SummarySo there you have it, the case against me laid bare. I have tried to put the case both from the prosecution and the defence equally.
It would have been easy for me to put myself in a good light and play down the prosecution case, but what would be the use in that?
I did not do these crimes and don’t believe that hiding the facts does anyone any good; it’s that type of thinking and lies that have put me in this position.
The police say Duffy has:
1) No reason to lie,
2) He has been offered no deals,
3) He was not supplied with details of offences,
4) He was not coached by the psychologist to tailor his evidence,
5) The DNA found in the case of Klejs proves Duffy is telling the truth,
6) Why don’t I have alibis for the times of the crimes?
What do I say?
(1) Duffy admitted his lies in court (after he had no choice, due to the fact that the version he gave in 1986 did not match with the one he now presented) saying “I lied throughout the interviews; nothing I said was the truth” and continues to lie all the time.
(2) I was the person who gave the police a statement about him after he raped his wife; this led to his arrest for that attack and when his blood was taken it matched this series of crimes and he was charged with them. I would say that was a pretty good reason for Duffy to want to lie about me, would you not agree?
(3) Also, if you look at the descriptions of the second attacker, it can’t be the same person each time. From a letter recovered in his flat after the arrest, it seems he had friends willing to do things to his wife to stop her giving evidence against him. So who knows, maybe there were many different accomplices on different crimes.
(4) Duffy tried to get Ross Mockeridge (the person who helped Duffy fake amnesia), to agree to rape with him saying! “Rape is a normal thing for a man to do!” However, when Mockeridge realised what Duffy was hiding Mockeridge gave evidence against Duffy in the 1988 trial.
(5) It is well documented throughout his psychology files that Duffy has asked for and been offered deals. He refused to speak to police until he made sure that these things were going to happen (see deals page.) Let’s look at what happened when he was moved to another prison (not the one he wanted) in 2008. He set fire to his cell, threatened to kill himself and ended up in the Segregation Unit. My legal team sent him a letter to say now that he was not getting his deals would he tell the truth and let an innocent man go home? The prison responded by giving him all the privileges he wanted including a cell move. (For those of you lucky enough to never to have been in prison, asking for a cell move is like asking for ‘Day Release!’ It’s not going to happen. So why are the police that sure he is telling the truth? And if so, why pander to his whims? They let him say what he likes regardless of the clearly inconsistent lies and no matter what he says. If Duffy was to speak the truth, I could go home.
(6) Again another lie. It is documented that Duffy was supplied with statements and maps; Duffy was even taken to the scenes so that he could see the layouts before he made the statements used in court. He also had made some statements before he was supplied with details; these were all discarded once he had been supplied with the statements, maps, etc. The way I see it is if you do something as sick as rape you don’t need statements and maps to remember what you did! You only need them if you need to tailor the evidence.
(7) The files and notes complied by J Cutler show that she had also read the statements and had advised Duffy about my alibis. Thus he was pre-warned of my defence. J Cutler also gave possible reasons for the murders, all of which were later taken up and used by Duffy. J Cutler also got to meet with Duffy whilst he was in police custody making his statements and while Duffy was giving evidence at court. Given that a phone was installed in the room they were in with a direct line to the police in charge of this case, it doesn’t take to big a step to imagine Duffy was continuing to get help on his statements. This is against all rules on giving evidence in court. If I am wrong about police coaching him during evidence, why was the phone installed in the room if Duffy or J Cutler was not allowed to use it?
(8) The DNA does seem to be a match to me. I cannot deny that, but let’s look at all of the problems with this exhibit (See Klejs exhibits) as it becomes less straight forward and the main point. Why is there no DNA on the other 14 cases if I am the person involved? It cannot make sense, no matter how you look at it. Two men rape the same women and yet they only find DNA from one person, Duffy, and try as she might E Harris could not explain it away. Instead E Harris chooses not to test exhibits that didn’t match me.
(9)I did have alibis for at least two of the crimes. Duffy was told of these and totally changed his story to get around them before court. I had the testimony of my wife to say I would normally be home on that day, but who could swear that they could remember what they were doing at 04:00am on a day 18 years ago? Could you? And what use would it have been as they would only have told Duffy anyway and Duffy would have tailored his evidence yet again to get around the fact that I was elsewhere at the time with a proven alibi.
So what do we have?
No smoke without fire! Good saying and I used to use it a lot before, but I know smoke can also be used as a smoke screen!
I don’t expect to be believed on face value. All that I ask is that you look at the evidence and come to your own conclusion. If having done that, you see that I am innocent, check your memory; see if you know anything about Duffy. And if you do, please get in contact with my website co-ordinator. The guilty belong in jail, not the innocent. Do you know anyone who would be willing to look at this case to aid my appeal? Please get in touch. You could be the person who rights a massive wrong.
Summary: download (pdf)
If you have any further questions concerning my case, please contact me via mail:
HMP Full Sutton
York YO41 IPS