Billie-Jo Jenkins Murder

OT

What about Sion Jenkins ? Is he guilty or not in the public opinion ?

I marvel how someone with question mark over their reputation can be remarried.
Dont their new partner have doubt ?

aiyoyo wrote:OT

What about Sion Jenkins ?  Is he guilty or not in the public opinion ?

I marvel how someone with question mark over their reputation can be remarried.  
Dont their new partner have doubt ?

Don't want to be accused of going too far off topic but it seems this woman is a genius when it comes to clear cut cases, where even a "civilian" would come to the same conclusion, and of course with the benefit of hindsight. It might be interesting to hear what she has to say about a more contentious case.

People often say of the McCanns "It could happen to anybody". I actually take this as a personal slight because what happened to them could never, EVER befall my family - at least not in the same circumstances. However I could theoretically find myself in the same situation as Sion Jenkins and, whatever you may think of his guilt or otherwise, I certainly wouldn't be happy to be convicted on the same basis he originally was.

Clay Regazzoni wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:OT

What about Sion Jenkins ?  Is he guilty or not in the public opinion ?

I marvel how someone with question mark over their reputation can be remarried.  
Dont their new partner have doubt ?

Don't want to be accused of going too far off topic but it seems this woman is a genius when it comes to clear cut cases, where even a "civilian" would come to the same conclusion, and of course with the benefit of hindsight. It might be interesting to hear what she has to say about a more contentious case.

People often say of the McCanns "It could happen to anybody". I actually take this as a personal slight because what happened to them could never, EVER befall my family - at least not in the same circumstances. However I could theoretically find myself in the same situation as Sion Jenkins and, whatever you may think of his guilt or otherwise, I certainly wouldn't be happy to be convicted on the same basis he originally was.

I am still not an inch clearer. Was he wrongly convicted or got lucky because of technicality ?

Jenkins case is still unsolved isn't it ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billie-Jo_Jenkins

For those abroad who may not know of the Billie-Jo Jenkins case.

I was never convinced of Sion Jenkins' guilt and was glad that he was released.

aiyoyo wrote:

Clay Regazzoni wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:OT

What about Sion Jenkins ?  Is he guilty or not in the public opinion ?

I marvel how someone with question mark over their reputation can be remarried.  
Dont their new partner have doubt ?

Don't want to be accused of going too far off topic but it seems this woman is a genius when it comes to clear cut cases, where even a "civilian" would come to the same conclusion, and of course with the benefit of hindsight. It might be interesting to hear what she has to say about a more contentious case.

People often say of the McCanns "It could happen to anybody". I actually take this as a personal slight because what happened to them could never, EVER befall my family - at least not in the same circumstances. However I could theoretically find myself in the same situation as Sion Jenkins and, whatever you may think of his guilt or otherwise, I certainly wouldn't be happy to be convicted on the same basis he originally was.

I am still not an inch clearer.  Was he wrongly convicted or got lucky because of technicality ?

Jenkins case is still unsolved isn't it ?

Put it this way. If there was analysis done on his interviews & Q & As. I'm fairly certain the results would show his pants are on fire.

However he's been found non guilty in a court and that's that, but the police haven't found anybody else responsible.

Interesting, No Fate.  I was always convinced of his guilt.  IMO his first wife must have had doubts about him, she left with their four children and now lives in Australia.

I don't think there's any question that he wasn't the best husband and father in the world.

However, I just couldn't see how he could have committed a brutal murder, then immediately gone out with two of his daughters on an errand, with no sign of distress or blood on him, then returned and allowed one daughter to find the body.

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:I don't think there's any question that he wasn't the best husband and father in the world.

However, I just couldn't see how he could have committed a brutal murder, then immediately gone out with two of his daughters on an errand, with no sign of distress or blood on him, then returned and allowed one daughter to find the body.

Unfortunately I can see how he could have done this. 

These are not visions for the fainthearted, nor are they given to those who attempt to assess the guilt or innocence of others by imagining their own reactions were they to commit the heinous crime of murder.

Discounting any notion of Icke-style theory, until such time as it is fully recognised that there are those among us who are effectively alien beings in human guise, it will always be the case that the gullible will be tempted to err on the side of mercy and show compassion to those who deserve none.

Yes, UT, I agree but I wasn't sure if I was allowed to say it!

Ladyinred wrote:Interesting, No Fate.  I was always convinced of his guilt.  IMO his first wife must have had doubts about him, she left with their four children and now lives in Australia.

