The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann. Please note that your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

The submission to the Attorney-General calling for a fresh inquest into the killing of Stuart Lubbock

View previous topic View next topic Go down

The submission to the Attorney-General calling for a fresh inquest into the killing of Stuart Lubbock

Post by Tony Bennett on 31.07.17 17:54

Today I have received notice from the Attorney-General that he has been asked by both the Essex Coroner and Essex Police for an extension of time in which to respond to my application, dated 10 June 2017, for a fresh inquest into the killing of Stuart Lubbock.

They have been granted until 31 August to file a reply.

If they both agree that s second Inquest is required, then fine.

If not, Terry Lubbock and I will have a further opportunity to state our case and respond to whatever is said by the Essex Coroner and Essex Police.

--------------------

In the meantime, Terry Lubbock has asked me to place on the public record a copy of his application. 

I am afraid that without sight of the Inquest transcript, which runs to several hundred pages, much of my submission will not make a lot of sense. 

The burden of my submission is that the Inquest wholly failed to establish as a fact at what time Michael Barrymore and/or his accomplices retracted the cover of the swimming pool.

It is our case that it was retracted only AFTER Stuart Lubbock was already dead after being killed by a violent sexual assault - and that it was only retracted in order to promote the wholly false scenario that Stuart had been swimming in the pool that night.

He did NOT. The evidence that he was in the pool came primarily from one of those later arrested on suspicion of murdering Stuart, and contradicted the evidence of other witnesses.

Moreover, Essex Police misled the entire Inquest by requiring P.C. Jones to state at the very start of the Inquest that Stuart HAD been seen swimming in the pool that night.

In addition, all four Pathologists in the case were told as a FACT that Stuart had been seen swimming in the poll that night.

ALL FOUR Pathologists were unable to see clear evidence of drowning, and as my submission below shows, most of them said the evidence CONTRADICTED drowning.

The submission is long, so I will have to break it up into several posts (sorry about some formatting issues I can't resolve):

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------      
 
The killing of Stuart Lubbock, 31 March 2001

The case for a new Inquest


Application made by Terry Lubbock’s representative Anthony J S Bennett M.A.
10 June 2017


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


CONTENTS                                                                                                           Page No

Executive Summary                                                                                               

Introduction                                                                                                          

Developments since the Inquest                                                                          


C.1  The compilation of a dossier                                                                        


C.2  The investigation into the death of Stuart Lubbock re-opened  

C.3 A book on the case: ‘NOT AWIGHT: Getting Away with Murder’                       

C.4  Explanations for the condition in which Stuart Lubbock was found                

C.5  The arrest of Michael Barrymore, Jonathan Kenney and Justin Merritt on suspicion of murdering Stuart Lubbock, June
2007
   
C.6 The decision of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA)  that Stuart Lubbock had died as the result of a crime of violence
   
C.7  Findings of misconduct against Essex Police by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)
                                     
C.8  New
 disclosures revealed in the trial of Michael Barrymore’s civil claim for £2.5 million compensation for ‘wrongful arrest’: Michael Parker [Barrymore] v Chief Constable of Essex Police [2017]                                              


D. Where Essex Police, the Coroner and the Inquest all went wrong                             

D.1 The police                                                                                                       

D.2  All the pathologists were seriously misled                                                 

D.3  The evidence of the Pathologists: Michal John Heath, Professor Milroy, Professor Jack Crane, Dr Ian Calder                                                                                    


EDay Three – Evidence from relatives and friends of Stuart Lubbock and from  Ambulance Service and Hospital Staff                                                      

F.  Day Four - The evidence of Toxicologist Professor Forrest                                   


G.  Days Four and Five: Witnesses at the ‘party’ at Michael Barrymore’s ho              
G.1  Kylie Merritt’s evidence                                                                                  
G.2  Justin Merritt’s evidence                                                                                
G.3  Michael Barrymore’s evidence                                                                       

G.4  Jonathan Kenney’s evidence                                                                          
G.5  James Futers’ evidence                                                                                   
G.6  Simon Shaw’s evidence                                                                                  
G.7  The evidence of Terry Brennan, Paramedic                                                 
G.8  The evidence of Angela Nagle, Nurse                                                               
G.9  The evidence of Stuart Nairn                                                                           
G.10 The evidence of Chief Superintendent Ian McNeill                                       


H. The Lady Coroner’s Summing-Up                                                                      


I.  The Verdict                                                                                                            


APPENDIX 1:  The weather on 31 March 2001                                                     
APPENDIX 2:  Newspaper articles in the News of the World                              



I make this submission on behalf of Stuart Lubbock’s father, Terry Lubbock.

