MSN Home  |  My MSN  |  Hotmail
Sign in to Windows Live ID Web Search:   
go to MSNGroups 
Free Forum Hosting
 
Important Announcement Important Announcement
The MSN Groups service will close in February 2009. You can move your group to Multiply, MSN’s partner for online groups. Learn More
Oswalds Bar & GrillContains "mature" content, but not necessarily adult.[email protected] 
  
What's New
  
  Message Boards  
  General  
  Meddlers in Time  
  Meddling in Time- Images  
  Pictures  
    
  Recipes  
  Events  
  Links  
  Blog Links  
  Member Profiles  
  Our Cultures  
  Meeting Photos  
  Kings of Chaos Age 4  
  Dark Throne Links  
  Manage XNC2  
  Manage KNTB  
  
  
  Tools  
 
General : WTF? Three “not guilty�?verdicts in murder trials in the past few days!
Choose another message board
 
     
Reply
 Message 1 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameKiwithrottlejockey  (Original Message)Sent: 5/28/2008 9:07 AM

Here is the latest “not guilty�?verdict....



Murray Foreman not guilty of Jack Nicholas murder

NZPA | Wednesday, 28 May 2008

Murray Foreman has been found not guilty of the murder of Hawkes Bay farmer Jack Nicholas.

 

SHOT DEAD: Jack Nicholas (left). �?BILL KEARNS/The Dominion Post
THE ACCUSED: Murray Foreman (right). �?EVA BRADLEY/The Dominion Post



The jury returned its verdict tonight after a day and a half of deliberations in the High Court in Napier.

Eight women and four men began hearing evidence against accused man Murray Kenneth Foreman in the High Court in Napier on April 14.

Foreman, 51, denied any involvement in the dawn shooting of Mr Nicholas at his remote farm northwest of Napier on August 27, 2004.

The jurors added a rider that they did not believe any member of the Nicholas family was involved in the killing.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4563434a10.html



So what is going on?

Are the crown prosecutors blowing it?

Are the police stuffing up in their investigations and gathering of evidence?

Are defence lawyers getting considerably better at carrying out their job on behalf of clients?



First  Previous  2-8 of 8  Next  Last 
Reply
 Message 2 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameLeadboot Sent: 5/28/2008 9:39 AM
I dont think so KT.
Once Lorraine Smith raised sufficient doubt as to whether or not King did it and not Kahui, there was pretty much only one way the case was going.  Police appear quite happy that he did it and have no plans to mount a further investigation.
From that I infer that there is plenty of inadmissible evidence that implicates him.
 
I'm saddened for Agnes Nicholas, but the case revolved around a witness that appeared a year after the event, recalling admissions from Foreman and being believed by the jury.  For whatever reason, they chose not to believe her and the case fell, as it must.
 
The other one escapes me for the moment.
 
Really, its what can happen under our system.  Its a great disappointment to the teams of cops that work tirelessly assembling the case and its a great disappointment to those deprived of a father/husband.
 
Still, better 10 guilty persons go free than one innocent man be convicted - or so the Law Lords would have us believe

Reply
 Message 3 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknamek1w14everSent: 5/28/2008 10:12 AM
we the public only here part of these storys on the media.  Why I think it is hard on familys of these dead people(with respect here) at least these people on the jurys are not just saying guilty for the sake of it.    There is too many people oing to jail for not doing the crime and to me that is so wrong. 
In todays day and age I would not like to be on the jury for all the money in the world.

Reply
 Message 4 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknamenítpíckerSent: 5/28/2008 11:38 PM
?   Are the police stuffing up in their investigations and gathering of evidence?
 
Ms Kingi also said that at the time she first contacted Sensible Sentencing Trust national spokesman Garth McVicar in November 2005 she was unaware of the reward, despite having been onto the website to find out how to contact him, and denied her belated contact was motivated by the offer of a reward.
 
Mr Delaney told the court he had found 10 "results" on the website when he searched using the keyword "reward" and eight when he targeted "Jack Nicholas".
 
 
Seems to me rewards aren't a very good idea.

Reply
 Message 5 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameheatherupnorthSent: 5/29/2008 1:24 AM
I must admit I followed the Kahui trial really closely and I honestly didnt believe it was him.  King looked the most likely from the start. I didnt really follow the Nicholas one. But from the point of view looking at 'beyond reasonable doubt' I think the jury did the right thing.  In both cases. 

