Journalists should fight injustice

'We must revive the link between investigative journalism and miscarriages of justice' – Dr Eamonn O' Neill


We've been working on an innocence project for nearly six months now and I'm not exaggerating in the slightest when I say it's been one of the most exhilarating experiences of my life. Working on a case is addictive, I've spent untold hours pouring over witness statements and forensic evidence. Fire reports, crime scene photos, e-fits and psychological profiles. Slowly, a picture of events that took place over ten years ago is starting to come together. It's captivating.

I caught the bug at last October's INUK training event. The personal stories of miscarriages of justice we heard were infuriating and heartbreaking, the passion we saw in other members of the INUK was inspiring. Last week, myself and other students from the University of Winchester attended a similar event.

The chair and first speaker was Dr Eamonn O' Neill, a freelance investigative journalist and one hell of a role model for journalism students. He opened with a talk that made the journalists in the audience sit up that little bit straighter and swell with pride. The Innocence Network wants the skills we have to offer and thanks to the example set by Dr O' Neill, we want to give them.

He reminded us of the long tradition of journalists exposing the truth and freeing the wrongfully convicted, the late Ludovic Kennedy being a prime example. The BBC TV show Rough Justice, that resulted in 15 quashed convictions, was axed in 2007. According to Dr O' Neill this is just another symptom that there has been a decline of coverage in recent years, a dearth of journalists willing to put the time into investigating cases.

When Winchester first joined the INUK we were a little apprehensive about being the only university running cases without any law students. Now I choose not to see that weakness, instead I look at the strengths that journalists bring. Investigative journalists have incisive minds to spot what's important, they really want to get to the bottom of things. They have curiosity and persistence, a strong sense of purpose, a feeling of outrage about wrongdoing and a moral conviction to find the truth. They're prepared to be very unpopular and are determined enough to knock on the 16th door in the rain when they're tired and the first 15 doors have led them nowhere. They have courage and put tough questions to powerful people.

I think those are exactly the qualities needed to expose a miscarriage of justice.


'The system is process over truth, law before people' – Dr Michael Naughton


The founder of the INUK, Dr Michael Naughton then took the floor. He reminded us of the importance of factual innocence over legal innocence. As an innocence project we should be concerned with finding the truth, whether that means our client is innocent or guilty. We're not looking to free a prisoner on a legal technicality, rather find concrete evidence to prove that they either did or did not commit the crime they are imprisoned for. Circumstantial evidence is the enemy.

He argues that the current system is flawed and I'm inclined to agree with him.


'When there is no hope, there is always hope' - Mark Newby


Mark Newby was the keynote speaker at the conference. As a solicitor he's exposed injustice and freed the wrongfully convicted. He took the opportunity to take us through five of his cases and in the process showed how determination and an eye for detail can save lives.

He gave us a blow by blow account of how he and his team proved factual innocence. I took notes and Winchester's innocence project will be stronger for it.

It was a fantastic day and I came away with a host of ideas I can't wait to implement into our project. Growing up, many of the moral absolutes I held have been shattered by the reality of our society and justice system. It's my work with the Innocence Network UK that has convinced me some absolutes are worth clinging to. There is right and wrong, there is guilty and innocent. Sometimes it can be as simple as that.

(Photos courtesy of United Against Injustice)

Two horrific stories and one fantastic night of learning

It was an odd moment, Gerry Conlon sipped his beer and looked me in the eyes and said "I love this country. I really do." And why shouldn't he? Apart from wrongfully imprisoning him for 15 years it's great.

On Friday night in an pub just around the corner from Fleet St he happily chatted to our group of Winchester journalism students and even demonstrated a few handy, quick and easy torture techniques he 'picked up' while in police custody. On my lecturer. Which was damn funny.

Gerry was one of the Guildford four, meeting him and hearing his story firsthand was exhilarating and just one of the reasons the Innocence Network training weekend was really special. It's safe to say that I couldn't be more excited about setting up our own innocence project and putting investigative journalism skills to good use.

We arrived in central London and entered the luxury offices of Freshfield Bruckhaus Deringer, all sparkling glass and stainless steel. The toilets were some of the nicest I've ever been in and you can always safely judge a place by its toilets... After grabbing a cheeky coffee we were ushered into a conference hall that puts Winchester's lecture theaters to shame.

On the first night we were spoken to by a panel of five chaired by Bruce Kent, the other four speakers were Terry McCarthy from the Parole Board, Dr Michael Naughton who founded the INUK and victims of misjustice Paul Blackburn and Gerry Conlon who told us their stories. A lot of what we heard wasn't pretty.

Paul was convicted at the age of 15 for a sexual offence, 25 years later he was acquitted. He spent a quarter of a century in prison. Because of the nature of the crime he was charged with he was a target for bullying and violence in prison. Paul told us of a terrifying night when the lights went out and the door to his cell opened, three men in balaclavas entered wielding blades and attacked him. During his incarceration he was stabbed seven times, beaten and burned. "It was like being taken and put on another planet, a violent, dangerous one" he said, "It's a difficult place to grow up in prison... It left me completely lost in life. I don't really know where I'm going from here."

He spoke of how difficult it was for him to try and prove his innocence: "How do you fight a case you know nothing about because you didn't do it... it will drive you mad in the end." It's not hard to see how a teenager could struggle to face a system they simply don't understand. I can't imagine how hard it must have been to enter a world of lawyers and judges at such a young age.

