-
Posts
-
gary wadell an ex police officer was granted bail after murdering his wife. he was given bail despite the fact he had done this crime. only to hunt down his mother in law and murder her as well. im not in the least bit suprised at this. the whole system is geared at protecting the police and their supremacy delusions. the police and judiciary are all members of the masons. they never convict one of their own. they will throw a case against an officer out, if the date in the courtroom is wrong. look at the speeding police officer who was let off for driving at stupid miles an hour. anyone else would have been banned and fined.
we all know that cops will never get in trouble for their actions. they have killed several people in the street whilst speeding with lights on, but going no where. onr officer killed a young man while driving away from a takeaway in sheffield.. go figure. will they say sorry ? will they admit liability ? will the poor family ever get justice? yeh rite…There are those who would say that topping your mother-in-law is no bad thing !!!
@forumhostpb wrote:
There are those who would say that topping your mother-in-law is no bad thing !!!
les dawsons the only comedian to get away with mother in law assassination. he was rather good. and he didnt have to top himself cos he lost the argument. twice..
Well I listened to a long news interview about this case at lunchtime today … and the facts that came out are not those that the infamous tabloid press went for in order to get a news story.
Waspish – take it from me that ”the police and judiciary” are NOT all Freemasons. Yes some are of course but in fact the numbers who are on the square are not proportionally greater than many many other professions/occupations. Given that the pursuit of the highest ideals in morality are a central theme of freemasonry, any Brother who got himself in the position that Weddell did would find little sympathy (if any at all) from his fellow Brethren.
In the interview it became clear that this was the THIRD bail application made by the defence – the previous two having been refused. What swung it was a report made in open Court by a psychiatrist (employed by the defence team) who categorically stated that in his professional opinion, Weddell did NOT represent either a threat to himself OR to witnesses OR to the community.
Weddell had been held in custody for nearly a year pending trial and it was felt that as he represented NO THREAT (in the opinion of the professionals) keping him in custody could not be justified.
Of course his subsequent actions clearly dmonstrated that the professionals were wrong yet again.
However, my point is that to put the blame on Judge John Bevan QC is simply not fair. He is bound by strict guidelines related to the setting of bail for prisoners on remand and PROVIDED those guidelines are met in full (as they were in Weddell’s case) then he cannot refuse bail.
Here’s a bit more detail that you won’t find in the Sun and the other trashy tabloids.
Weddell was released on bail as long ago as July 27th LAST YEAR. The tabloid’s story implies pretty strongly that he was released and almost immediatly rushed round to kill his mother-in-law and then top himself.
It has been said that he broke his bail conditions in November but that Woking magistrates failed to revoke his bail and return him to prison on remand.
Yes he did break the bail condition that he must NOT enter the county of Bedfordshire. However, the pub was in fact only 60 yards or so inside the county boundary and the magistrates decided that this breach was so minor and of a technical nature only, that they decided to allow him to continue on bail.
As I’ve said above, the Judge refused a bail application twice before finally granting it on a third application. Weddell’s brother-in-law had to put up £200,000 in cash as a surety – which presumably he will now lose – and a psychiatrisrt (Tony Nayani) certified that Weddell was not a suicide risk at that time.
As is often the case in these matters, the tabloid press indulges itself in a bit of self-righteous screaming; banner headlines; whipping up popular outrage etc etc and everybody jumps onto the bandwaggon.
When you take the time and trouble to look at the FACTS behing these stories, a totally different picture often emerges.
yep i take what you say on board mate. as you say the red tops did make a bit of a dogs dinner of it. i still cant get my head round the fact he was given bail at all. he killed his wife in cold blood ffs! if she had killed him, it would have been a totally different story. more along the lines of. wife murders hero cop… etc. no one who has murdered someone in cold blood should be walking the streets, in my mind anyway.
his wife and her mother are dead. cant be given justice, because he killed both of them and himself. now thats just plain selfish.Well under normal circumstances related to most offenders, he wouldn’t have been given bail at all.
Indeed not only did the Crown Prosecution Service vigorously oppose bail, but also so did all his (so-called Freemason) mates in the Police.
However, his defence team put forward that he was not a danger to the general public. They produced ‘evidence’ in the form of a psychiatrist’s report – delivered in person in front of the Judge in open court – to support this. They also certified that he was NOT a danger to himself. They produced a cash surety of £200,000 to guarantee that he would appear in court when needed. He had a fixed address and a ‘stable’ background.
Faced with this, the Judge was in an impossible position, particularly given the current bail guidelines … which are that bail should be granted unless there are EXCEPTIONAL circumstances as to why it should not be granted.
The fact is that many many people ”walk the streets’ after having been charged with serious offences and released on bail pending trial. The most recent was Kate Knight, who has just been convicted of attempting to murder her husband by putting anti-freeze in his food & drink.
The Red tops made a huge fuss over Weddell’s case because it was pretty much guaranteed to inflame public opinion and thus improve their circulation figures. Why let the facts get in the way of a good story eh???
agreed pet didnt know all the backgrount to the story. its certainly a different version to sky news and the red tops..[no i dont read the red tops. the headlines are enough.] i didnt know he had been in jail. for instance. i havent had the time to do any googlin.. so ill take your word as said. :roll: :roll:
i worked in mental health for years. we had some fantastic stories, and some realy sad ones. it just goes to show ya, that the most decent of people become a different altogether, when faced with a decision they dont like the outcome of…
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!