I am with Ladyinred on this one, not NFWTD, sorry.

aiyoyo wrote: "I am still not an inch clearer. Was he wrongly convicted or got lucky because of technicality?"

All I will say is this. His barrister probably wore the jury into submission by repeating time and time again: 'you can only convict this man if you are absolutely sure of his guilt'; I think if I had been on the jury my vote would probably have gone the other way, based on what I read of the case  

Tony Bennett wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:Interesting, No Fate.  I was always convinced of his guilt.  IMO his first wife must have had doubts about him, she left with their four children and now lives in Australia.

I am with Ladyinred on this one, not NFWTD, sorry.

aiyoyo wrote: "I am still not an inch clearer. Was he wrongly convicted or got lucky because of technicality?"

All I will say is this. His barrister probably wore the jury into submission by repeating time and time again: 'you can only convict this man if you are absolutely sure of his guilt'; I think if I had been on the jury my vote would probably have gone the other way, based on what I read of the case  

I agree too, seemed a controlling psychopathic personality to me. I was 100% sure he'd done it.

tigger wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:Interesting, No Fate.  I was always convinced of his guilt.  IMO his first wife must have had doubts about him, she left with their four children and now lives in Australia.

I am with Ladyinred on this one, not NFWTD, sorry.

aiyoyo wrote: "I am still not an inch clearer. Was he wrongly convicted or got lucky because of technicality?"

All I will say is this. His barrister probably wore the jury into submission by repeating time and time again: 'you can only convict this man if you are absolutely sure of his guilt'; I think if I had been on the jury my vote would probably have gone the other way, based on what I read of the case  

I agree too, seemed a controlling psychopathic personality to me.  I was 100% sure he'd done it.

I think he lied about his CV to get a deputy headship at a school. And, yes, there was an air of menace about him - which I've seen in one or two other controlling types. He's happily remarried and living in Sussex now, I believe

quote="No Fate Worse Than De'Ath"]I don't think there's any question that he wasn't the best husband and father in the world.

However, I just couldn't see how he could have committed a brutal murder, then immediately gone out with two of his daughters on an errand, with no sign of distress or blood on him, then returned and allowed one daughter to find the body.[/quote]

His ex-wife claimed he would 'suddenly snap and then and suddenly regain composure' so I suppose it's possible that he could lash out and just as quickly return to normal as if nothing had happened. The jury were told of his violence toward Billy-Jo  but not that he was violent toward his wife.
According to the Mirror specks of blood were found on Sion Jenkins clothes which contained fragments bone. This information was withheld from the jury because the judge ruled it was submitted too late.

Mirror
THE angry family of murdered Billie-Jo Jenkins lashed out yesterday at the judge for refusing to allow key evidence which could have convicted Sion Jenkins of her killing. As Jenkins, 48, walked free after a second retrial it can now be reported that the prosecution wanted to bring evidence that specks of Billie-Jo's blood found on his clothes contained fragments of her bone. But the judge refused to allow it after Jenkins' QC said the defence were told of the evidence too late to be able to challenge it properly.

It can also be revealed that the jury did not know Jenkins was a bully who repeatedly attacked his first wife Lois.

Billie-Jo's aunt Maggie Costner said last night: "We are furious that this key evidence wasn't heard. The jury didn't hear the full case. We had faith in British justice until then.
"There is no excuse. The judge said the defence didn't hear about it in time. Well if that was the case then why the hell didn't he halt the trial and give them time to look at it?
"Billie-Jo was taken from us nine years ago. It's not like we couldn't have waited a few weeks while the defence had a look at the evidence."

Mrs Costner - who punched Jenkins outside court - wept as she revealed the family plan to sue him in the civil courts, where cases can be proved on "balance of probability" instead of the criminal courts' "beyond reasonable doubt". She added: "We will see him in court again. This is not the end. "The life sentence imposed on us when Billie died has now been confirmed. Her murderer is living a free life. Her killer, whoever British justice deems that to be or not to be, is allowed to do as he pleases."

Mrs Costner, who lives in East London, went on: "The reason we have gone through so many trials is because of clever lawyers."

Billie-Jo - who was being fostered by the Jenkins family but was not related to them - was battered to death as she painted the patio doors of their home in Hastings, East Sussex, in 1997. Jenkins was convicted of her murder but retried twice after appealing. Yesterday he was acquitted after the jury could not agree on a verdict. On the eve of the latest retrial last October the prosecution told Mr Justice David Clarke that new scientific tests had been carried out on nine of the 148 spots of Billie-Jo's blood on Jenkins's clothing.

