Not Guilty of Murder -Kieran Williams Trial Verdict

Mercia Blackcat said:
So assisting an offender in the act of murder is manslaughter.

Never heard that one before.
Click to expand...

That's a fair point, and I was thinking about that. Joint enterprise applies to murder also.

I've found this from the West Midlands Police website.

What is Joint Enterprise? - Life Or Knife - The choice is yours

#LifeorKnife the choice is yours is for young people, parents and teachers. Explore the consequences of choosing life or knife. Get information on how to anonymously report knife crime or find out how talk to someone about knives. Discover where you can anonymously dispose of knives, and how to...
lifeorknife.west-midlands.police.uk lifeorknife.west-midlands.police.uk

Examples of how you could be charged for murder under ‘joint enterprise’ are if:
  • You were part of a group and someone in that group kills someone with a knife. This is the same for any other weapon or physical attack.
  • You were supporting the attacker’s actions in some way. This could be verbally by encouraging them or physically if you acted as a supportive presence.
  • You knew that the person who made the attack was going to start violence against the victim, and you did nothing to stop it.
Given that, it's difficult to see how one of these was charged with manslaughter and the other walked free.

Interesting to note also that the lad who was convicted of manslaughter, was not a unanimous verdict and so what did those jury members who didn't want to convict him think happened?

Columbo seems to know a bit about it so it would be interesting to hear more from him.
 


Locke's SAFC said:
As Columbo says, there's a decent chance the jury didn't believe either of them did it.

The reasons being:

1) If they believed the lad who was convicted of manslaughter did it, then surely both would have been convicted under 'joint enterprise'.

2) The defence summed up by saying someone else did it. Not diminished responsibility or loss of control or whatever (in an attempt to ward off a murder verdict). If that's the defence, then you can only assume the jury believed the defence when not convicting either of them of murder.

3) The reason one was found guilty of manslaughter and the other wasn't, was because under joint enterprise you would have to show that they assisted an offender. You could demonstrate that with the lad whose fingerprints were in the grave, but far more difficult to demonstrate that with the other lad.

I think Columbo may be right when he says the jury believed someone else did it. In that scenario only the lad whose fingerprints were in the grave could be done for manslaughter as he could be proven to have assisted an offender.
Click to expand...
Some good points. Both admitted to aiding the other after the killing. So they didn't mind 'grassing' to save their own skin.

Or was that their pre-planned fall back plan if confronted by the police with any evidence that would potentially send them both down ?

Surely they could now both be charged with 'concealing the body' as they both admitted to helping hide it and not reporting it ?
 
Mercia Blackcat said:
So assisting an offender in the act of murder is manslaughter?

Never heard that one before. Any examples that have set precedent?


Hard job claiming you didn't intend GBH by stabbing someone 20 times but I get your point.
Click to expand...
what we are saying here is neither of the lads stabbed him......but they have took the rap for it and sworn to secrecy....both accused each other to confuse it even more.....they are 19 years old...be out by 35 if that if they went down for murder......a family member might be 45 years old with previous convictions and life would for them would mean life.....so the lads took the rap , blamed each other.......and the jury knew this too.....and so do the police but they prosecuted what they could prove
 
Last edited:
fulwellfred said:
Some good points. Both admitted to aiding the other after the killing. So they didn't mind 'grassing' to save their own skin.

Or was that their pre-planned fall back plan if confronted by the police with any evidence that would potentially send them both down ?

Surely they could now both be charged with 'concealing the body' as they both admitted to helping hide it and not reporting it ?
Click to expand...

Thing is, mate, I've just had a look on facebook and like here everyone is unanimous in that it's a shocking verdict. The people on the jury are no different to the rest of us and so you have to wonder what they heard in court that made them let one walk free and couldn't even agree on the one whose fingerprints were in the grave.
 
columbo70 said:
what we are saying here is neither of the lads stabbed him......but they have took the rap for it and sworn to secrecy....both accused each other to confuse it even more.....they are 19 years old...be out by 35 if that if they went down for murder......a family member might be 45 years old with previous convictions and life would for them would mean life.....so the lads took the rap , blamed each other.......and the jury knew this too.....and so do the police but they prosecuted what they could prove
Click to expand...
None of that explains the verdict of manslaughter as defined by law.
 
Fetch Fletch said:
Lad just tripped man.


Seriously. Anyone who came to that verdict.
Any judge who accepted that verdict.
Any solicitor defending them…

Shake your heads you absolute bastards.

His poor mother 😔
Click to expand...
The c**t that walked free and the c**t who’ll be out in a few years will both go on to offend again and most likely very serious crimes. That burden should fall on the judge and jury in this case. Vile.
 
