Convicted of child murder.
But was he guilty of it?
(Unfinished article)
Source: Merseyside Police.
On April 3rd 2023, Thomas Cashman, who was found guilty of murdering nine year old Olivia Pratt-Korbel in her Liverpool home, refused to attend his sentencing hearing at Manchester Crown Court.
He has been widely criticised by politicians and the media for failing to do so. He was called a 'disgrace' by Labour's shadow justice secretary Steve Reed and the Manchester Evening News branded him a 'coward'. The Justice Secretary, Dominic Raab described him as 'spineless' and promised to change the law to force convicted persons to appear for sentencing, which is currently not the case.
At the hearing, the Judge Amanda Yip handed down one of the longest sentences in British criminal history - 'Life with a minimum term of forty two years'. She said:
"The killing of Olivia Pratt-Korbel is an offence that shocked not only the city of Liverpool, but the nation. Olivia’s name is likely to be remembered for many years. It is plain that Olivia was a lovely little girl, who cared for others and brightened the lives of her family and friends. They have suffered an unimaginable loss which they must carry for the rest of their lives."
Following an 18-day trial at Manchester Crown Court, Cashman, 34, of Grenadier Drive, West Derby, was found guilty of murder, attempted murder, the wounding of Olivia's mum Cheryl and two firearms offences. As stated above, he was jailed for life to serve a minimum of 42 years for the murder of the little girl.
There are also widely publicised accounts that his life is also in danger, with threats to kill from the prison population and criminal underworld. There certainly appears to be little sympathy in Liverpool and the wider community for his fate, perhaps deservedly. So why would or should someone like me, just based on a few snippets of information and not party to the judicial proceedings over eighteen days, with all the protections inherent in the British adversarial trial system, have any doubts or reservations about the result?
Although the principle of 'open justice' is enshrined in English law, in practice its workings tend to be closeted. It is vitually the exclusive domain of the professionals who practice in it. In large part victims, witnesses, juries and the accused have walk-on parts, have little or no control over the process in which they find themselves and may feel as if they are merely extras in a theatrical performance. It is claimed to be fair and open. The experience may challenge that assumption.
The history of criminal proceedings, both here and abroad, is littered with injustice and wrong verdicts, despite all the built-in judicial safeguards - at least in most democratic countries. We need not even consider the case of tyrannical ones.
Britain shares its legal system, evolved over centuries, with many other countries as a result of its colonial past, and prides itself on the jury system, the independence of the Judge and adequate professional representation for the accused at the State's expense. Despite this over the years, there have been many miscarriages of justice including high profile ones such as the 'Birmingham Six', the 'Guildford Four', the 'Maguire Seven', Stefan Kiszko, Barry George, Suzanne Holdsworth, Angela Cannings and many more, all of which can be researched on the Internet.
Most recently the courts quashed 47 convictions against Post Office workers – adding to more convictions that were overturned last year. This constituting the most widespread miscarriage of justice in British history. The convictions related to a variety of offences that were linked to theft and false accounting. How with all the built-in protections, could this possibly happen?
These and many other cases here and abroad, where the wrong person was convicted, whilst the true criminal escaped justice, should serve as a warning of over-confidence in the reliability of judgements handed down, even after long trials in front of juries. This is particulary true of high profile cases, or where there is widespread public outrage and clammour for retribution.
In these circumstances, the authorities and particularly the police find themselves under great pressure to get a 'result' - that is identify a suspect or suspects and get a conviction. As in the examples above this has led them to regard any conviction better than none and the temptation to make the evidence fit the crime and the people unlucky enough to be chosen. The public is never too concerned whether the right people have been convicted as long as someone has been.
Besides this desire of the police to placate the public, or in other situations to make a crime go away, other more sinister factors may be at work. The public like to think, and the police like to project, an image of probity and high ethical standards, with a clear distinction between the law-abiding policeman and the criminal. Sadly, that is not always the case. In reality it may not be easy to distinguish between the two, particularly where large sums of illicit money is involved.
One of those is the supply and distribution of illegal drugs. Given the huge amount of money that changes hand and the street value of relatively small quantities of the substances involved, the temptations for those enforcing the laws must be great. Some corrupt police officers are caught and prosecuted but it would be naive to believe that there are many more that are never detected. Both criminal and corrupt police officer share in a common interest to maintain the covert relationship for financial gain.
It may even result in protection being afforded certain individuals, whilst blaming or 'fitting up' others. It is something that Thomas Cashman, the accused and convicted person in this horrendous case has claimed. The point is, is there any substance to it? Surely no jury would have convicted him unless they were 100% convinced of his guilt? Surely no judge would have incarcerated him for forty-two years unless they were equally convinced? Nevertheless I have nagging doubts.