Gerry Conlon wasn't much older when he entered prison, he told us how at age 20 the police stormed his house at five in the morning, dragging him out of bed in front of his family and throwing him into a van where they burnt him with cigarettes and later broke his nose. "October is a weird month for me" he said, recalling how he had been arrested on the 22nd. Gerry describes the events vividly: "These people were corrupt and they were torturers", then he told of a gauntlet of police officers that kicked and spat on him at Addlestone police station.

Gerry unsurprisingly knows a lot about law and miscarriages of justice, he spoke fondly of the recently deceased journalist and campaigner for the wrongly convicted, Ludovic Kennedy, saying the man cared about the justice system and cared about people. Then he went on to talk about the Criminal Cases Review Commision (CCRC), started in response to Gerry and others' wrongful convictions: "They set us the CCRC and initially it worked. But then they started taking away money and they started taking away case workers."

Dr Michael Naughton also spoke about the CCRC, telling of mixed successes with the Bristol innocence project: "The last few weeks have been challenging. The Bristol project has had a case sent for appeal. So why aren't I smiling? Well, I'm just miserable" he joked. The Birmingham six and Guildford four wouldn't have been successful under current CCRC rules despite being the main reason the body was created. Dr Naughton made clear that there is a big difference between having a conviction overturned and actually proving innocence and an innocence project should be concerned with truth not just legal loopholes. I'm beginning to think the law students involved don't have any advantage over those of us studying journalism and in fact it may be the other way round entirely.

With the creation of the CCRC, Dr Naughton says the media began to believe that miscarriages of justice weren't newsworthy anymore since a government body was assigned to deal with them. But now there's a need to resurrect media interest. He said "Journalists and the right kind of journalist are very important. It's the wrong kind of journalist that contributes to wrongful convictions".

After the meeting we left the hall to discover a plentiful selection of beers and wines, perhaps to get us in the mood to talk with other students and the speakers at the event. It worked and probably not just because alcohol was there to ease the process, the talks and stories we heard fired us up and all we wanted to do was talk more about the project. And as everyone else left for their hotels and hostels we played the part of journalists admirably, heading straight for the nearest pub. Gerry, Paul, Michael and others kindly joined us.

One of my colleagues mentioned that the talks were interesting, Michael Naughton was in earshot and his passion showed through as he turned and said "Interesting? Interesting!? I think the word you're looking for is inspiring."

Miscarriages of Justice, the Guildford Four and Innocence Network UK

In October 1975 Paul Hill, Gerald Conlon, Patrick Armstrong and Carole Richardson were convicted of murder and other charges and given life sentences. It would be 15 years before the convictions were successfully appealed and their innocence admitted.

For our final year project, instead of a standard dissertation, journalism students in my year at Winchester university will be starting an Innocence Project. We will be taking on cases like the Guildford Four in an attempt to find new evidence that might help the accused win an appeal.



The Guildford Four were tried and convicted of two pub bombings in a time of political tension surrounding Ireland and the IRA. The conviction remained upheld despite new evidence coming forward. A witness provided an alibi for Carole Richardson that was collaborated by photographic evidence, but the prosecution developed a dubious possible sequence of events by which Richardson could have been traveled at high speed across town to still commit the bombing. Soon after, four confirmed IRA members were caught and convicted for other bombings but confessed to the Guildford bombings too. This too was dismissed as a conspiracy to release the Guildford Four. It finally took evidence that the police had doctored notes used in court to cause the judges to rethink the case.

Along with the case of the Birmingham Six it was a shocking reminder to the public that our criminal justice system is fallible. It also raised many questions about police procedure and put doubts in many minds as to the honesty and integrity of the police service in the 1970's. There were accusations that the police used beatings, intimidation and threats against family and friends to illicit confessions from the accused. These confessions were central to the prosecution's cases and in the Guildford Four trial was essentially the entire case after the other evidence was called into question.

If these convictions were wrong, how many other people could be falsely imprisoned right now?

It was because these high profile court rulings were quashed that the government created the CCRC (Criminal Cases Review Commission), an organisation with the intention of reviewing cases with possible grounds to appeal. According to the CCRC's website as of 30th September 2009 they have received 12109 applications. 398 of these made it to court and 116 were upheld. This means that under 1% of applications result in a successful appeal.

There are two possible reasons for this. Firstly, the system works. Our prosecution system is strong and we get the right people convicted of the right crimes, there are just a tiny number of cases that fall through the cracks and those people are saved from wrongful imprisonment by the appeals process. Or secondly, mistakes are being made and the process for rectifying them is flawed. Obviously the first option is infinity more appealing and probably much more likely, but without constant checking and questioning we can't be certain this is the case. The Innocence Network UK and student innocence projects are other checks we can use.

INUK was started in September 2004 by Dr Michael Naughton and was inspired by a similar project that proved successful in America. Naughton teaches criminal law at the university of Bristol and specialises in miscarriages of justice. He started the first dedicated innocence project in the UK.

The students in my year will split into small groups of three or four and be assigned cases that meet certain criteria. The person we will be working with will have received a life sentence, effectively meaning they were convicted of either murder or rape. Our job will be to test the strength of that conviction. This will be real opportunity to do some investigative journalism.

When given a life imprisonment, usually parole is only granted once the individual admits their guilt. If the chance occurs and they still maintain their innocence then that person is either a dedicated (and foolish) liar or they genuinely believe their own innocence, choosing to remain imprisoned purely on principle. It is these cases we will be especially interested in.

This promises to be an extremely exciting project and I can't wait to get started.