Friday, 25 November 2016


After a serious racial assault by a prison officer on Kevan Thakrar 2 weeks ago which we shall go into further detail in our letter of complaint to Wakefield Governor,  JENGbA have just received a call from Kevan Thakrar to be told he has been subjected to another racist attack today.  Fellow prisoner in the Closed Supervision Centre (Solidarity Confinement) at Wakefield, Charles Bronson has assaulted Kevan today by collecting and storing faeces in a plastic bottle.  He deliberately threw it over him as he walked by his cell from behind his cage.  Kevan knows he has been encouraged to do this by the prison officers who have continually subjected him to racist abuse by offering incentives to the other inmates in the CSC.  When Janet Cunliffe and myself, visited him a couple of months ago the other inmates screamed racist abuse at us when we left, of course we complained but we were ignored. If they can do that with impunity to visitors and not punish anyone what might happen to Kevan behind closed doors is truly terrifying. 

This assault happened in front of officers, Kevan was being escorted by 7 officers as is the norm whenever he is allowed to leave his cell, yet no action has been taken against Bronson and he is remaining on enhanced regime thereby sanctioning his behaviour. Not only did he throw a bottle of shit at Kevan, he shouted racist abuse and was not once ordered to stop.  Bronson is one of the ‘Death before Dishonour’ racist gang that is being recruited in prisons and operating inside HMP Wakefield.  Please write in support of Kevan Thakrar A4907AE HMP Wakefield 5 Love Lane Wakefield W. Yorks WF2 9AG

Gloria Morrison Campaign Co-ordinator JENGbA

Tuesday, 1 November 2016

***** PRESS RELEASE - 31.10.16 *****

JENGbA has been fighting for justice for the past 6 years.  During that time we have experienced many setbacks as well as successes.

Today's Court of Appeal judgement is a huge disappointment, not just for all the families involved but all those wrongfully convicted ever since the law took a "wrong turn" over 30 years ago.

It is our understanding that the applicants are taking legal advice on whether this judgement can be appealed.

JENGbA intends to support them in every way we can.

Gloria Morrison
Campaign Co-ordinator
07709 115793
07725 727520


Tuesday, 27 September 2016

JENGbA Call For Help - Edward Conteh

JENGbA have had a call from Edward Conteh who is currently being held at a deportation Centre Brook House Gatwick.  He has been given a ticket to Brussels for a flight leaving 6th October.  He has no family or contacts in Brussels and as far as he knows he is not being given accomodation. 

Edward is a particularly vulnerable young man who was 200 yards away with Joe Appiah running away from boys attacking them when an incident resulting in a fatality on the other side of the park.  Edward's deportation hearings were a disgrace - JENGbA campaigners attended many - he was low risk until a new Probation officer he never met decided he was high risk based on 'intel' that he had NO evidence of.   JENGbA found him a deportation lawyer and she is working with a criminal lawyer pro bono to try to stop his deportation.  

But this is where the JENGbA campaigners need to take a stand - can everyone write to the Home Office James Brokenshire MP and demand that Edward is allowed a chance to appeal his conviction for a crime he did not commit.  

Also send Edward cards of support so the detention centre know we are on to them.  

Edward Conteh 
Brookhouse Detention Centre
Perimeter Rd S,
London Gatwick Airport,
Gatwick RH6 0PQ

If anyone has any contacts with deportation/immigration campaigns please let us know - we might need to go and do a protest also - perhaps this Friday.

Compaign Co-ordinator

Thursday, 22 September 2016

Substantial Injustice - John Crilly, fellow JENGbA Campaigner

What constitutes Substantial Injustice?  As I sit in my cell, having served eleven and a half years of a twenty year tariff for a conviction of [joint enterprise] murder, I have to ponder this question if I have any chance of gaining [simple] justice.  Basically, I am astounded that this is even considered a legitimate question by those who represent the very best of our judiciary. 