Reply
 Message 6 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameKiwithrottlejockeySent: 5/29/2008 3:19 AM

Police ‘picked wrong man�?in Nicholas case

Foreman weeps as he is cleared of murder

By MARTY SHARPE - The Dominion Post with NZPA | Thursday, 29 May 2008

Police investigating the death of Hawke's Bay farmer Jack Nicholas "simply picked the wrong man," the lawyer for Murray Foreman, who was acquitted of the murder last night, says.


NOT GUILTY: Murray Kenneth Foreman walked free from the High Court at Napier after a jury found him not guilty of murdering farmer Jack Nicholas.
�?LYNDA FORREST/The Dominion Post

The jury delivered their verdict in the High Court at Napier at 7.11pm yesterday after a day and half of deliberating.

In a rare move, they asked Justice Simon France to read a note which said: "We believe no one in the Nicholas family was involved in any way."

Mr Nicholas�?son Oliver had been suggested as a suspect during the trial. Mr Foreman, 51, who did not give evidence, looked up to the ceiling and wept when the jury of four men and eight women read the words "not guilty".

Speaking to Radio New Zealand, Foreman's counsel, Bruce Squire QC, lashed out at the police investigation, labelling it "shoddy" and "selective".

He said police had made the "fatal flaw" that characterised many investigations of picking a particular individual and trying to fit a case around them, instead of thoroughly investigating a crime and remaining open minded until all the evidence was clear.

"They simply picked the wrong man and they should have known it long before they charged him," Mr Squire said.

He said the jury had "utterly and completely rejected" the evidence of Crown witness Donna Kingi, who claimed Foreman confessed the murder to her.

"I think that the verdict represents a finding that that woman told lies."

Mr Squire said he did not know whether police planned to reopen the case, but if they did, they should "look in rather obvious quarters for the person who was responsible for the shooting".

He believed there were "other avenues" for police to pursue.

The officer in charge of the case said police were surprised at the verdict.

"We will do what we do in these situations, we'll have a look at it, we'll debrief it and try to figure out what happened in there."

Asked how he felt, as he left the court building, Mr Foreman told reporters: "I’m happy, I’m happy, I can’t wait to see my [teenage son Chea], I haven’t seen him for 18 months", before being whisked away by a waiting car.

Mr Foreman denied any involvement in the dawn shooting of Mr Nicholas, 71, at his remote farm northwest of Napier on August 27, 2004.

He was shot twice by a high-powered .308 rifle.

The Nicholas family left the courthouse without making comment, but Mr Nicholas' brother Craig told The Dominion Post from Christchurch: "I am so shocked by this. I am deeply disappointed with the outcome ... that [Mr Foreman] has walked free."

He thanked Napier police and also the Crown’s star witness Donna Kingi for her "great bravery in coming forward".

The officer in charge of the Nicholas inquiry, Detective Sergeant Dan Foley, said he was surprised by the verdict.

"As far as the police are concerned, that is the end of the inquiry. We won’t be taking the matter any further."

The jury asked four questions of Justice Simon France yesterday as they deliberated, the last only an hour before they gave their verdict.

They asked whether they could believe all the evidence of Ms Kingi if they did not believe her version of when the alleged conversation took place.

Ms Kingi alleged that Mr Foreman had told her on the morning Mr Nicholas died that he had shot someone.

The jury were told they could disregard some and believe other evidence, but in the end they decided the evidence was not enough to convict Mr Foreman.

Outside court, Penny Edwards said the entire Haumoana community, where Mr Foreman lives, had known their friend "Moe" was innocent.

The close friend said the case had torn the Foreman family apart.

This is the third high-profile murder trial to fail in a week. Last Wednesday, George Gwaze was found not guilty of the sexual violation and murder of his niece Charlene Makaza and the following day Chris Kahui was acquitted of murdering his twin three-monthold boys Chris and Cru.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4563458a6045.html


Reply
 Message 7 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameKiwithrottlejockeySent: 5/29/2008 3:20 AM

What the public didn't hear about
the death of Charlene Makaza

Sunday Star Times | Sunday, 25 May 2008

CHARLENE MAKAZA went into hospital as a victim of HIV. By the time she died 18 hours later, doctors had decided she was a victim of murder.