A.          Executive Summary

The original inquest was defective in serious ways. 

The ‘Open’ verdict was contrary to overwhelming evidence that Stuart was killed by a violent sexual assault, and that those responsible covered up his death. 

At the start of the inquest, the Coroner’s Officer, P.C. Jones, made a false factual statement when he informed the inquest that, quote, “Stuart Lubbock was found in the pool at the premises”. 

What he should have said was that: “A number of witnesses claimed that he had been in the swimming pool that night”. 

A proper assessment of the evidence tends to suggest that Stuart Lubbock was never in the swimming pool that night. 

Essex Police failed to analyse the evidence properly and consequently misinformed the Lady Coroner and the inquest. 

Due to errors by both the police and the Lady Coroner, the four pathologists who gave opinions on the case were not told of the wholly contradictory and fabricated evidence of the witnesses who claimed that Stuart was in the swimming pool. As a result, and as explained in detail in this submission, they were not made aware of the probability that Stuart Lubbock was never in the swimming pool that night. Consequently, all their findings are flawed. 

The Lady Coroner so arranged the inquest that the pathologists’ evidence first BEFORE there was a proper opportunity to test the contradictory evidence about how Stuart was found. 

Since the inquest, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority REVERSED their previous decision not to award Terry Lubbock and his wife Criminal Injuries Compensation. In 2007, in response to my dossier of evidence they held that Stuart Lubbock WAS, on the balance pf probability, killed by a crime of violence. They then paid the maximum CICA payment possible to Terry Lubbock and his wife. 

Since the inquest, Michael Parker [Barrymore], Jonathan Kenney and Justin Merritt have all been arrested (June 2007) and investigated on suspicion of murdering Stuart.   Since the inquest, an Independent Police Complaints Commission, after receiving a dossier from me, published a report finding Essex Police guilty of misconduct, particularly over the exceptionally lax supervision of the crime scene, which included allowing Michael Barrymore’s Manager, Mike Brown, to record the evidentially  all-important, indeed crucial, pool temperature.        

My book ‘NOT AWIGHT: ‘Getting Away With Murder’ (enclosed with this application) - a detailed investigation into the killing of Stuart - explained in detail how the evidence suggests that:

[size=16]Stuart was never in the swimming pool that night[/size]

[size=16]He was killed by a violent sexual assault, probably between 4.30am and 5.00am that night[/size]

T[size=16]hose who killed him decided to create a fake ‘drowning scenario’[/size]

[size=16]They contacted Michael Barrymore’s Manager at around 5am who, according to an informant, advised the killers: “Clean everything up and I’ll be right over”[/size]

[size=16]Immediately before Justin Merritt contacted the Ambulance Service at 5.46am, the killers of Stuart laid out his body in a pair of shorts at the poolside, and poured quantities of water over his dead body to fake a drowning.   
 
The Lady Coroner should consider whether a jury should be empanelled for any fresh inquest in view of the misconduct findings against Essex Police, which could be taken to suggest that the killers were helped by the police to minimise (a) the possibility of any of Stuart’s killers being prosecuted for killing him and (b) the possibility of a homicide verdict at the inquest.         
                                   [/size]


B.         Introduction

The original Inquest into the death of Stuart Lubbock took place in September  2002. 