Having established that our criminal “justice” system have been manipulating a doctrine – not even a substantive law – for the best part of thirty years (the length of some tariffs), the Supreme Court determined that anyone convicted under this unjust doctrine (pre-Jogee) must first show that they are suffering from Substantial Injustice. 

I have been studying for a law degree for 5 years now, briefly touching on criminal law along the way, so I cannot claim to be as knowledgeable as are our esteemed judges.  However, the Rule of Law: Right to a Fair Trial and the fundamental maxim that No Person is Above the Law all mean nothing if this question is allowed to be accepted. 

Injustice is what it says on the tin.  If something is found to be unjust then surely allowing the word substantial to be prefixed to it is an act of the judiciary putting itself above our fundamental Rule of Law and an unconstitutional mockery. The judiciary seem at odds to ‘ever’ put their mistakes right – if you are lucky enough to be able to prove them wrong in the first place – they use rules of construction/interpretation to slip through rough terrain like a snake.  

They come out with complete madness such as:
“…where a conviction has been arrived at by faithfully applying the law as it stood at the time. It can be set aside only by seeking exceptional leave to appeal out of time.  That court has power to grant such leave, and may do so if substantial injustice be demonstrated, but it will not do so simply because the law applied has now been declared to have been mistaken.” (R v Jogee [2016] UKSC8)
This principle comes from the case of Ramsden [1972] Crim LR 547, which involved a conviction of Dangerous Driving for which the relevant sentence involved would be from 6 months up to 3 to 4 years at worst.

Do not get me wrong, one day in prison is too long, especially if wrongfully convicted but in most Joint Enterprise cases I know of, we are talking of minimum sentences from 15 years all the way up to 40 years.  That to me (and I am sure to anyone who was unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong person) is unequivocally unjust.  

How have words such as ‘exceptional’ and ‘substantial’ been allowed to be accepted into the equation?  Stop and Search, Two-Strikes, IPP and best of all ‘JE’ are very clear indicators of a criminal “justice” system in crisis, less focused on the cornerstones of Law which they [judiciary] represent, and more concerned with what the ‘red-tops’ will report. 

Sorry, but I have to laugh, if I don’t I can only cry. And I have – and will continue to do so, for the victim (who is never far from my thoughts), the victim’s family and friends, my family and yes sometimes even for myself.  

I was a drug addict for 14 years and put needles in myself every day.  I did not care if I overdosed and died, but paradoxically I did care about my family. I never intended to hurt them or anybody else.  However, in Law my ‘intention’ is paramount relative to a conviction for murder especially satisfying the burden of proof – ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.  Criminality as a whole dictates that people will invariably find themselves associating with individuals who they do not particularly want to. Kids mostly join “gangs” due to nothing more than fear.  They are caught up in conflicts that they had no part in starting and therefore, logically have no ‘intention’ of finishing by which I mean by hurting anyone!  They simply stay at the scene for a variety of reasons (fear, shock) and pretend to be involved or even half-heartedly participate for no other reason than to prevent them from also being a victim. 

In my case it was shock and a fear for the victim: as a drug addict I can talk from experience. From when I first stuck a needle in my arm in 1991 for reasons that are irrelevant, I have associated with literally hundreds of different addicts from hundreds of different areas up and down the country. How am I, seriously expected to know what they are capable of; I mean what they’re really capable of?  I have been released from prisons in places such as Cumbria, Liverpool and Preston and have stayed there for a time ‘associating’ with people I do not know well enough to judge how they may act in any given situation.  Thankfully nothing bad ever happened on those occasions other than the usual back-stabbing and disagreements associated with addicts, so I would simply move on. 

However in an area not too far from where I lived in Manchester but still far enough for me to be an outsider I began ‘associating’ with more people I had no background information on. One of these, my co-defendant, I had known for no more than twelve weeks.  Imagine you daughter meets a new boyfriend. Twelve weeks in the relationship you go for a meal with them. On the way home you are passing a group of lads who make a rude remark to your daughter and subsequently start harassing her.  In the eyes of the law you are entitled to use legitimate, reasonable force to protect yourself and your daughter; so you simply try to push the assailants away with the sole ‘intention’ of getting away.  Simple right?!  Wrong.  Your daughter’s boyfriend proceeds to physically attack of the lads and uses much more force, aggression than you would have intended used.