George Gwaze gets a hug from his daughter Maggie as he leaves the
Christchurch District Court after being found not guilty on charges
of murder and sexual violation on May 21, 2008 in Christchurch.
�?MARTIN HUNTER



Their testimony in the High Court at Christchurch over the past month that the 10-year-old Zimbabwean girl had suffered atrocious genital injuries and been suffocated in a sexual assault could have seen an innocent man jailed for life.

Wednesday's acquittal of Charlene's uncle, vet George Gwaze, 56, on murder and sex charges would have surprised many. But that is because the public has been misinformed about Charlene's case since she died on January 7 last year.

This is what police told the media in the days following the death:

  • Charlene did not die by accident or natural causes.
  • There was no evidence she was sick or ill.
  • Charlene had been suffocated.
  • Charlene was found in her bed having difficulty breathing.
  • Her family washed her bedding and clothing after she was the victim of a "horrific" sexual assault.
  • Police had been briefed on African beliefs about sex, including the myth that sex with a virgin could cure Aids.

By the time the Crown revealed at a depositions hearing in July that George Gwaze's semen had been found on Charlene's underwear, the court of public opinion had found a new hate figure.

 

George Gwaze leaves Christchurch District Court after being found not guilty on charges of murder
and sexual violation on May 21, 2008 in Christchurch, New Zealand. Gwaze was charged with
the rape and murder of his 10 year old niece Charlene Makaza on January 07, 2008 (left).

George Gwaze's daughter Maggie with a portrait of Charlene Makaza, who died last year (right).

�?MARTIN HUNTER.



But this is what really happened and this, in the first days after her death, is what we were NOT told.

Charlene was indeed found in her bed at 6am having difficulty breathing. But she was deeply unconscious and awash in her own diarrhoea. It was like porridge, chalky, white and watery. There was so much of it that it had plastered to her legs, the white skirt and pink undies she had worn to bed and drenched her bedding. When her aunt, Gwaze's wife Sifiso, changed her into new clothes before rushing her to an emergency GP clinic, the faeces continued to pour out and soaked those clothes as well. In the end Sifiso wrapped her in a towel.

By the time Charlene got to a 24-hour accident and medical clinic, she had a temperature topping 40°C, a racing pulse over 180, and no recordable blood pressure.

She had lost so much fluid from her blood because of the diarrhoea that she was in what was known as hypovolemic shock. There wasn't enough blood to pump to her brain, causing the oxygen deprivation that was later attributed to suffocation.

Charlene was regularly unwell. She had 20 days off school the year before.


Charlene Makaza, 10, was a student at Wairakei School.


Expert sex abuse witness Dr Felicity Goodyear-Smith.
�?MARTIN HUNTER

The evening before her collapse an elder at her church noticed she was hot to the touch and was having difficulty with her breathing.

Charlene had contracted HIV at birth from her mother Senzeni who died of HIV-related tuberculosis when Charlene was nearly two. Senzeni's husband Edgar also died of Aids in 2000.

Charlene's "horrific" anal injuries amounted to a series of tiny lateral tears and such fissures have been reported in HIV-Aids patients.

Charlene's older sister Charmaine, 12, had chicken pox a virus that could prove devastating to a child whose immunity was as compromised as Charlene's.

The semen on Charlene's underwear always looked bad for George Gwaze. When the defence raised the suggestion of innocent transfer through the wash, it was easy to see how the first reaction could have been "Yeah, right".

But defence counsel Jonathan Eaton's DNA adviser, Arie Geursen the scientist whose work helped to free wrongly convicted David Dougherty in 1996 was in no doubt, given the other facts of the case, that innocent transfer was the most likely explanation.

The morning Charlene was found near death in her bed, Sifiso had returned home from hospital after being told Charlene was likely to be transferred to Auckland's Starship Children's Hospital. Sifiso rinsed all Charlene's soiled sheets and clothes and threw them in the washing machine. It was from here that police recovered the underwear on which Gwaze's semen was found.

But that morning there was none of George or Sifiso's underwear, which could have been the source of such contamination, in the same wash. So how could semen be transferred? Sifiso's habit was to wash underwear her own and Charlene's, in a hand basin together, or throw them in the machine if there was a full wash.

For Geursen, the contamination theory came down to scientific facts, and the lack of any other evidence of a sexual assault. Gwaze's DNA was not found anywhere else on Charlene, nor Charlene's on him.

