Murder - A Miscarriage of Justice Like No Other

---

Mr B’s case stands out as one of the most significant miscarriages of justice in British legal history. Convicted alongside his younger brother, Mr B was found guilty of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, while his brother, JA, received a murder conviction. The controversy and concerns stemming from their prosecution have persisted, prompting ongoing scrutiny and vigorous advocacy efforts.

The Index Offence

On the evening of 11 March 1998, Mr B and his brother attended their local pub in Essex. A confrontation erupted, resulting in five customers fleeing the premises and leaving only Mr B and his brother behind—reportedly because their drinks had been interfered with. While Mr B was awaiting trial in custody, his prescribed antipsychotic medication was abruptly stopped.

Systemic Failings in the Investigation and Trial

The catalogue of irregularities and procedural failings in this case is so extensive that it could easily be mistaken for fiction. However, thorough and independent investigations have verified these claims, many of which came to light even before the inception of Justice on Appeal in 2009. Notably, the charity Justice on Appeal was founded in direct response to the injustices experienced by Mr B and his brother, with JA being convicted of murder at just 21 years old.

Critical Problems Identified

A review of the police investigation, overseen by David Bright, commander of Essex Police, revealed serious misconduct including the fabrication and falsification of evidence. These actions were allegedly undertaken to shield local criminal figures and their associates. Key issues uncovered include:

• The presence of the junior prosecutor’s brother-in-law on the jury
• Intimidation of witnesses by police officers
• Withholding of a helicopter surveillance video from the defence
• Swapping and mislabelling of intimate forensic samples
• Suppression of information about a road accident involving a police officer who may have been responsible for the fatality
• Permitting a third party, connected to local gangsters, to leave the trial after admitting involvement
• Fabrication of the SOCO (Scenes of Crime Officer) video
• Falsification of call logs
• Manipulation of photographs and exhibits
• Concealment of witnesses
• Allowing a prosecution witness to give evidence while simultaneously being the sole defendant in his own murder trial
• And numerous other irregularities

Ongoing Advocacy and Legacy

Justice on Appeal continues to play a vital role in challenging miscarriages of justice, advocating for individuals failed by institutional systems. The organisation remains resolute in holding public bodies and their affiliates—including the NHS—to account, especially when their actions undermine those they are meant to protect.

Click on the image below to read the background and more of the detail into this case.