Is it fair that you are just as responsible for any consequences which may follow from his (another person’s intent) conduct?  What if the victims dies? Murder, Manslaughter charges for you and your daughter, think about that!  It could have been one single punch. And not just you, your daughter is just as responsible because she did not stop it.  Bear in mind, if you knew him for twelve weeks and had been out with him before (and your daughter) and you had witnessed him maybe get aggressive in a verbal confrontation – you would be presumed (courts love a presumption) as realising there is a possibility (even a vague possibility will suffice) that he could be aggressive: a vague possibility in my case was sufficient.  

Under the misused, unjust pre-Jogee doctrine if there was any possible foresight on your part that a person could do something, then you (and your daughter) are going to be held equally responsible.  And if the consequence is murder then you are all going to receive a mandatory life sentence and your tariff could be 20, 25, 30, 35 years.  I am, as are hundreds of others, actually serving these sentences. We know what equates to injustice; for me it is being labelled a murderer having not laid a hand on the victim, and I must add having not encouraged my co-defendant to either. 

Yes I know I was a drug addict, and yes I did terrible things to get my drugs but nothing close to what I’m convicted of.  I totally accept that I put myself in the position I was in and am totally prepared to go to prison for every single day of a sentence which reflects MY part/intention - not that of someone I had no control over. 

Is this fair?  Is this justice? There was no evidence that I threw the one punch which tragically killed the victim (it was proved my co-defendant threw it) but the simple fact that I could have “possibly” foreseen what my co-defendant ‘might’ do was enough. 

Joint Enterprise murder convictions like mine are clearly an Injustice, “substantial” or not.

Message to all JENGbA Campaigners and Supporters from Gloria Morrison, Campaign Co-ordinator

From Glo:

We know our website ain't the most up to date and actually it hasn't been updated for months.   The grassroots nature of our campaign means that Maria (Supporting her boyfriend Dean) has to come after work to my home (supporting far to many now to mention!) and put in updates.  The summer months have been tricky because:

1. I and many other JENGbA campaigners were travelling up to Nottingham for the trial of Ameen.  Which was knackering and I am amazed that Rachael stayed sane. But at least as his mum she had hope - which without JENGbA lots of us would have lost years ago.

2. As ever the Criminal Justice system is making us tread on coals and stay in limbo. By treading on coals I mean our hearts and minds will stay subserviant to their rule - because they will decide our loved ones futures - and limbo because they are taking so long about it.  Why?  We all know why because they have no idea how to cover up this mess - and so we have to stay 'on it' until we know their next move.

For that reason can every single one of you click on

as often as you can so that a crap legal firm and articles from commentators do not supercede our work and achievements.  Website ain't perfect but just like  JENGbA it is built from love from campaigners who care.  (Thank you Maria).

Glo, your fellow campaigner!

JENGbA - Joint Enterprise Not Guilty By Association
Norland House Office A
Axis Community Hub
Queensdale Crescent
W11 4TL

T: 07709115793

Monday, 12 September 2016

"Ameen Jogee Cleared Of Murder, Sentenced To 12 Years For Manslaughter" by Miranda Grell of The Justice Gap