The average male produces around 130,000,000 sperm heads in each ejaculation. A peer-reviewed international study has found that cotton underwear retains 43% of the DNA after it's been through each wash. "So you have to do quite a few washes to reduce DNA below the detectability of the tests," he says. That means the contamination could well have occurred in an earlier handwash.

The total DNA sample from Charlene's underpants was the size of about one hundred thousandths of a single grain of sugar. Had Gwaze been convicted, says Geursen, it would have been "a terrible travesty of justice. It would have been science and medicine gone astray".

So how did things go so badly wrong for George Gwaze?

GP and forensic physician Felicity Goodyear-Smith, the medical adviser for the defence, believes that once sexual abuse had been raised, other possible explanations were never considered.

And because Charlene's care was handed over between shifts, those on duty later lost sight of her first symptoms. "They were well-intentioned but totally wrong. The fact that she was admitted with sepsis and hypovolemic shock was lost in the retelling.

"Once you get a particular line of thought, like this is sexual abuse, it colours thinking," she said. "And these were very senior people saying it was abuse. If it IS sexual abuse that doesn't matter, but suddenly the possibility that it might not be isn't on the table any more so everything is focused on looking for evidence of it and this is really what this case typifies."

Goodyear-Smith says at first, she too thought the odds were stacked against Gwaze.

"It looked very damning, and very difficult. But when I went through it bit by bit and produced a timeline it all fell into place and then it became incredibly compelling that there was actually no crime. Even though there may be strange coincidences, there are explanations for all of it."

On her timeline, the turning point in medical opinion as to the cause of Charlene's death came at around 1pm when a rectal probe was inserted to take a more accurate temperature. Nurses alerted consultants to what they thought was a "meaty open wound" in her anus, or a rectal tear. A paediatric consultant put the size of the wound at around 7cm while a nurse described it as "a wound you would never forget".

Quickly, attention switched to a possible sexual assault and the infection being caused by the anal injury. By the time Charlene took her last breath 12 hours later, with Sifiso holding her hand and the rest of her family looking on, police were stationed outside.

And when pathologist Martin Sage reported the results of his autopsy the following day that Charlene had likely been suffocated and her genital injuries were consistent with forcible penetration the prosecution had its murder victim.

But when the jury delivered its not guilty verdicts on Wednesday afternoon, the Gwaze case became a judicial rarity a murder trial without a murder. There was a victim, but no crime.

There were no gaping genital wounds, either, says Goodyear-Smith. She believes what the doctors and nurses were actually seeing was a swollen and distended anal canal caused probably by a combination of the severe diarrhoea, Charlene's HIV-Aids status, and the fact she was being pumped with litres of fluids to increase her blood pressure. "There was no 7cm laceration. There were lots of tiny fissures but there wasn't a big tear. But that's what they thought they saw and they went ‘gasp�?"

Sage's autopsy report made no mention of a 7cm tear, referring only to cracks in the anal tissue, the largest of which was 5mm. But he thought these could not be explained by natural causes.

What the doctors were in fact looking at was a very rare HIV-related death in an untreated child. Charlene, who arrived in Christchurch with Sifiso and Charmaine in October 2005, had never had an HIV test.

Though tests in Zimbabwe showed her immunity was lowered and HIV was suspected, she didn't have an Aids-defining condition that would have triggered treatment. And because she came here on a student visa, she didn't have an HIV test.

The family probably knew Charlene was infected, but chose to treat problems as they occurred, pointing to Zimbabwean children dying with Aids despite aggressive treatment.

Goodyear-Smith says she approached HIV experts and pathologists to help but found it difficult to get experts willing to testify. "It is very difficult because if you do come out for the defence against your colleagues you may end up as a pariah."

Goodyear-Smith has tracked Charlene's 18 hours in hospital, almost by the minute. Every test, every scan, every examination.

"Their attempts to save Charlene's life were heroic," she says. "They did everything right. The only thing wrong was the diagnosis."



MEDICAL TIMELINE

JANUARY 06, 2007:

6am: Charlene found in bed, covered with diarrhoea, unconscious, no recordable blood pressure.

6.45am: Arrives at GP clinic. Meningitis or encephalitis suspected. IV drip. Immediate transfer to Christchurch Hospital.