Locke's SAFC said:
Thing is, mate, I've just had a look on facebook and like here everyone is unanimous in that it's a shocking verdict. The people on the jury are no different to the rest of us and so you have to wonder what they heard in court that made them let one walk free and couldn't even agree on the one whose fingerprints were in the grave.
Click to expand...
and police havent kicked up a stink about the verdict either....just said in their statement dont use knives or something like that...the police probably knew there was more to it but had no proof
 
Mercia Blackcat said:
None of that explains the verdict of manslaughter as defined by law.
Click to expand...
i think it does...the jury would have said to each other that Hackett didnt do it.....but he knew about it and was there at the scene sometime after the murder ( fingerprints in grave)....his fone been there on the night might not be him carrying it etc etc etc.....the jury then decided we cant send a guilty verdict for murder when we dont know if he actually did it....hence manslaughter

read between the lines from the closing statement from defence lawyer and also the lack of police outrage after the verdict
 
Last edited:
columbo70 said:
i think it does...the jury would have said to each other that Hackett didnt do it.....but he knew about it and was there at the scene sometime after the murder ( fingerprints in grave)....his fone been there on the night might not be him carrying it etc etc etc.....the jury then decided we cant send a guilty verdict for murder when we dont know if he actually did it....hence manslaughter
Click to expand...
That's rubbish. Manslaughter indicates he killed him. It's not an excuse for a murder that can't be proven. He either killed him or he didn't.
 
columbo70 said:
what im saying is....was it only those 2 who were there that night.....their age too.....have they been forced to take the blame.......5 were originally arrested , all family members etc......those 2 eventually got charged.....did they do the deed???....and maybe this is where the jury are at

www.independent.co.uk

Body found in search for missing teenager as five arrested for ‘conspiracy to murder’

‘Lovely lad with so much potential,’ writes one person in emotional tribute
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk
Click to expand...

Any idea whose family members they were?
Mercia Blackcat said:
Then they couldn't arrive at manslaughter either unless they think he killed him
Juries can't just make the law up on the fly.
There's something seriously wrong here.
Click to expand...

It doesn't seem to make much sense.

But, regardless of the law or whatever, I think the answer lies in the defence.

There is only the defence and the prosecution for the jury to deliberate. The defence claimed somebody else did it. In the absence of agreeing with the prosecution, you can only assume that the jury believed the defence's claim that somebody else did it (even though there are a few other bits and pieces that don't add up).
 
Last edited:
This is some of the evidence presented interesting how Cook put his phone on airplane mode to avoid being able to be tracked for 90 mins

"Mr Lamb said the last use of his mother’s wifi system on Mr Williams’ phone was at 6.40pm that day.

Shortly beforehand phone calls were made from the landline at Mr Cook’s home to Mr Hackett’s mobile phone.

It was followed almost immediately by a call from Mr Hackett to Mr Williams, who then left his mother’s address to make his way to the spot that would prove to be his burial site

Mr Lamb said this was evidence that it was a pre-planned attack by the accused pair.

He said Mr Hackett then left his home in Fordenbridge Square, making his way to the meeting site on his bike, receiving two calls from Mr Cook as he did so, at 6.31pm.

Mr Lamb said after this there was to be, “an unusual and sinister event”, as at 6.58pm Mr Cook activated the aeroplane mode on his mobile phone.

He did so to prevent his movements and location being traced by police during the inevitable further investigation that was to follow.

“We suggest that having turned to aeroplane mode on his phone, he left the device at his home address, in Fordfield Road.

“Ben Cook then also made his way to the murder scene.”

Mr Lamb said while the accused duo were together, over a period of 14 minutes and 48 seconds, all communication between them was halted, up to 7.24pm.

He said it was during that short period that they murdered Mr Williams, before burying him in the possibly pre-dug grave in a secluded area, surrounded by trees.

Thereby, they were executing the plan the two had hatched.”

Mr Lamb said cell-site analysis supports the fact that both the hand sets of Mr Williams and Mr Hackett were both present at the burial site at that time.

In what Mr Lamb said was, “a curious twist of fate” Mr Hackett’s mobile phone was used, by Mr Cook to leave a message, intended for his mother, saying: “I’ll be ten minutes. On my way home”, at 7.28pm, implying they (both accused) were together at that point.

Mr Lamb said by 8.36pm Mr Cook’s phone came out of aeroplane mode, having been off-grid for 90 minutes, and within 24 seconds of it becoming operational again and re-joining the network, a text message was sent to Mr Cook by Mr Hackett.

The last time Mr Williams’ phone activated was 8.29pm, with cell-site analysis showing he was where his body would be found, almost six weeks later.

Mr Lamb said messages were sent to Mr Williams’ phone by the accused pair, to leave the impression they were trying to contact him, supposedly unaware where he was at the time.

“The prosecution is asserting that by this time Kieran Williams was already dead and this was part of the cover up between these two defendants.”
 

Back
Top