It reached the following verdicts:

[size=16]1 That the cause of Stuart Lubbock’s death was ‘unascertained’ and[/size]
[size=16]2 An ‘open’ verdict was recorded, a decision which effectively leaves the surviving family and the public not knowing what really happened.
In many cases an ‘open’ verdict is entirely reasonable as there simply is insufficient evidence to give any other of the range of possible verdicts.
But in this case, I think a serious injustice was done to Stuart Lubbock and his family by the ‘open’ verdict, and I shall proceed to explain why. [/size]


C.          Developments since the Inquest

First, I will explain what significant developments there have been since the Inquest, and what if anything has changed, either in terms of new evidence, or otherwise. 

At the very beginning of 2006, it was reported that Michael Barrymore was going to make a ‘comeback’ to his entertainment career via the medium of appearing on a TV reality show, Celebrity Big Brother, that month. Up until then, he had been living in New Zealand with a young male partner, Shaun Davis, having left England sometime after the death of Stuart Lubbock at his home in Roydon. Stuart’s father reacted to the news of his forthcoming appearance on Celebrity Big Brother by calling publicly for Michael Barrymore to fully explain what happened the night Stuart died. 

I was until recently living in Harlow, two miles from Terry Lubbock. I had followed the case in the Harlow newspapers for years. From these reports it was clear that Terry Lubbock remained distressed that the Inquest had not gone anywhere near to providing answers to what really happened to his son.  He wanted the truth. He wanted justice for his son. He did not appear to have any lawyer or adviser helping  him. On this occasion, I wrote to Terry Lubbock and offered to help him.      

As a first step to opening up the case once more, I helped Terry Lubbock to apply for a summons against Michael Barrymore in respect of a number of specific offences which Terry Lubbock considered had been committed that night by Michael Barrymore. At a hearing at Epping Magistrates Court on  January 2006, a Stipendiary Magistrate ordered me to serve Michael Barrymore, or his solicitors, with notice of the application. After it was duly served, the application was considered by another Stipendiary Magistrate at Southend Magistrates Court on 30 January 2006, but was refused. 

C.1  The compilation of a dossier

Thereafter, I spent months researching and analysing material on the death of Stuart Lubbock, mostly a set of witness statements from the Inquests and a transcript of the Inquest. 

By 1 August 2006 I was able to send the Chief Constable of Essex Police an 80-page dossier of analysis suggesting that a full re-investigation was needed. 

The main points of my submission in that dossier were these:
[size=16]That the witnesses’ evidence was reasonably consistent as to what happened that night up until around 4am or just after[/size]

2 [size=16]That thereafter there were major contradictions as between the accounts given by the eight witnesses of the evening’s events[/size]

3 [size=16]There were the most serious and irreconcilable contradictions in the evidence of those who claimed to have (a) seen Stuart swimming in the pool  (b) first discovered Stuart ‘floating’ in the pool and (c) rescued him from the pool.
Evidence about when the pool cover was electronically opened was vague and contradictory. The evidence was that the pool has not been used all winter and it must have been very cold (the outside temperature on the morning of 31 March was probably around 7degC (45degF). [Please see APPENDIX]. explicably and unbelievably, the Senior Investigating Officer appointed that night, Kevin Macey, allowed Michal Barrymore’s Manager, Mike Brown, to take the temperature of the pool, well after the police arrived. This decision was criticised in a subsequent Independent Police Complaints Commission report (see below). I formed the conclusion from these facts that the pool cover had not been opened for the purposes of allowing guests to swim but, instead, had been opened much later in the morning to cover up how Stuart Lubbock had been killed.[/size][size=16]Alongside this conclusion, and after carefully assessing all the witnesses’ evidence, I formed the view that Stuart Lubbock had never been in the swimming pool that night, and that all the tales of his having done so, having been found ‘floating’ in the pool and having been rescued etc., were blatant fabrications designed to create an alternative, superficially plausible, explanation for Stuart’s death. [/size]

[size=16]Two young women who were at Michael Barrymore’s home that night were not asked to give evidence at the Inquest. One of them referred in her witness statement to the other young woman having been in tears over a ‘rape’ that took place that evening.     [/size]


C.2  The investigation into the death of Stuart Lubbock re-opened
 

After submitting the dossier, Terry Lubbock and I were invited to meet with the police. In particular, we met with a Cold Case Reviewer, ‘Nobby’ Clark, and the new Senior Investigating Officer, Detective Chief Superintendent Gareth Wilson, and discussed the evidence with him. They both agreed that the contradictions over what happened were major, and promised to review them. 