7.15-10am: Airway tubes and catheter inserted, antibiotics started, IV lines introduce saline. Blood tests taken. Blood pressure rises to 130/60. X-rays and vaginal swab taken, nasogastric tube inserted. Charlene has seizure; blood pressure drops to 65/20. Registrar records diarrhoea. Meningococcal septicaemia or brain abscess suspected. Charlene in deep coma, peripherally shut down. Starship hospital consulted. X-rays show fluid on lungs. Vaginal discharge and redness.

10.30am: Transfer to ICU. Results of first CT scan show encephalitis or oxygen deprivation. Preliminary diagnosis viral or bacterial infection.

12.30pm: George and Sifiso go home to pack bag and clean up. Do washing.

1pm: Nurses trying to insert rectal thermometer find what they believe is large, open anal wound. Consultants called, digital photos taken. Consultant surgeon called in. Doctor calls Sifiso at home, asked about past medical history and what she found on bed and clothing.

2pm: Rectal exam with proctoscope shows no evidence of rectal penetration. Doctors discuss whether Charlene was suffocated during sexual assault. Starship team arrives but decision taken that Charlene is dying and will not be transferred.

2.45pm: Tests taken in morning find HIV-positive. Social worker told to notify CYF and police.

3-4.15pm: Sex abuse doctor called in. Hospital staff advise Gwazes of anal injury.

6-8pm: Gwazes told Charlene is brain dead. Sex-abuse doctor calls pathologist. Police liaise with pathologist.

8-9pm: Another rectal exam with proctoscope reveals anal canal bruising, no evidence of perforation but pinprick haemorrhaging. Haemorrhage on hymen.

10-11pm: Third proctoscopy; swabs taken. Two police officers in ICU. Doctors show Sifiso injury to rectum. Family told Charlene is dying.

JANUARY 07:

1.05am: Charlene certified dead.

10am-3.30pm: Autopsy carried out.

JANUARY 08:

6-7pm: News and radio reports quote police saying pathologist has reported Charlene was suffocated.



http://www.stuff.co.nz/sundaystartimes/4558377a6619.html


Reply
 Message 8 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknamenítpíckerSent: 5/30/2008 4:06 AM
I haven't lost faith in the police system, per se, but I have gained faith in the justice system
 
 
 
 
Friday May 30, 08:07 AM
Payment of witnesses under spotlight

The acquittal of Murray Foreman for the murder of Hawke's Bay farmer Jack Nicholas has forced the spotlight on the issue of paying witnesses to testify -- a practice that is now likely to stop.

The defence in the Foreman trial used the proposed payout to undermine the Crown's star witness, Donna Kingi.

The Sensible Sentencing Trust was set to pay $50,000 to Ms Kingi if Murray Foreman was convicted of Mr Nicholas' murder, but Mr Foreman's lawyer, Bruce Squire, QC, said Ms Kingi was motivated only by money and discredited her evidence.

Mr Foreman was acquitted on Wednesday, and trust spokesman Garth McVicar told the Dominion Post it was unlikely rewards for information leading to conviction would be offered in future.

Not guilty verdicts in three murder cases in the past fortnight have stirred heated debate on the justice system, the role of crown prosecutors, and faith in the police.

The other acquittals were those of Chris Kahui, who was accused of killing his twin baby sons in Auckland, and George Gwaze, accused of sexual violation and murder of his 10-year-old niece in Christchurch.

Auckland University associate law professor Scott Optican said any attempt to draw a pattern from the three acquittals was "nonsense".

"You're supposed to have acquittals if there's no evidence. It doesn't mean things have gone wrong with the system. They've gone right."

Solicitor-general David Collins said two other recent, high-profile cases, those of Lipine Sila and Ian Crutchley, had resulted in convictions.

Police and the crown are to review their roles in all five cases.

The other acquittals were those of Chris Kahui, who was accused of killing his twin baby sons in Auckland, and George Gwaze, accused of sexual violation and murder of his 10-year-old niece in Christchurch.

Auckland University associate law professor Scott Optican said any attempt to draw a pattern from the three acquittals was "nonsense".

"You're supposed to have acquittals if there's no evidence. It doesn't mean things have gone wrong with the system. They've gone right."

Solicitor-general David Collins said two other recent, high-profile cases, those of Lipine Sila and Ian Crutchley, had resulted in convictions.

Police and the crown are to review their roles in all five cases.

 


First  Previous  2-8 of 8  Next  Last 
Return to General