The Clydach Murders

[PSumbler]

It's simple really (or at least for me)

if you want to believe Morris did it then you will look at the evidence that said he did (and there is plenty)
If you want to believe he didn't then you will point at the evidence that said he didn't (and again there is plenty)

For me, he was tried for it on more than one occasion and found guilty on more than one occasion based on the evidence placed in front of those designed to make the decision. I would have enough faith in the system to say that the correct decision was arrived at on that basis.

 

[jack123]

It's simple really (or at least for me)

if you want to believe Morris did it then you will look at the evidence that said he did (and there is plenty)
If you want to believe he didn't then you will point at the evidence that said he didn't (and again there is plenty)

For me, he was tried for it on more than one occasion and found guilty on more than one occasion based on the evidence placed in front of those designed to make the decision. I would have enough faith in the system to say that the correct decision was arrived at on that basis.

Surely the point is the ones who presented the evidence, are the ones under scrutiny, so is their evidence really valid?

 

[Best_loser]

It's simple really (or at least for me)

if you want to believe Morris did it then you will look at the evidence that said he did (and there is plenty)
If you want to believe he didn't then you will point at the evidence that said he didn't (and again there is plenty)

For me, he was tried for it on more than one occasion and found guilty on more than one occasion based on the evidence placed in front of those designed to make the decision. I would have enough faith in the system to say that the correct decision was arrived at on that basis.

Faith is believing something you can't prove, the jury made a decision that he was guilty but that does not mean he did it, I doubt anybody will know for sure , you would hope there would be no doubt in a murder as bad as this one, but there is, some murders are like that

 

[PSumbler]

It's simple really (or at least for me)

if you want to believe Morris did it then you will look at the evidence that said he did (and there is plenty)
If you want to believe he didn't then you will point at the evidence that said he didn't (and again there is plenty)

For me, he was tried for it on more than one occasion and found guilty on more than one occasion based on the evidence placed in front of those designed to make the decision. I would have enough faith in the system to say that the correct decision was arrived at on that basis.

Faith is believing something you can't prove, the jury made a decision that he was guilty but that does not mean he did it, I doubt anybody will know for sure , you would hope there would be no doubt in a murder as bad as this one, but there is, some murders are like that

Without a doubt nobody will ever know for sure but the trials say that based on everything in front of them the decision was he was guilty and that for me says there is a greater evidence that he did than he didn't. Whether that is factually what happened is as you say

 

[PSumbler]

It's simple really (or at least for me)

if you want to believe Morris did it then you will look at the evidence that said he did (and there is plenty)
If you want to believe he didn't then you will point at the evidence that said he didn't (and again there is plenty)

For me, he was tried for it on more than one occasion and found guilty on more than one occasion based on the evidence placed in front of those designed to make the decision. I would have enough faith in the system to say that the correct decision was arrived at on that basis.

Surely the point is the ones who presented the evidence, are the ones under scrutiny, so is their evidence really valid?

So you tell me why it isn't and what evidence that was?

 

[jack123]

Surely the point is the ones who presented the evidence, are the ones under scrutiny, so is their evidence really valid?

So you tell me why it isn't and what evidence that was?

Well I'm just saying you are talking about evidence, and I say is there really any evidence, when the swp are being called into question on this case? You saying he was tried on more than one occasion and found guilty, is truly irrelevant when the whole part on the argument for morris defence is that he was stitched up by the swp.

 

[Trampie]

Faith is believing something you can't prove, the jury made a decision that he was guilty but that does not mean he did it, I doubt anybody will know for sure , you would hope there would be no doubt in a murder as bad as this one, but there is, some murders are like that

Without a doubt nobody will ever know for sure but the trials say that based on everything in front of them the decision was he was guilty and that for me says there is a greater evidence that he did than he didn't. Whether that is factually what happened is as you say

More likely than not should not result in a conviction in a murder trial criminal case, beyond reasonable doubt is the standard, it's highly debatable i would say that the conviction meets that test, hence the fuss, that does not mean he did not do it, just should he have been found guilty based on what they know.

 

[exhmrc1]

2 juries heard the evidence that some of the experts here didnt. They decided he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt on separate occasions in different parts of Wales. The Dawson and Power family sat through the 2 cases. They have no doubt over his guilt. The press who sat through the trials believe he was guilty. Those present who heard the evidence think he was guilty yet some on here who werent there think they know better.

After the BBC program one of Mandy's sisters posted on her facebook page that the woman who claimed she had witnessed Lewis was found out in court. She claimed she never knew the Lewis brothers yet it transpired in court she went to the same gym.

The whole BBC story was never doubted. Someone with a criminal record comes forward 20 years later to claim he saw one of the Lewis brothers walking over a very little used mountain road. Another witness a taxi driver claims to have seen the Lewis brothers half a mile away walking towards the house along the third busiest road in Clydach which was in the opposite direction from the house the other witness claimed to have seen Lewis. Yet the BBC never questioned any of this.

Would 2 vastly experienced coppers have been walking 1/2 mile towards the property. Wouldnt they have getaway car nearby. Would one have walked 4 miles home whilst the other left in the car.

 

[Trampie]

It's simple really (or at least for me)

if you want to believe Morris did it then you will look at the evidence that said he did (and there is plenty)
If you want to believe he didn't then you will point at the evidence that said he didn't (and again there is plenty)

For me, he was tried for it on more than one occasion and found guilty on more than one occasion based on the evidence placed in front of those designed to make the decision. I would have enough faith in the system to say that the correct decision was arrived at on that basis.

