conviction for the
murders of Lin and Megan Russell and attempted murder of Josie Russell.
Solicitor Derek Hayward said the
defence team was "hopeful and optimistic" about their chances of
being granted leave to appeal.
Stone, 38, was given three life
sentences last month after his trial at Maidstone Crown Court. It is believed
the defence is basing its appeal on witness Barry Thompson's alleged admission
of perjury.
Just days after Stone's conviction,
Mr Thompson said that he had told the jury "a pack of lies" when he
claimed Stone had threatened him and referred to the murders.
Stone, a long-term heroin addict
with a severe personality disorder which psychiatrists say is untreatable, is
being held at top security Frankland prison in
His sister and mother went to visit
him there this week, after defence lawyers had told him of the new
developments.
Stone family's gratitude
His sister Barbara Stone said:
"He has been informed of the new evidence. Obviously he has always
maintained that Thompson did lie. I am just grateful that he (Thompson) had the
strength of character to come forward."
Stone's family have criticised the
local health authority for claiming Stone was untreatable. They believe he was
responding well to community care at the time of the murders and are convinced
of his innocence.
Asked how her brother was coping
with jail, Mrs Stone said: "He's fine. He is as well as can be expected.
We are quite happy with the way he is being treated."
|
|
Witness credibility
'reduced'
The barrister for double murderer
Michael Stone has said that the credibility of a key witness had been
"very much reduced" after his claim that he lied to the jury.
Former prisoner Barry Thompson, 33,
said Stone had referred to the murders for which he was jailed last week while
the two were serving time in Elmley prison in
He now claims to have fabricated
the conversation, bringing into question the safety of Stone's conviction and
possibly having an impact on his forthcoming appeal.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today
programme, barrister William Clegg said: "If the reports are accurate, it
will plainly provide fresh evidence which the Court of Appeal will be able to
consider in deciding whether this conviction is safe.
Statement uncertain
"On the basis of the material
I've read in the newspapers and I have been given overnight, I would have
thought his [Thompson's] credibility as a witness is very much reduced."
Stone, 38, received three life
sentences last Friday for the brutal hammer murders of Lin Russell, 45, and her
six-year-old daughter Megan, and the attempted murder of Josie Russell, now 11,
in
On Monday, Stone's solicitor Derek
Hayward said Thompson had agreed to make a statement admitting that he lied.
"I have spoken briefly to Mr
Thompson and hope to speak more fully with him in the next 24 hours as a result
of which I hope to receive a statement from him," he said.
'Pack of lies'
Thompson's evidence, described by Mr
Clegg as "very important", was one of two "cell
confessions" testified to by Stone's fellow prisoners.
"Both confessions potentially
were damning pieces of evidence - if they were said by Stone," said Mr
Clegg.
He refused to comment on whether or
not Thompson's comments could overturn the double killer's conviction, adding:
"It will be for the Court of Appeal to decide whether, in the light of the
fresh evidence, the conviction is safe."
The Crown Prosecution Service has
asked Kent Police to investigate Thompson's claim to the Mirror newspaper that
he told "a pack of lies" during the 11-day trial.
Thompson told the Maidstone Crown
Court jury which convicted Stone that he had been threatened by the double
killer while they were together in Elmley prison in July 1997.
Thompson testified that Stone had
said: "I made a mistake with her - I won't make the same f------ mistake
with you."
'Encouraging' for appeal
The prosecution claimed this was a
reference to the fact that Josie Russell survived the attack that killed her
sister and mother.
Thompson now denied the
conversation took place, telling The Mirror: "None of what I said was true
and I want to give a statement to his solicitor admitting I lied. Stone never
said the words I attributed to him. I told the jury a pack of lies."
Mr Hayward said the development was
"encouraging" for Stone's pending appeal.
Thompson's motive for changing his
story has been withheld for legal reasons.
Stone's defence counsel William
Clegg QC, alleged during the trial that his client was being "fitted up by
a bunch of convicts".