The tests, by Dr Jeremy Skepper of Cambridge university, found the bone fragments.

But Christopher Sallon QC, defending, applied to have them ruled inadmissible because they had been served on his team too late.
In submissions in the absence of the jury which can now be reported, Mr Sallon said: "The crown are proposing a further series of tests of an unknown nature by unknown experts employing unknown protocols which are to be reported some time in the future."

He added: "The consequences for the defence are very real. How do we cross-examine Dr Skepper? How do we present our case properly without further exploring the issue with different experts?" The judge said: "All this has come extremely late. It is material that has been served very, very late without any warning that it was coming." He ruled: "I have very much in mind the impact in this exceptional case that a further significant delay will have. Having regard to the extreme lateness of what is now sought, I have decided to refuse."

Jenkins, who claims to be a Christian, can now be revealed as a wife beater. The latest retrial was told of his violence towards Billie-Jo, whom he kicked on her sprained ankle on a family holiday to France. But the jury did not know that his ex-wife Lois was also a victim. At Jenkins's appeal it was ruled that her evidence about his violence could not be reported at the time because it could prejudice a retrial.

Lois, 43, said he regularly flew into tempers, suddenly snapping and hitting her before suddenly regaining his composure. She told police during the investigation: "I first became aware of Sion's temper about three weeks before our marriage. He slapped me around the face.
"A few weeks after the marriage he slapped me again. I was surprised at how volatile he was and felt frightened. When he lost his temper we never argued. He would just lose it, snap and in a few moments be back to normal." She said that finally "I told him I was not going to put up with it any more. For the first time he admitted he had a temper. Previously he had always blanked it out and refused to admit he had hit me."

Lois added: "He was having real trouble putting up a toilet roll holder upstairs. As I passed I made a practical suggestion ... he hit me around the face hard and my head was spinning with the force of it. I hid in the loft crying.
"I had extreme earache for three to four days and I could not hear out of it and a whistling noise developed. I realised my eardrum had been perforated. I went to my GP and attended the ear, nose and throat department at hospital." Lois divorced Jenkins after he was convicted of murder in 1998 and lives in Australia with her new partner and four daughters by Jenkins. Sussex Assistant Chief Constable Geoff Williams called the verdict "unfortunate". But he added: "A case such as this is never closed. This remains an unsolved murder case. It will be subject to review."
Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/billie-jo-murder-trial-what-the-jury-577789#ixzz2pqL87zXN

Ladyinred wrote:Interesting, No Fate.  I was always convinced of his guilt.  IMO his first wife must have had doubts about him, she left with their four children and now lives in Australia.

For men such as Sion Jenkins to flourish it's necessary for them to have wives/partners who are willing to act as enablers.  

I find it more than a tad disconcerting that, at the time of her foster child's murder, Lois Jenkins was a social worker and, as such, it cannot be said that she was tied to her violent spouse by economic dependency, lack of education, or other similar considerations which are customarily put forward in cases such as that of Mairead Philpott.     

If a social worker employed to work with children and families in a local council or regional authority Social Services Department fails to take the required action to protect their own children from an abusive environment, what hope is there for the children they are professionally charged with protecting?

Many questionable decisions are made by social workers whose personal judgement is so skewed they cannot be said to possess the impartiality necessary to determinine proper courses of action or, as evidenced by sight of Alan Pike's curriculum vitae, are unqualified to work in the challenging and complex field of child protection.

While the family Courts continue to be shrouded in secrecy the abuse of the system by those who work within it will continue to be hidden from public scrutiny.

My sympathy is reserved for Billie-Jo whose death was as preventable as it is inexcusable.

ultimaThule wrote:
My sympathy is reserved for Billie-Jo whose death was as preventable as it is inexcusable.

Obviously I agree with that, very undecided on the rest. Must have been tough for the jury. I heard that the Police "turned" the family by claiming that they had evidence which more or less made it a fait accompli when at the time it was anything but.

I do now fear that Aquila will have my guts for garters for bringing Sion Jenkins into the discussion in the first place!

Tony Bennett wrote:

tigger wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:Interesting, No Fate.  I was always convinced of his guilt.  IMO his first wife must have had doubts about him, she left with their four children and now lives in Australia.