So what were the facts in this case that caused such public outrage, particularly in Liverpool?
On the 22nd August, 2022 a shooting incident occurred that resulted in the death of nine year old Olivia. A gunman was in pursuit of a member of the criminal class, probably in connection with drug running, that ended up at a domestic premises. Shots were fired after him through the front door that tragically hit and killed Olivia who was sheltering on the stairs inside. In that sense at least, she was not the intended target. Her death might otherwise have been regarded as 'manslaughter' were it not for the criminal recklessness of the shooter.
However that is not the point at issue: rather it is, was Thomas Cashman the shooter in this case, or was he, as he claimed 'set up' by police and the criminal network involved, as a useful 'fall-guy'?
In considering this issue I must point out I was not at the trial and so must rely on second hand information as reported by the press and media. These excerpts are themselves subject to manipulation and must always be questioned as regards content and purpose. Cashman has undoubtedly been painted as a violent and cowardly villain (the Mail calls him a 'Monster') responsible for a prolongued attack, indifferent to the danger posed to occupants of a house or innocent bystanders. The question is does the evidence stack up to support it?
So first, what do we know of the accused?
To quote the Daily Mail again, Cashman (33) is described as a 'hitman and drug dealer'. The latter may be accurate but we are here concerned with the former description. If it was Cashman on the night of the 22nd August, 2023, chasing and shooting at his friend or aquaintance Joseph Nee (36) it would be accurate but could it still be applied if it wasn't him on the night? Cashman admitted to dealing in drugs but denied being a gunman and more particularly that gunman?
To delve into the life of Cashman is to dive into a murky world of sexual infidelity and drug crime in Liverpool and beyond, in which extreme violence for enforcement and control, was always on the cards. He has been linked to the killing of another 'friend', Karl Bradley (31) in 2013, also shot but was never charged for that death. We do not know whether he was responsible or not. Claiming he was, may be part of an attempt by the drugs underworld or even police, to paint him as a killer.
Bradley's brother Kirk is apparently serving a twenty-two year sentence for (in the Sun's words)
"For leading a ruthless gang that organised contract violence across Merseyside. Kirk Bradley organised a wave of violence across Merseyside in 2009 and 2010. Enemies were shot and hand grenades thrown at family homes. In one incident an off-duty paramedic was shot in his own home in a case of mistaken identity. One victim had to have a leg amputated after being shot while in a phone box. Bradley and his partner in crime Tony Downes escaped from a prison van bound for court in 2011.The two men were later hunted down in Holland and brought back to the UK to face justice. They were ordered to serve minimum 22 year terms during a hearing at Woolwich Crown Court in 2012."
This account raises questions as to how they managed to escape the prison van, but supports the fact that another of Cashman's friends met a very sticky end from gun shots. It does not necessarily infer Cashman was responsible for them. Either Bradley and Nee were friends or they were enemies. They could hardly be both. Is it possible that despite Cashman being deeply implicated in the criminal world of drugs, he was not the violent enforcer he was painted? Further, that it might suit both the criminal underground and even law enforcement to 'fit him up' as he has claimed, to protect others and the racket in which they are engaged?
Cashman apparently described himself as a "high-level cannabis dealer". For rather obvious reasons he does not describe himself as a dealer in other more dangerous substances such as heroin or as a gun-slinging killer but it is reasonable to ask the question and highly relevant to the crime he is now convicted of. He lives in a £450,000 house it is claimed, but that is not exceptional and we do not know whether it is owned outright or subject to mortgage or even owned in his name. Cashman told the court that he made between £3,000 and £5,000 per week supplying between five to 10 kilos of the drug to his local “catchment area” in Dovecot. That is a substantial sum but if accurate, modest in drug-dealer terms and not the sort of money he would get if he was trading in hard drugs. It doesn't appear he has hidden assets or no doubt the police would have made a prominent point.
A woman with whom Cashman had been having a “fling”, also testified during the trial, telling the jury that she had overheard her ex-lover saying that he had “Done Joey” when he arrived at her home after the shooting occurred. Cashman told the jury that the woman’s boyfriend owed him £25,000, with the woman threatening to tell his partner of their “fling” after he refused to leave his family and start a new life in Spain. It was clearly a complicated situation.
This female witness was afforded generous praise by the police for her bravery. We are ignorant of any pressure that might have been brought to bear on her, or of other concessions offered, or indeed her true motivation but with the best will in the world, her evidence is about as thin and flimsey as possible. Overhearing someone saying something so insubstantial.