Mr Clegg said the defence team
would submit grounds for an appeal in the next two weeks, but it could take up
to six months for the court to list the hearing.
|
|
Russell witness
'lied in
court'
A witness whose crucial evidence
helped convict Michael Stone of the murders of Lin and Megan Russell has told a
newspaper that he lied to the jury.
"None of what I said was true
and I want to give a statement to his solicitor admitting that I lied,"
former prisoner Barry Thompson told The Mirror.
Michael Stone was given three life
sentences on Friday for the murder of Lin Russell and her six-year-old daughter
Megan and the attempted murder of Josie Russell, then nine, at
At Maidstone Crown Court, Thompson
claimed Stone, a fellow prisoner, said to him: "I made a mistake with her
[Josie]. I won't make the same f------ mistake with you."
The paper reports that Thompson
said what Stone actually told him was: "You and me are going to fall
out."
The Mirror said it has seen a
lengthy and "amazing" confession written by Thompson and which it
says would surely form and important part of Stone's appeal.
The paper said it was unable to
reveal why Thompson had made this "incredible about-turn" for legal
reasons.
But it did state that Thompson did not
think he would have to go to court after making his statement to the police,
and that he never thought Stone would be convicted.
The Mirror said Thompson had
neither asked for nor received payment for the interview.
|
|
Prosecution admits
few links
to murder
The jury in the Michael Stone
murder trial has heard there is "little in the way of evidence" to
link him to the brutal killings of Lin Russell and her daughter Megan.
Anne
Her closing speech came after Mr
Stone declined to give evidence at the trial.
Miss Rafferty admitted there was no
identification of Mr Stone as the killer of Lin Russell, 45, her daughter
Megan, six, or the attempted murderer of her other child, Josie, then aged
nine.
But she said there were witnesses
in the area at the time of the killings who had seen a man resembling Stone.
And a former friend who had seen
him with blood on his clothes the day after the murders was a "truthful,
reliable and accurate" witness.
The victims attacked by a man with
a hammer as they walked along a country path to their home in
They were tied up and Lin and Josie
were blindfolded before they were bludgeoned.
Josie was left for dead but
recovered and went on to tell police of the 15-minute ordeal.
Mr Stone, 38, denies the charges.
'Little in the way of evidence'
Miss Rafferty told the jury of
eight women and four men: "I told you there would come a time when you
would need to strip away emotion and sympathy so that you can do your job.
"It is essential because your
starting point is the limited amount that Josie can say."
She added: "It is against this
miserable background that you might want to consider what little there is in
the way of evidence about the day and the time and the day of the
killings."
Witness Nicola Burchell had seen a
man fitting Stone's description in a car by the country path shortly after the
murders.
But she had not picked him out at
an identification parade last year - and Josie Russell, although recognising an
E-fit of the killer compiled by Miss Burchell, had also failed to spot him in a
line-up.
The prosecution has relied
throughout the trial on an alleged confession made by Stone to a fellow
prisoner while he was being held on remand for the murders.
Miss Rafferty admitted that
prosecution witness Lawrence Calder was unreliable in his evidence about seeing
Stone with blood on his clothes the day after the killings.
No forensic evidence
She said: "Lawrence Calder as
a witness was all over the place. He was not only difficult to understand but
what he had to say was all over the place."
But, said the prosecutor, Calder's
girlfriend Sheree Batt had provided a far more coherent account.
She had seen the defendant with
blood on his T-shirt.
Miss Rafferty said: "She was
truthful, reliable and accurate. She didn't know the contents of what Lawrence
Calder had put in his witness statement."
The court has also heard that there
was no forensic evidence to link Stone to the murder scene.
Miss Rafferty reminded the jury
that Stone had told detectives he burned his clothes from the time of the
murders because they were scruffy and he had put weight on.
She said: "It assured, of
course, there was absolutely no forensic link because they no longer exist. If
he were worried, it was a very sensible precaution."
Stone had told police that he had
no idea where he was that day because he had been using so many drugs.
The trial was adjourned.
|
|