I am with Ladyinred on this one, not NFWTD, sorry.

aiyoyo wrote: "I am still not an inch clearer. Was he wrongly convicted or got lucky because of technicality?"

All I will say is this. His barrister probably wore the jury into submission by repeating time and time again: 'you can only convict this man if you are absolutely sure of his guilt'; I think if I had been on the jury my vote would probably have gone the other way, based on what I read of the case  

I agree too, seemed a controlling psychopathic personality to me.  I was 100% sure he'd done it.

I think he lied about his CV to get a deputy headship at a school. And, yes, there was an air of menace about him - which I've seen in one or two other controlling types. He's happily remarried and living in Sussex now, I believe

As can be seen from this article available on the BBC News/England website, Sion Jenkins did indeed lie on his CV:

Billie-Jo was found lying on the patio with head injuries

The foster father of Billie-Jo Jenkins was under "considerable stress" at work at the time he is accused of murdering her, the Old Bailey heard on Thursday.
Sion Jenkins had applied for the head's job at the school in Hastings, East Sussex, where he was deputy head.

But he had "not been entirely truthful" on the form and would face the sack if it became known he had lied about his qualifications, the jury heard.

Mr Jenkins, 47, of Aberystwyth, Wales, denies murdering Billie-Jo in 1997.

Application form

The 13-year-old was bludgeoned to death with an 18in iron tent peg on 15 February. She was found on the patio at the family's home in Hastings.

Details on Mr Jenkins' application form were read to the court by Crispin Aylett, prosecuting.

Mr Jenkins said he attended Gordonstoun school between 1969 and 1975 and obtained 10 grade A O-Levels in 1973 but this was not true.

In fact, he got two grade C O-Levels in art and history, one D grade in arithmetic and E grades in French and physics, said Mr Aylett.

He obtained one Higher grade C in English.

Mr Jenkins indicated he went to the University of Kent between 1975 and 1979 where he attained a BA Honours 2(1) in English and then took a post graduate teaching qualification in English with drama.

False claims

In truth he just studied to qualify as a teacher with physical education as his subject, the court was told.

He stated he attended the University of London and received a MSc in education management in 1992. He did hold that qualification, but from the University of East London.

The jury has heard that Mr Jenkins had been told he had got the head's job subject to references but the confirmation was taking a long time to come, which made him gloomy.

Mr Aylett asked David Mellon, the County Education Officer for East Sussex, what would have happened if the education authority had found out about the false claims.

Mr Mellon said if it was learned before the appointment "we would not have offered it to him".

"If we had found out subsequently, we would have taken disciplinary action and my recommendation would have been dismissal," he said.

The case continues.

In the Madeleine McCann case, the PJ has repeatedly said that it would only re-open the case if there was, quote 'new and credible evidence' about what might have happened to her.

After the double jepoardy rule was repealed, the law was changed so that people who had been found 'not guilty' could be re-tried if there was 'new and significant evidence'.

So, we now have bone fragments in the blood of Sion Jenkins' foster daughter, Billie-Jo.

Why has there been no retrial of him?

Tony Bennett wrote:

tigger wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

Ladyinred wrote:Interesting, No Fate.  I was always convinced of his guilt.  IMO his first wife must have had doubts about him, she left with their four children and now lives in Australia.

I am with Ladyinred on this one, not NFWTD, sorry.

aiyoyo wrote: "I am still not an inch clearer. Was he wrongly convicted or got lucky because of technicality?"

All I will say is this. His barrister probably wore the jury into submission by repeating time and time again: 'you can only convict this man if you are absolutely sure of his guilt'; I think if I had been on the jury my vote would probably have gone the other way, based on what I read of the case  

I agree too, seemed a controlling psychopathic personality to me.  I was 100% sure he'd done it.

I think he lied about his CV to get a deputy headship at a school. And, yes, there was an air of menace about him - which I've seen in one or two other controlling types. He's happily remarried and living in Sussex now, I believe

There was more than an air of menace about him: he was violent towards his first wife and from what I remember there was some inappropriateness about his relationship with Billie-Joe (who was fostered by the couple).

Tony Bennett wrote:In the Madeleine McCann case, the PJ has repeatedly said that it would only re-open the case if there was, quote 'new and credible evidence' about what might have happened to her.

After the double jepoardy rule was repealed, the law was changed so that people who had been found 'not guilty' could be re-tried if there was 'new and significant evidence'.

So, we now have bone fragments in the blood of Sion Jenkins' foster daughter, Billie-Jo.