It could be said the more trials and appeals the more doubt not less, if a jury get it wrong the first time then it can be hard to get it overturned the second time, new evidence required etc, I remember the Ched Evans case and them wanting the accusers past brought up second time around and all the arguments around whether or not that should be allowed, they needed something different having lost first time round.

If someone else had been put on trial for it could they have been found guilty ? , was it a case first one to be put on trial gets done ?

 

[exhmrc1]

The family believe they got it right and they sat through 2 trials. You dont based on what. A TV program that didnt fully examine the people making the allegations and a book written by someone who previously claimed Jack the Ripper was a woman. I trust people who heard the evidence rather than those who didnt. We have 23 jurors who were convinced of his guilt. Members of the victims family who believe they have the right man and said so publicly. The jury were taken to the various venues and saw Morris give evidence and didnt believe him.

 

[Trampie]

The evidence presented to the jury might have been tailored to not incriminate the police, so the jury and others could sit there and think he has done it as they don't get the full picture.
Wasn't it the Birmingham six that the highest people in the land were said to have known they were innocent but they were still done ?

 

[exhmrc1]

And what evidence do you have of this. It was the same police that arrested the Lewis family. Had they not done that nobody would have been any the wiser. The fact is the juries didnt believe Morris and those in court found him to be a very unreliable witness. The jury were taken along the route he claimed he went. My sister lived on that road and I stayed there sometimes looking after my mother on Saturdays. I have seen the traffic passing between 11.30 and 12 and yet nobody saw Morris on that route. It is about 5 miles there and 4 miles back after an all day drinking session. I dont believe that. Neither do I believe that 2 highly experienced coppers would have been walking up a road that had traffic passing or that 1 somehow then walked back 4 hours after the murder along a little used mountain road. If the Lewis brothers had done this I am pretty certain they would have covered their tracks better than this.

The chain found at the house matched the paint from Morris house. He constantly denied it was his until the prosecution declared their evidence to the defence pre trial. He even had a relative buy a similar chain to get rid of suspicion. It was only when he was confronted with the evidence he changed his story and said he left it there the night before when he had sex with Mandy which is something Mandy's family and friend's totally dispute.

The bottom line is that the people who heard the evidence believe him guilty and they believed it beyond reasonable doubt or they would have acquitted him. 2 unanimous verdicts with not a single dissenter. They were in possession of the facts. We arent.

As far as Clydach people are concerned how many actually know the Lewis family. They are not from the locality. The brothers are from Ystradgynlais and the woman somewhere near the Caerphilly. All they have to go on is press reports just like you and probably anti police bias like you.

 

[exhmrc1]

Maybe Trampie you and others need to read this that Mandy's sister posted nearly a year ago. It might give you a truer perspective

I can't believe i am writing this today 21yrs after losing our Mam, sister Mandy and nieces Katie and Emily. What our family and children have gone through and are still going through has been horrendous. We all love and miss our family so much, and there's never a day goes by when we dont think of them and wish with all our hearts they were still here with us. We have always said and continue to say that there is or never has been any doubt whatsoever that the person who committed these cruel murders was David George Morris .
Throughout both trials we all sat in that court room every single day listening to the horrific injuries and suffering our family endured that night and what they went through will stay with us forever. We heard every bit of evidence against Morris and all the lies he said in court, claiming he was having an affair with my sister is untrue, Mandy was scared of him and use to call him a psycho. He said he met her on the friday morning and went to her house and thats when he left his chain there, this was a total lie because there were witnesses and phone records showing Morris was in his flat and made calls to his partner proving he was nowhere near Mandy's home.
Morris's campaigners claim the E FIT wasnt made public ?? It was in the South Wales Evening post June 29th 2002 !!! The witness who done the E fit and picked out one of the Police officers, said she had never seen him before and yet she went to the same gym as him !!
This along with other evidence and lies was heard by 2 court Judges and 24 jurors and after listening to it all, the right verdict was given in both trials and that was David George Morris was GUILTY.
Morris's supporters claim there to be new evidence, where is this new evidence ??? Three times The Criminal Cases Review Commission has gone through this case. We can't believe that there are still people out there that believe everything they've read in a book, especially as that book was written by someone who didnt attend court or even know Morris, and to claim that he is innocent and to portray him as just a normal 'Jack the lad' couldn't be further from the truth. We are a very close and strong family but No family should ever go through and continue to go through what we have.
During these last few years we have lost our sister Sandra, our brother Robert and our brother in law Ken and it has left us all totally devastated , but i hope they are looking down on us today and see that we will never ever give up fighting for our beautiful Mam, Mandy, Katie and Emily and to continue to make sure DAVID GEORGE MORRIS will never ever be released .
Thank you to all our family and friends for your support

 

[Trampie]

I seen one of the documentaries that is doing the rounds on Sky and Netflix about the French woman murdered in Ireland, Irish would not take on the prime suspect because their system is based on the English system, French took him on and found him guilty, was there more evidence against Morris compared to the bloke the Irish police wouldn't take on ?.....hmm, not a lot in it, debatable if it passes the beyond reasonable doubt test.
If Morris was found guilty in a civil case ok (balance of probability) but a criminal case....hmm, not so clear cut.

 

[Darran]

Why the f*ck does anyone reply to Trampie?