That's too bad isn't it. They shouldn't jail innocent people in the first place. The (
) procedural irregularities alone should be enough to cast doubt on the conviction:
Quote:
Fair Trials International sent an observer to the trial, who noted the following:
* Flawed identification evidence:
Michael's conviction turned primarily on identification evidence. The nature of the evidence and the manner in which it was gathered was fundamentally flawed. Michael was not segregated from the victim and witnesses before the parade. Other witnesses were later asked to identify Michael when he was in the dock at court. Although this would be inadmissible in the UK, it was taken to be positive identification in the Bulgarian court.
* Conflicting witness statements:
The evidence given by café staff regarding the attack conflicted with other eye witness accounts. Five witnesses, including Michael's two roommates, a representative from the hotel and two other men, have stated that Michael was not at the scene of the incident. This evidence was rejected along with further evidence that Michael was asleep in the hotel at the time of the incident.
* Breach of the principle of equality of arms:
It was noted at the trial that none of the points raised by the defence were considered; on the other hand, all suggestions by the prosecution were followed. There was an evident bias against Michael in the gathering and presentation of ID evidence. There were some extraordinary admissions of evidence by the trial judge, for example a letter from the prison governor expressing his opinion that a pre-trial haircut request had been made by the defendant for the sole purpose of avoiding recognition. This was admitted at court without calling the governor to give evidence.
* Refusal to take into account the confession of one of the prime suspects:
A prime suspect, who was known to have been present at the scene of the crime, was released without charges. At the time of the trial, he signed a written confession in front of his British solicitor. Although this evidence was made available to the Bulgarian courts, insufficient efforts were made to secure his appearance at court, and the courts refused to take his confession into account.
* Absence of forensic evidence:
No forensic evidence was available at the trial. In particular, there was no DNA evidence to link Michael to the large rock that had been used in the attack. No CCTV footage of Michael's movements in the hotel exists; the electronic swipe records for Michael's room key were also not available. In the absence of DNA evidence, these were the only reliable and objective pieces evidence as to Michael's whereabouts.
Mr Kalfin wants to do more to improve that shambles of a justice system his country has instead of moaning about ours. He could start by ensuring that in future, evidence which would exonerate a man from a serious criminal offence doesn't mysteriously go missing.