Note no claim to have 'killed' or 'shot' him, and absolutely no details of the circumstances. Just one short phrase? And the person who he was alleged to have said it, was her current partner, who nevertheless appears not to have corroberated the account. Why wasn't that person subpoenaed to confirm it?
Then there are other factors that render her contribution as a prosecution witness suspect. The fact that she was a spurned lover; that she had made threats to tell; that her current partner owed a significant sum to Cashman, which if he was gaoled would never be collected. Her performance in the witness box was highly spirited and vituperative.
The following account is from the Liverpool Echo and it provides detail not available elsewhere:
"Manchester Crown Square Crown Court previously heard during a three-and-a-half-week trial that Cashman "lay in wait" for his (sic) Nee while armed with two loaded guns as he watched a Liverpool FC v Manchester United football match on the television at his friend Timmy Naylor's house on Finch Lane. When he left the address with another man, Paul Abraham, the gunman approached them from behind and opened fire with a self-loading Glock-style pistol.
"A chilling piece of CCTV footage showed Mr Abraham running for his life as two loud bangs rang out. Convicted burglar and drug dealer Nee was shot in the midriff at this point and stumbled to the floor as a result of his injuries.
"David McLachlan KC, prosecuting, described how Cashman had "murder on his mind" and stood over the helpless man and attempted to discharge the firearm again as he begged: "Please don't. Don't lad".
"But the gun malfunctioned, and Nee was able to escape. Cashman however continued his "ruthless pursuit" as he fled towards the Korbel family home.
"Forty-six-year-old Cheryl, alarmed by the gunfire outside, had stepped out of her house to investigation but quickly rushed back indoors when she saw Nee running towards her and away from Cashman - who was dressed all in black and had his face covered. She then tussled with the gunman's intended target in an attempt to keep her front door shut and to keep him out of the property, but was unable to fully close it as it had been left on the latch in order to allow the neighbours to let themselves in for a cup of tea.
"The assailant fired another shot with a second, backup weapon - a 0.3 caliber revolver - at this point. This was the shot which claimed Olivia's life, the bullet passing through the door and travelling through the mother's hand before striking her in the chest.
"Nee was bundled into a car by his associates and taken to Whiston Hospital, later being transferred to Aintree Hospital after suffering gunshot wounds to the chest and lower abdomen. Cashman meanwhile escaped the scene of the shooting by leaping through back gardens before making his way to the home of a woman with whom he had previously had an affair.
"She was woken by him standing at her bedside before she phoned her boyfriend Paul Russell, who then arrived at the house. The witness - who cannot be named for legal reasons - reported hearing Cashman make an apparent confession to her partner at the doorstep, telling him: "I've done Joey."
"He was then given a change of clothing before being driven back to his Citroen Berlingo van, which he had earlier parked on Aspes Road, by Russell. A pair of Under Armour tracksuit bottoms which he was handed at this time were later found at his sister's home on Mab Lane with his DNA and traces of gunpowder residue on them.
The attacker was also identified to have worn distinctive Monterrain trackies which matched a pair owned by Cashman. He had been observed on CCTV making a number of trips past Finch Lane on the day in question, including an apparent attempt to carry out the shooting at around 4pm that afternoon having spotted Nee's van outside - but this was thwarted after the then 35-year-old left to visit Screwfix.
Cashman however claimed in his evidence that he had no involvement in the shooting and was counting £10,000 in cash and "smoking a spliff" at his friend Craig Byrne's house on Snowberry Road at the time. He had admitted being a "high level" drug dealer who made up to £5,000 per week selling cannabis, and his various trips around the area throughout the day were apparently concerned with his involvement in the supply of the class B substance.
Meanwhile, Cashman accused the woman with whom he had had the fling of attempting to frame him for the murder as she was a "woman scorned". He suggested that her boyfriend Paul Russell owed him a £25,000 debt and questioned whether she had been motivated by the possibility of reward money.
He told jurors: "It shows you the lengths a woman who’s got something in for someone would go to. This is how low they go to."
The defendant also stated he had "no problems" with the Nee family and counted them as friends. The father-of-two, who was defended by Professor John Cooper KC, said on the witness box: "I'm not a killer, I'm a dad."