This morning at Nottingham Crown Court, following a three day retrial of his case, Ameen Jogee was sentenced to 12 years in prison for the manslaughter of Paul Fyfe. A jury acquitted Jogee of murder earlier in the month and returned a manslaughter verdict last Monday. As he has already served five years in prison, Jogee will now only be required to serve another nine months before he is released.
Today’s sentencing marks the end of a high profile legal battle for Jogee who, in February, won a landmark appeal in the Supreme Court that led to his original murder conviction being quashed and a retrial ordered.
His lawyers had argued in the Supreme Court that the ‘joint enterprise’ legal principle under which he was convicted in 2012 had been incorrectly applied at his original trial and was also being incorrectly applied across the courts. The Supreme Court agreed and allowed his appeal.
It also restored a pre-1984 rule that, for someone to be found guilty of a crime under joint enterprise, then they either needed to have committed the crime directly or – if they were a secondary party present at the scene – to have ‘intentionally assisted or encouraged’ the crime, rather than merely having had some ‘foresight’ that the crime might take place.
In the court’s words:
The correct rule is that foresight is simply evidence (albeit sometimes strong evidence) of intent to assist or encourage, which is the proper mental element for establishing secondary liability.’
Eyewitnesses who attended Jogee’s retrial told The Justice Gap that the main prosecution witness in the case, Paul Fyfe’s former partner – who was present at the scene on the night Fyfe died – had attended the retrial reluctantly and only after the police had threatened to arrest her. As she gave evidence at the retrial, she reportedly told the court: ‘This is what you (The Crown Prosecution Service) keep doing. You keep asking me the same question over and over again and I keep on giving you the same answer. He (Jogee) is not a murderer. He didn’t encourage or assist Mo (Mohammed Hirsi). He didn’t egg him on.’
The Crown Prosecution Service had taken four witness statements from her and at the retrial had sought to question her on the contents of her fourth statement. That statement contained testimony that on the night Fyfe died, Jogee had ‘waved a bottle around’ and shouted ‘come on’ outside the house. However, at the retrial she refused to confirm the contents of her fourth statement and the CPS had to make a formal application to turn her into a hostile witness.
Just before the hearing was adjourned for sentencing, Jogee’s barrister, Felicity Gerry QC, told the court: ‘Ameen Jogee falls to be sentenced as an accessory to manslaughter not murder. We cannot underestimate how hard it is for a young man to serve a life sentence as he did in these circumstances.’ Gerry read out a letter Mr Jogee had written to the judge, in which expressed his remorse and informed the court about the qualifications he’d studied for in prison.
Jogee’s mother Rachel Whitehead tweeted: ‘Finally justice for my boy. (It’s taken) five years to prove he is innocent. Happy we’re on the road home. I now see a future with my son, something I didn’t think I would see until I was an elderly lady.’
The campaign group Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association (JENGbA) welcomed the manslaughter verdict but not the sentence. Speaking to The Justice Gap, JENGbA campaigner Gloria Morrison said: ‘We feel disappointed with the 12 year sentence. It seems very harsh considering Ameen was just standing outside. However, he will be home next year and there are still thousands of other people (convicted under joint enterprise) who won’t be.’
‘We do feel vindicated because had we not campaigned for the change in the law, the Supreme Court would not have come to its decision that the law took a ‘wrong turn’ in 1984 and Ameen would still be labelled a murderer. However, we still need better guidance on what constitutes ‘presence’ regarding aiding and abetting under the common law.’
Gloria Morrison
Morrison said that JENGbA was still waiting for decisions regarding four joint enterprise appeals heard in the Court of Appeal together back in June. ‘Michael Hall’s case in particular is shocking,’ she said. ‘He’s challenging the murder conviction that he was given for being in the same car park where a murder took place. He’s been in prison now for nine years.’
‘JENGbA intervened in the Court of Appeal hearing to put forward our view of what constitutes “substantial injustice” as per paragraph 100 of the Supreme Court’s February judgment,’ she said. ‘For us, being given the “murderer” label and receiving incredibly long mandatory sentences should be enough to qualify as substantial injustice. Despite today’s sentence, Rachel Whitehead is happy that her son Ameen Jogee will no longer be branded a murderer.’
Sandeep Kaushal of Defence Law Ltd solicitors who represented Ameen Jogee called the case ‘a miscarriage of justice that was corrected after five years of hard work and the will to challenge a legal error’.
[ Original  article available HERE ]

Thursday, 25 August 2016