Why has there been no retrial of him?

Surely this case has had enough court time and fees for the lawyers? 

Original trial and conviction, two appeals the second of which the guilty conviction was quashed and two further trials where in both cases the juries failed to reach a verdict. The CPS publicly stated there would be no further retrial. 

This is a classic case for the Scottish Law Not Proven verdict to be recorded.

Mirage wrote:  Wikipedia entry.


Following his acquittal Jenkins commenced a PhD in 2008. He was awarded a doctorate in Criminology by the University of Portsmouth in July 2011.^[7] He currently works with pressure groups across the UK seeking reform of the criminal justice system. He remains active in the miscarriages of justice community both in the UK and abroad.


Well I never. The University of Portsmouth,  A-GAIN !   

Quelle surprise, Mirage. 

Having read the biography of Dr Sharon Leal who "obtained a first class honours degree in Psychology at the University of Portsmouth in 2000" it occurs to me that, unless I am no judge of age, she would have been a mature student when she first embarked on her degree course and I wonder what previous life experiences determined her choice of this particular subject?

This case has always interested me.

I have always believed he was guilty of killing his foster daughter, he definitely has an air of menace about him but a couple of other things make me believe he is guilty.

Someone I know used to work with his first wife and told me that she on many occasions told her that Sion used to hit her and the girls, she was scared of him.
I know that doesn't automatically mean someone is capable of murder but it shows a personality that can become suddenly enraged and violent.

Another thing (which I hasten to add could be rubbish) that made me dubious was at the time of the murder, before any convictions, a policeman who frequented a pub I was working in, told me (when he had had a few) that it was common knowledge in the Police force that Sion Jenkins foster daughter was pregnant by him.

Could just be drunken gossip though.

ultimaThule wrote:

Mirage wrote:  Wikipedia entry.


Following his acquittal Jenkins commenced a PhD in 2008. He was awarded a doctorate in Criminology by the University of Portsmouth in July 2011.^[7] He currently works with pressure groups across the UK seeking reform of the criminal justice system. He remains active in the miscarriages of justice community both in the UK and abroad.


Well I never. The University of Portsmouth,  A-GAIN !   

Quelle surprise, Mirage. 

Having read the biography of Dr Sharon Leal who "obtained a first class honours degree in Psychology at the University of Portsmouth in 2000" it occurs to me that, unless I am no judge of age, she would have been a mature student when she first embarked on her degree course and I wonder what previous life experiences determined her choice of this particular subject?

As Jenkins had lied about his education and therefore should first have embarked on a bachelor degree or at least a taught Masters it seems the 'cut and paste' variety of doctoral studies is the preferred method at Portsmouth.
Dr.Leal is an excellent example of the result of such a policy.

bristow wrote:This case has always interested me.

I have always believed he was guilty of killing his foster daughter, he definitely has an air of menace about him but a couple of other things make me believe he is guilty.

Someone I know used to work with his first wife and told me that she on many occasions told her that Sion used to hit her and the girls, she was scared of him.
I know that doesn't automatically mean someone is capable of murder but it shows a personality that can become suddenly enraged and violent.

Another thing (which I hasten to add could be rubbish) that made me dubious was at the time of the murder, before any convictions, a policeman who frequented a pub I was working in, told me (when he had had a few) that it was common knowledge in the Police force that Sion Jenkins foster daughter was pregnant by him.

Could just be drunken gossip though.

Yes, I mentioned on Page 1 of this topic that I thought he'd had an inappropriate relationship with Billie-Joe but Admin must have removed it.

Jenkins also claimed £500,000 compensation for his time spent in prison but was unsuccessful.

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:I don't think there's any question that he wasn't the best husband and father in the world.

However, I just couldn't see how he could have committed a brutal murder, then immediately gone out with two of his daughters on an errand, with no sign of distress or blood on him, then returned and allowed one daughter to find the body.

To clarify what I said earlier, yes I can understand perfectly that there are people who would be capable of killing someone and then behaving perfectly normally afterwards.

It's more the physical evidence - or lack of it - that puzzles me. I remember at the time it was stated that whoever did this must have been caked in blood and gore. Yet SJ was able to go out with his children to a shop with no signs of anything on his person or clothing.

Some microscopic signs of blood showed up later but he did of course touch Billie-Jo when she was found when he returned.

As for the claims of her being pregnant, that surely would have come out at the trial to make the case against SJ much stronger.