The Justice Select Committee
follow up inquiry into Joint Enterprise gathered welcomed media attention with
some of it focused on my contribution to the inquiry.
I noticed how an unconnected
victim’s family member was placed alongside me in one feature, somehow
suggesting we are fighting against each other. I was left feeling slightly
uncomfortable with this and it had me thinking that the driving message was
that only one of us was right, and like a tacky game show the audience must
decide. When I started to think about it in that way it leapt from
uncomfortable to offensive, then down right disrespectful.
No one in my family has ever
murdered another human being and that is to the best of my knowledge. My son
has been convicted of murder, not because he murdered someone, but because
Joint Enterprise allows this to happen. Those with a clear understanding of how
JE works will find this easy to understand and will no doubt sympathise, and
those who have yet to be educated will be shocked once they are made fully
aware.
Every time I say or do something
I am mindful that there are mothers and fathers who have lost someone to a
blade, a bullet, a kick or a punch. My son didn’t stab, shoot, kick or punch
anyone. I am not campaigning because I am unhappy with the length of his
sentence or saying he was involved in some way but doesn’t deserve to be called
a murderer. I am saying my son is wholly innocent, that he had no involvement
what so ever in the death of the victim, he played no part, had no argument and
wasn’t even a witness to it unfolding.
I speak out so often because I
want everyone to know and understand just how perverse the law of Joint
Enterprise is. I want everyone to see my son’s case as one that is so clearly
unjust that it is my boy’s name that springs to mind when they hear the phrase
Joint Enterprise.
I have no challenge with the
bereaved; I have only sympathy that they are forced to relive their grief
through the media. I have never been party to how the media hook a story, and
if I did I certainly would not ask it to be one shown as "a battle between
us and them". There is no us and them, there is only injustice. The
challenge is between those who apply the law incorrectly, and those who are
serving unimaginable torture through a life sentence for a crime they did not
commit, it always has been.
It is those who apply the law
that have let both sides down. They are the ones who have created the
miscarriages of justice, the never ending turmoil for the bereaved, and yet
they hide behind senseless quotes, taking no responsibility and expecting two
sets of victims to battle it out amongst themselves. Their media silence speaks
volumes.
I have learned to cope with
adverse commentary; it cannot get much worse than it already has been. As
support grows so does my hope, and some victims’ families no doubt feel fear.
My intention is not to hurt the bereaved, and if I ever have in any way I
cannot apologise enough.
Those speaking out for the
bereaved have said countless times, that I can see, speak to and hold my son,
(not nearly as much as I would like to or in situations that are normal), and
they cannot. I already know that, I don't need reminding. What I cannot get my
head around, even all these years in to my son’s wrongful conviction, is why is
my boy supposed to feel lucky he is alive, and that my family ought to take
comfort from that, even though he did not murder anyone. It is as if somehow
his sacrifice somehow makes the suffering for the bereaved more palatable for
the rest of us. Why does someone who is clearly innocent have to suffer in
order to make it better for the grief stricken, including those not connected
to your own case? It is nonsense
and the very idea makes me think of some weird ancient ritual where the
creation of new victims is brought about by men in cloaks and strange headwear,
somehow giving power to the dead so they may rest in peace, and the new living
victim must take this sacrifice with honour.
I may sound old fashioned, but I
don’t believe in collateral damage, wrong place wrong time, lambs to the
slaughter or sacrificing five to appease one. I believe in natural justice
applied by honest Prosecutors who are satisfied they have an extremely high
standard of evidence to prove you have committed the actual crime you have been
charged with. I no longer believe
in "the realistic prospect of a conviction" scenario, I say that
because Prosecutors are wilfully using a lousy, confusing, abusive common law
doctrine weighted 99% in the prosecution’s favour, with no allowances for an honest
jury to base the verdict on real solid evidence.
Joint Enterprise is about lies
and the first set of people who are lied to in this entire system are the
bereaved. The very people who are supposed to be at the heart of the criminal
justice system. They are lied to, manipulated and used to create a fresh set of
victims. And now as this abuse of trust comes to light they are made to feel as
if it is their battle to quash our voices. That they must speak out and
challenge those of us involved in seeking justice and bring us into disrepute.
Like I said my challenge is not
with the bereaved, it is with those who apply the law. My challenge is with
those who made the decision to charge Jordan Cunliffe with murder in 2007,
those who chose to use Joint Enterprise to convict him, in the full knowledge
this was not a gang attack, in the full knowledge of who inflicted the single
killer blow and most disturbingly of all knowing that my 15 year old son was
blind. And once the conviction they so desperately craved was found he was
allowed to be named and vilified by the press. Not many people are aware of
this, but a gagging order was enforced to prevent the public from ever knowing
Jordan was blind. Like I have said Joint Enterprise is about lies, and the
first set of people who are lied to in this entire system are the
bereaved…..then the public, and last lie goes to the person charged.
I would like to be given the
opportunity to ask those people who chose out of all those at the scene of the
crime in my son’s case, to prosecute my vulnerable son knowing that Joint
Enterprise (coupled with inexperience, disability and a media onslaught we
could not counteract due to his age) held a more realistic prospect of
conviction than it ever could with the others or another law.
"If
there is honour in sacrifice, are the seven years’ unblemished
prison record of an innocent blind child not enough sacrifice?”
I would like to be able to sit
with them and tell them that if there is honour in sacrifice, then it doesn’t
feel like an honour, it actually feels like a terrible burden. Cowards hide and
right now the cowards are hiding behind people who are bereaved, people who
themselves are victims.
Janet Cunliffe
Janet with
her son Jordan