On Saturday 2 December 2006, Detective Chief Superintendent Gareth Wilson announced that there would be a full re-investigation into the death of Stuart Lubbock. Days later, he met with myself and Terry Lubbock and said that he was deploying a team of 15 detectives on the case. We subsequently had regular contact with him.     

    

C.3  A book on the case: ‘NOT AWIGHT: Getting Away with Murder’

Terry Lubbock was keen that a book should be written on the case, which he hoped would be another milestone on the road to getting out the truth and providing justice for his son. I had begun working on this prior to December 2006 and a rough draft was ready by end of January. The News of the World was interested in publishing a serialisation of my book and ran two long extracts of it in December 2006 and February 2007 (see Appendix below). 

Every word in the articles had to be checked and rechecked for strict accuracy and of course for the reason that, if anything untrue or unjustified was written, Michael Barrymore might sue the newspaper. The articles are attached to this report. They suggested, with ample evidence, that Stuart Lubbock had never been in the swimming pool that night. Michael Barrymore did not sue. A copy of my book, the contents of which I stand by, is enclosed with this report and the evidence within it forms a significant part of our case for a second inquest. It was published in July 2007. 

C.4  Explanations for the condition in which Stuart Lubbock was found

As the Lady Coroner who conducted the Inquest (now the Senior Coroner for the area), or anyone else who considers this application for a second Inquest will be aware, the circumstances in which Stuart Lubbock was found by the Ambulance Service were as follows:

1 [size=16]The ambulance was called at 5.46am by Justin Merritt (some accounts say 5.50am) and the Ambulance Service arrived at 6.03am[/size]
2 [size=16]He was laid out by the side of the pool[/size]
3 [size=16]He was wet and there was quite a lot of water around him[/size]
4 [size=16]He had a lot of water in his system, e.g. in his lungs[/size]
5 [size=16]On the majority view of the pathologists, he had petechiae around his face and neck which strongly suggested that he had not drowned[/size]
6 [size=16]Despite claims that Stuart Lubbock had been lifted bodily out of the swimming pool by one or two men (the various accounts contradict each other), there were no marks indicating where Stuart’s body was held, or dragged against the side of the pool (which would surely, at a minimum, have left scratches or grazes[/size]
[size=16]7 [/size][size=16]He was dressed only in a pair of boxer shorts, which had a spot of blood on them[/size]
8 [size=16]There was unmistakable evidence that earlier in that morning he had suffered a serious sexual assault up his anus, causing marked lacerations.
 
It is suggested that the explanation that best fits the above facts (and others, see below), is as follows.[/size]

A [size=16]Sometime after 4am, with the most likely time in my view being around 4.30am-4.45am, Stuart Lubbock was killed as the result of an exceptionally violent and brutal sexual assault.[/size]
B [size=16]He was never in the swimming pool that night.[/size]
C [size=16]It does not matter, in a sense, whether he died as the result of a heart attack/heart failure, or asphyxiation, or another cause of death related to the sexual assault; it is overwhelming probable, I suggest, that the sexual assault killed him, and that that is why there needed to be a hastily-arranged ‘cover-story’, namely: “He went swimming and drowned”.[/size]
D [size=16]After the sexual assault and it was realised that he was dead, those who killed him did the following:[/size]

i   [size=16]Electronically drew back the cover of the pool to promote the ‘drowning’ scenario [/size]
ii   [size=16]Cranked up the heating system to warm up the water[/size]
iii   [size=16]Dressed Stuart Lubbock in his boxer shorts[/size]
iv   [size=16]Carried Stuart Lubbock out to the side of the swimming pool[/size]
v   [size=16]Forced some water down his throat, again to promote the ‘drowning’ scenario
 
When all this had been done, they threw a few buckets of water over him and called the Essex Ambulance Service.       
 [/size]


C.5  The arrest of Michael Barrymore, Jonathan Kenney and Justin Merritt on suspicion of murdering Stuart Lubbock, June 2007

On   June 2007, Michael Barrymore, Jonathan Kenney and Justin Merritt were arrested on suspicion of murdering Stuart Lubbock. Michael Barrymore was questioned for two days. All three were bailed pending further enquiries. Some while later, the police announced that the Crown Prosecution Service had formed the view that there was ‘insufficient evidence’ to lay murder charges, or any other charge, against any of the three individuals.

