George Ince

Product Information

By using the Web site, you confirm that you have read, understood, and agreed to be bound by the Terms and Conditions. On 24 May 2011, Davis's conviction for the 1974 raid on the London Electricity Board was quashed by three judges at the Court of Appeal. As soon as the investigation has been completed and checks have been made into the statement, we shall be in touch with my hon. He said Ince had “brought disgrace upon yourself and indeed the police force” but commended the investigation conducted into his conduct by the Safeguarding children online (SCOLT) team which he said was of the highest standard.

The present Home Secretary, however, has done a total reversion, right back to before 1974, to a harder line—a very hard line indeed. It goes without saying that the proper forum for judging guilt or innocence is a court of law, particularly where, as in the case of serious crime, we have a jury system, which everyone values. The report is a private report and not a public one, and such reports have not been disclosed in the past, any more than police investigations have been published.

Ince was dismissed from the Norfolk force in August at at an accelerated misconduct hearing at the force's HQ which lasted less than 10 minutes. The excess of zeal by Essex police officers to pursue investigatory ends oblivious to the contradictory evidence was not in the best interests of such an investigation. establishing an alibi at the last minute, escaped conviction for the Barn murder, and a short while afterwards two men were arrested, charged and convicted of that murder.

Due to the current volume of work, we are unable to provide individual responses regarding updates on requests. at Walthamstow on 18 May 1974 were passed on to the Yard's Senior Scientific Officer, Peter Martin, on 21 May and he reported his negative findings to the police officer in charge of the case on 20 June. Even where there is a public inquiry it is often necessary to check with people who have given evidence as to whether they agree that the particular proposal should be published.Friend does not feel able to depart from the normal practice, and does not feel able to publish this document, for the reasons set out in Home Office Circular 63/77, a copy of which is available in the Library. We ask that you please bare with us during this extraordinary period and we will endeavour to provide final disclosures to you as soon as possible. This direct action protest by relatives and friends of George Davis was accompanied by Davis Campaign graffiti proclaiming "FREE GEORGE DAVIS .

D. Moore made this Freedom of Information request to Norfolk Constabulary Automatic anti-spam measures are in place for this older request. Finally, also on 8th April 1976, answering a different parliamentary Question, he said, without mentioning evidence, that the case could be reopened on some new consideration of substance. On 19 August 1975, while Davis was serving a 20-year prison sentence for the Ilford LEB robbery, his supporters dug holes in the pitch and poured oil over one end of the wicket at the Headingley Cricket Ground, preventing further play in the Test match between England and Australia. Clearly, someone has gone to a great deal of trouble to draw up the document from which the article in The Guardian is drawn.This Ft-T decision dated 30/10/23 (EA/2023/0132) concerning Sussex Police contains something of interest. That certainly post-dates the Sills report, but these are mere reiterations of the principle that has always obtained and which, I believe, obtained in this case with equal validity. Although it subsequently became clear that evidence had by then become available to police, it was suppressed and this abuse of due process became one of the core allegations relied upon by those campaigning for the release of Davis. I do not believe that it was reasonable for the court, even with some warning given to it about the identification evidence, to ignore this lack of credibility of the people who had built up the case. If that were so, the independence of the judiciary and of our legal system might well be undermined.

A number of blood samples (matching different blood groups) were recovered and formed part of the prosecution case. Friend to explain why he had not accepted such a recommendation and, indeed, why he gave the parliamentary Answer that he did to our mutual hon. However, I have read every word of the proceedings and I say that, innocent or not, George Ince should certainly not have been convicted on the evidence adduced against him at the trial and subsequently in the appeal, because the overwhelming bulk of that evidence rested upon identification carried out a few days later in the same place by the officers who, it is now known, did a crooked identification in the case of the Barn murder. significant matters which appear to suggest that the jury were not presented with an accurate or adequate picture of what occurred. George Davis (born 1941) [ citation needed] is an armed robber, born in Bletchley, [ citation needed] England and active in England.citation needed] The Davis campaigners who were remanded to prison to await trial for the Headingley sabotage continued their campaigning in support of one another within the prison system. Friend is going to say that the article is not true, let me bring out one point in the Sills report.