Cashman's family were heard shouting in the court following the verdict being announced that they would appeal the conviction.
no direct evidence
no positive identification
is the person in the CCTV footage Cashman?
no forensic
disposed of his phone two days before shooting
girlfriend said he visited and changed clothing "
i haven't committed non offence no offence whatever
didn't resist arrest
claimed to be innocent of the crime from the start
didn't attempt to go on the run, move away or hide
persistent claims he had been framed and set up
refusal to attend sentencing in protest
wife, though cheated on, appears to have remained loyal and supports his innocence
wife on leaving sentencing hearing states their intention to appeal
Reward of £200,000 Not sure what part it played.
No firearms recovered.
not in court to hear the sentence thomas cashman
42 year min term
hadn't acknowledged responsability
conviction last week cps were singing we are the champions trial turning into a circus
62,809 views 30 Mar 2023
Channel 4 News
62,809 views • 30 Mar 2023
“A little girl who will never get to go to high school, who will never run down on Christmas morning to open her presents.”
The words of Merseysde's chief constable on the murder of nine-year-old Olivia Pratt Korbel - as her killer Thomas Cashman was found guilty.
The trial revealed not just a child's life stolen by a violent criminal - but the communities terrified by gangs and the witnesses petrified to come forward.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBe7hxqucsY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFqKX0U3R8w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_-2l5mIpLE
A "blatantly dishonest" Merseyside Police Chief Inspector has been sacked over his persistent contact with an allegedly crooked property developer linked to the underworld.
Married dad-of-three Stephen Rice was yesterday told his 24-year-career in the force is over in disgrace after an independent panel concluded he was guilty of gross misconduct. Rice had other interests outside policing, and by 2016 was a landlord boasting a property portfolio worth in excess of £2million.
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/dishonest-chief-inspector-fired-over-26328887
Four Merseyside Police officers involved in an unconscionable attempt to frame my client Mark Bamber for an offence which had in fact been committed against him by one of their number
“This type of Police corruption – the attempt to frame a person who is in fact a victim of Police violence – has been around for generations, but has now been dragged into the full light of day by modern technology.
“Let us hope that Policing culture itself continues to change with the times, and that next time it is not the cameras which catch the likes of ex-PC McIntyre in the act, but his own colleagues – who should have arrested him on the spot, but in fact did worse than nothing, conspiring in his attempt to criminalise an innocent man.”
https://iaingould.co.uk/2021/04/30/crossing-the-line-of-duty-corrupt-officers-brought-to-book-at-liverpool-crown-court/
In 1998 DCI Davies, then 50, was jailed alongside Ahearne, aka 'The Warrior', and underworld figure Tony Bray for corruption and perverting the course of justice. The three men had been convicted of attempting to derail the prosecution of Philip Glennon Jnr, the 'brother in law' of Merseyside's most notorious drugs lord Curtis Warren.
Glennon Jnr had been arrested for firing off gunshots at a bouncer who kicked him out of the Venue Club in Green Lane, Tuebrook, on July 14, 1996. In 2020, PC Stephen Cloney, 41, was jailed after ACU detectives discovered he had been selling sensitive police intelligence to gangsters for several years. In a similar case, PC Barry Parkinson was sacked and jailed for seven years for being the “inside man” in a plot to burgle cannabis farms.
The 46-year-old had used Merseyside police force’s computer system to access information about suspected cannabis crops and then passed on the intelligence to old friend Robert Sloan.
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/tv-stars-drug-cartels-merseysides-23324840
Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) overturned the decision of Merseyside Police to vindicate DCI Rooney on allegations of serious corruption and ordered a new investigation of his conduct in an unrelated case. The allegations against DCI Rooney that were falling within the determination of serious corruption under the IOPC Guidance 2015, included perverting the course of justice, misconduct in public office and criminal offence of corrupt exercise of police powers under section 26 of Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015. It follows, the arrest of the mayor of a major UK city was initiated by the police officer under active investigation for allegations of serious corruption (including dishonesty in operational decision making and perverting the course of justice by authorizing to submit to the courts false evidence). It also follows that the political landscape of the UK was interfered by someone whose own integrity was a subject of scrutiny as per the decision of the IOPC made one month before the arrest decision was made by him. Merseyside Police’s failures have led to a major political crisis in North-West and it cannot be trusted anymore to handle the investigation of such importance as the failures are representing the ongoing risk to the efficacy of the investigation and its subsequent integrity / impartiality.
https://www.aaappp.org.uk/operation-aloft/
https://www.voiceofthechild.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/17-08-10-featured-cops-25.pdf
Wednesday 24 March 2021 20:20 The government is considering taking control of Liverpool City Council in the wake of corruption allegations and the arrest of mayor Joe Anderson, Sky News understands.
https://news.sky.com/story/government-poised-to-take-over-city-of-liverpool-after-corruption-claims-12252322
SOURCES
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.