 

C.6  The decision of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) that Stuart Lubbock had died as the result of a crime of violence 

Early in 2007, I asked Terry Lubbock whether he and his wife (from whom he was divorced) had ever made an application to the CICA for compensation. He told me that his previous solicitor Mr Gowen had done so but failed. I explained that the matter could be re-opened, as I believed from my investigations and despite the ‘Open’ verdict of the Inquest that there was sufficient evidence that he had died from a crime of violence.    

 

I assisted him to apply, and submitted a revised dossier to the CICA. They agreed that Stuart had died from a crime of violence and paid Terry Lubbock and his wife the tariff payment for the parents of a son killed (on the balance of probabilities), namely £5,500 each and £1,300 funeral expenses. 

 

C.7  Findings of misconduct against Essex Police by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)

 

I suggested to Terry Lubbock that there were grounds to suspect Essex Police of misconduct in the way they carried out their investigation of Stuart’s death.

I warned him, however, that the IPCC did not normally entertain claims made more than one year after the events complained about.   

The IPCC did agree to conduct an investigation into Essex Police and did find  misconduct. On the basis of my investigations, however, I think that the Senior Investigating Officer, Kevin Macey was open to much more serious criticisms of his actions. 

The IPCC report can be read at this link and is not attached:

 

[PDF]  IPCC independent investigation into complaints relating to the ...

https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Documents/.../lubbock_report.pdf

Cached

Similar

Apr 1, 2001 - into complaints relating to the investigation carried out by Essex. Police in 2001/02 into the death of. Stuart Lubbock. IPCC reference: 2007/ ...

 


The IPCC criticisms focused on significant failures of crime scene management and on the loss of the pool thermometer used to measure the temperature of the swimming pool.      

(To be continued later)

____________________

 Daily Mail journalist Daniel Bates wrote: “Kate and Gerry McCann have released a new picture of their daughter Madeleine as they prepare to commemorate tomorrow’s third anniversary of her disappearance. The photo shows her when she was three after a raid on the dressing-up box. She has a pink bow in her hair and a gold bead necklace and is wearing blue eyeshadow. It was taken weeks before the fateful family holiday to the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz when Madeleine vanished”

avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14662
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: The submission to the Attorney-General calling for a fresh inquest into the killing of Stuart Lubbock

Post by dartinghero on 12.08.17 18:20

Hi Tony
Wishing you and Stuart Lubbock's family all the best with this.

Have to wait for payday  violin but was wondering if you have any books left?
avatar
dartinghero

Posts : 41
Reputation : 18
Join date : 2017-03-27

Back to top Go down

Re: The submission to the Attorney-General calling for a fresh inquest into the killing of Stuart Lubbock

Post by Tony Bennett on 14.08.17 17:44

@dartinghero wrote:Hi Tony
Wishing you and Stuart Lubbock's family all the best with this.

Have to wait for payday  violin but was wondering if you have any books left?

@ dartinghero

Thank you very much.

Yes I do have some books left.

I am selling them for £5 each, including postage etc. that's £7.50.

If you email me please at ajsbennett@btinternet.com or send me a 'pm' I will send you further details.

Tony

____________________

 Daily Mail journalist Daniel Bates wrote: “Kate and Gerry McCann have released a new picture of their daughter Madeleine as they prepare to commemorate tomorrow’s third anniversary of her disappearance. The photo shows her when she was three after a raid on the dressing-up box. She has a pink bow in her hair and a gold bead necklace and is wearing blue eyeshadow. It was taken weeks before the fateful family holiday to the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz when Madeleine vanished”

avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14662
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum