Killer Simon Hall: Skullduggery, Crown Prosecution Lawyers, Controlling The Narrative, Concoctions & Web Of Deceit, Pre-Meditated Murder, Sentencing & A Time To Take Stock – Part 14a©️ 

Joan Albert’s Killer.
Photograph of Simon Hall taken whilst ’at large’ and ‘wanted’ by Suffolk police for a sexually motivated murder

Skullduggery, Concoctions & Web Of Deceit

The skullduggery used in an attempt to distort the reality of the true narrative of the facts of Simon Hall’s murder of Joan Albert, especially to any new comer to the world of the criminal justice system and its workings, would often succeed in duping people.

Although there were also many people and organisations already familiar with its workings who would also attempt to use their powers of persuasion and paltering to add to the already existing concocted, false and misleading narratives, distortions and confusion of a story based on a web of deceit.

Simon Spence who was the prosecution junior, alongside Graham Parkin, representing the crown prosecution service (CPS) during Simon Hall’s February 2003 trial, had made the false and misleading claim on his online bio that the evidence presented during the trial rested on contested fibre evidence.

This was and is untrue.

Simon Spence

NOTE: In June 2023 Innocence Fraud Watch became aware that Simon Spence and his chambers had removed the above blurb from his online bio.

The evidence heard throughout Simon Hall’s trial for his murder of Joan Albert rested on a whole lot more than contested fibre evidence asserted by Simon Spence.

Given Simon Spence’s role throughout the 2003 trial process and the 2010 appeal he would have known this if he was ever familiar with all the evidence in this case.

The jury were presented with a wealth of other evidence and Simon Spence would have had access to all the case files and access to the same police witness statements, which contained within them the very same excerpts which are published throughout this blog series.

The index for this blog series can be found by tapping on the button below;

And as per the prosecutions closing speech, which was made by Graham Parkin, the CPS case did not rest simply on the contested fibre evidence which linked Simon Hall to his murder of Joan Albert.

The case also rested on material concocted by Simon Hall and members of his immediate family (Lynne, Phil and Shaun) heard throughout the trial.

Sentencing

Following the guilty verdict of the February 2003 trial the East Anglian Daily Times reported on Simon Hall’s sentencing.

Their article was published the day after sentencing had taken place. Below are excerpts from their article;

Hall was sentenced to life imprisonment at London’s High Court yesterday but his solicitor said an appeal against his conviction was already underway

Dressed in a black suit, lemon shirt and pale yellow chequered tie, Hall listened to yesterday’s proceedings with a sombre expression

He looked shaken as Mrs Justice Rafferty told him that Mrs Albert’s death had been both “brutal” and “undignified”

“Dogged and painstaking police work eventually led to you, linking you to her home and her body by two different types of fibres”, she said

“Why you chose in the small hours of the morning to break into her home, may never be known”

The judge told Hall his parents must feel devastated after showing loyalty to him during “testing years” when he had acquired a criminal record for violence

Only one sentence could be passed, she added,

“you will go to prison for life”

Before Hall was sentenced, his barrister, Peter Rouch QC, urged Mrs Justice Rafferty to consider the fact that the prosecution’s case was that Mrs Albert’s murder had been a “burglary that went wrong”

He said there was never any suggestion that whoever killed the pensioner had gone to her home to deliberately take her life

Mr Rouch also said Hall’s previous convictions for violence, an assault in McDonalds in 1997 and another for wounding, was a result of a street fight

“He is only 25. He has a strong family union. Whenever he comes out of custody he will have that unit”

During the trial, the prosecution claimed Hall targeted Mrs Albert’s home because of his special knowledge about her living circumstances

His mother, Lyn Hall had walked the widow’s pet dog Rusty and it was alleged Hall once told ex-girlfriend Joanne Blowers that she lived on her own and was from a wealthy background

Graham Parkins QC, said Hall broke into the widow’s home in the early hours of December 16, 2001, with the intention of burgling the property

Hall told police he was drinking in an Ipswich pub on the night of her murder, and moved to Liquid Nightclub, then drove home and arrived at his parents’ house in Snowcroft, Capel, as 6.28am

The prosecution said there was a missing hour unaccounted for.

The main evidence of the trial centered on more than a thousand fibres found in Hall’s wardrobe at his Snowcroft home, his Audi car and in his home in Hill House Road, Ipswich

Forensic experts were unable to distinguish them from those found at Mrs Albert’s home and on her body, the court heard

Hall’s family sat silent and expressionless as he was taken down to the cells

They declined to comment after the case

Excerpts from East Anglian Daily Times article headed 11th April 2003

When The Mask Comes Off & Taking Stock

In 2013 during further occasions when killer Simon Hall’s mask came off, he disclosed numerous fantasies and plans he said he had, some of which included grooming, luring, raping and killing various female members of his family, including his adoptive mother Lynne Hall.

Excerpts from Simon Hall’s Sentence Planning and Review Report, referring to events recorded in September and October 2013 respectively read;

Mr Hall was heard on the pin phone stating that he wanted to hurt himself and others by sexually assaulting them, killing & stab (sic) somebody in the eye

Intel suggests that Mr Hall has been making phone calls stating that he intends to have sex with his mother, sister and adoptive mother and he fantasises about having sex with a child, killing the child and burying the body

Excerpts from page 15 of HMP Wayland Sentence Planning and Review Report (Report dated December 2013)

Killer Simon Hall also disclosed that apparently when he was younger he had “gone down” on the family pet dog.

An offender manager from HM prison service, recorded this in her notes as having been a pet cat, even though the offender manager had the benefit of recorded prison telephone calls and call logs.

And if the offender manager had spoken directly to Simon Hall, or appraised herself of the facts of the case as to why Simon was imprisoned in the first place, she would have possibly known Lynne Hall only ever apparently had Cavalier King Charles Spaniels and rabbits.

Lynne Hall stated;

We had lived at St John’s drive since 1969 and only moved because Phil was changing jobs.

My husband is known as Phil rather than by his first name George.

I should add that for the majority of our married life I have had a dog, they have always been Cavalier King Charles Spaniels, the first one we had was a Blenheim, which denotes the colouring in this case tan and white, he was called “buttons”, Buttons actually made the move from Lincolnshire to Capel with the family.

I think we actually moved around 1980.

Buttons was with us about 3 years before he had to be out down. we were a year without the dog before getting Lady who was a tricolour, Black, tan and white, again she was a Cavalier King Charles Spaniel. Lady only died around 3 years ago

Excerpt from Lynne Hall’s police witness statement dated 25th July 2002

As well as fantasies of harming children, Simon Hall also said he would probably have killed again if he were released from prison.

These disclosures also included comments of killing his then wife.

The following excerpt relates to events from early September 2013, whilst Simon Hall was still in open prison conditions at HMP Hollesley Bay;

Mr Hall’s risk has increased due to his statements over the course of 8/9 September 2013 that he had thought about absconding and ”killing himself”.

However, given Mr Hall’s recent admission of guilt, added to the fact that his index offence and previous offences are of a violent nature, it gives rise to concerns about the potential for him to abscond and commit a further violent offence.

His recent disclosures about sexual matters, also give rise to increased risk that Mr Hall may abscond and commit, not only a violent offence, but one that may be sexual in nature

Statement from page 21 of Simon Hall’s HMP Wayland Sentence Planning and Review Report (Dated December 2013)

A further reference taken from the same report read;

Intel suggests that Mr Hall has thoughts of self harm and smoking drugs

November 2013 note from Simon Hall’s security intelligence files

Lynne and Phil Hall travelled to HMP Wayland on the 30th January 2014.

Lynne Hall visited with her adoptive son Simon Hall, whilst her husband Phil Hall apparently waited in the prison visitors parking area in his car.

In excerpts from a copy of a letter written from HMP Wayland by killer Simon Hall, addressed to his adoptive parents Lynne and Phil Hall, it read;

Dear Lynne and Phil,

If I had children I would never turn my back on them no matter what the situation was. Recent events demonstrate that I have suffered psychological problems for most of my life and they are only going to get worse unless I get the help I need

The difference between us is that I am sorry for hurting you and bringing a huge cloud of doubt and shame over ”The Family”. But all you seem to care about is your image and reputation

You’re ashamed of me – fair enough, but as much as I love you both, I’m ashamed of you too.

You turned your back on me when I needed you the most. I’m obviously not well, but you couldn’t give a shit.

Instead you remain victims and have not offered any kind of help or support when I clearly needed it. Some of my actions are unforgivable, but so are yours

I will not write again and I have removed the phone number

True colours always reveal themselves

Simon

Excerpts from a copy of letter Simon Hall wrote from HMP Wayland to his adoptive parents Lynne and Phil Hall

Excerpts from one of killer Simon Hall’s final letters read;

I panic because of shame and because the truth is destroying me.

Living in denial gave me no reason to panic and if you remember, I only started to panic like that when I was being found out lying. I panic through fear of judgement and rejection

Am I like my biological father? He put himself before the children that he had

I am worried about genetics.

All of the Walton kids are damaged.

I believe that both nature and nurture f**ked me up, I do hate Lynne I do hate Shaun, but I hate myself more.

If they were in this cell, I’d punch their lights out. That’s true, but I’d want to hurt myself too

I don’t think it’s genetics.

I remember my conscience as a kid, before Shaun got hold of me. I think nurture is so important from both to adulthood.

If I’d been in loving households, I’d be different

Excerpts from one of Simon Hall’s last letters from 2014

Simon Hall was found hanging in his prison cell after committing suicide on the 23rd February 2014.

Link to Part 15 here

Killer Simon Hall: The Grift & Grifters Of The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), Helen Pitcher, Richard Foster, John Curtis, Euan Smith, James/Jim England, Julie Goulding & Simon Spence For Suffolk Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), The Court Of Appeal Judges & Cherry Picking – Part 15©️   

🌟 The Magic Makers 🌟

Helen Pitcher

Helen Pitcher

Helen Pitcher is the current chairman of the criminal cases review commission (CCRC).

Helen was first appointed as chairman on the 1st November 2018 as can be read here, and was reappointed as chairman in 2021 as can be read here.

Excerpts reads;

The Ministry of Justice has confirmed the reappointment of Helen Pitcher in her role as Chairman at the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) – the independent body responsible for investigating possible miscarriages of justice.

The reappointment, approved by Her Majesty on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, takes Helen into her second term and fourth year at the helm of the CCRC.

Chief Executive, Karen Kneller warmly welcomed the appointment as the Commission marks its 25th anniversary next year.

“Huge congratulations to Helen from all of us here at the CCRC. We are delighted that the term for this role has extended from three years to five after we sought to lengthen it.

“Helen is not only our Chairman but is very much part of the fabric of our organisation, bringing invaluable and unrelenting consistency and experience to the role in the quest to investigate possible miscarriages of justice”.

The CCRC made the decision to refer Simon Hall’s conviction to his murder of Joan Albert to the court of appeal on the 14th of October 2009, based on what they claimed was “new evidence relating to fibre evidence”.

Photograph of Simon Hall taken whilst at large and wanted by Suffolk police for his sexually motivated murder of Joan Albert

CCRC Commissioners Jim/James England, Julie Goulding & Euan Smith

The three CCRC commissioners who made the decision were Jim (James) England who had been chief crown prosecutor for West Mercia, Julie Goulding a trained nurse, solicitor and former NHS chief executive and Ewen Smith a criminal defence solicitor.

The three of them had been appointed as commissioners three years earlier, as can be seen here.

According to the CCRC;

Anyone convicted in the criminal courts of England, Wales or Northern Ireland, or in the Court Martial or Service Civilian Court, who believes they have been wrongly convicted or sentenced, can apply to have their case reviewed.

Applicants usually need to have exhausted the normal appeal process before approaching us.

It is our role to review cases and to identify any new factors which might shed light on the safety of the conviction or the correctness of the sentence.

The Commission considers cases impartially and employs people with a wide variety of skills and experience, including lawyers and investigators, to carry out this task.

In the course of a case review we may interview new witnesses or re-interview people involved in the original case.

We may also commission new expert reports or arrange fresh forensic tests such as DNA profiling.

The Criminal Appeal Act 1995 which created the Commission provided us with the power to obtain documents and information from any public body in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

In addition to basic material from court and prosecution files, there are times when we need to obtain other material such as medical records or files from social services or other agencies.

Sometimes we also need to look at defence files or obtain material from private companies or individuals and will seek their co-operation in providing their records.

During this period, staff at the Commission will usually start work on the case by obtaining some of the papers that are required for a review such as the prosecution files and judgments from the trial and the original appeal.

The Commission’s casework is carried out by Case Reviewer Managers and Commissioners who are chosen for their experience and skill in relevant areas.

When a review is complete we will consider, in light of everything that is known about the case, whether there is anything that raises a “real possibility” that the appeal court would quash the conviction or reduce the sentence if we referred it.

Whenever a referral seems possible, a committee made up of three Commissioners will meet to consider the case and decide whether or not to make a referral.

When a referral is made, the relevant appeal court must hear the case.

It is for the court to decide whether or not the conviction should be quashed or the sentence reduced.

The Commission’s decision about whether or not to refer a case is communicated to the applicant and his or her legal team or designated representative in a document called a Statement of Reasons.

This sets out in detail the Commission’s analysis of the case and the reasons for its decision.

Excerpts from the CCRC’s 2009/10 annual report and accounts

Abracadabra 🪄

The CCRC’s 2010/11 annual report and accounts, which included a reference to their referral to the court of appeal of Simon Hall’s conviction to his murder of Joan Albert read;

There is no doubt that the way in which expert evidence is presented to juries, and the weight that is attached to it, will become an increasingly important feature in appeals.

In this respect, we have found it helpful to be able to share knowledge and experience with the Forensic Science Regulator and his staff who have offices within our building.

Examples of the ways in which expert evidence has come before the Court this year as a result of Commission referrals include:

* methods of comparing fibres (R v Hall [2011] EWCA Crim 4)

Excerpts from page 19 of the CCRC’s 2010/11 annual report and accounts

The CCRC’s October 2009 statement or reasons highlighted at their paragraph 16 just one of what they viewed to be a “central” aspect to the prosecutions case, as per screenshot below;

Although the CCRC did make reference to Lynne Hall’s “reliability” at their paragraph 225;

Cherry Picking

The CCRC chose to cherry pick at the prosecutions closing speech and magic away the Hall families concocted evidence, which again Graham Parkin stated was woven into the general framework of the case;

Now Simon Hall was wrong in our submission when he said that this case is all about those fibres.

True it is that the finding of fibres is central to the prosecution case and of course without them there would be no case.

But it doesn’t rest simply on your assessment and your decision based on those fibres in Mrs Cunnison’s evidence.

No it does not. In fact I’ll go so far as to say this, the prosecution now have more evidence in this case for you to consider than we could ever possibly imagined we were going to have when I stood up to open it to you to outline it to you in other words just over a fortnight ago.

Now members of the jury we did not know nor indeed could we know that Simon Hall’s case was to develop well beyond what he had ever said before.

More particularly during the course of long detailed sensible interviews concluded by police officers in the presence of his solicitor throughout.

We did not know that his defence would include some material, and I’m going to say this, I’ll use the word deliberately and explain to you why I say it in a moment.

We couldn’t know that his case was going to involve material, which has been concocted.

Made up.

If you find it so to be you’ll have to ask yourselves the question why has it.

Because concocted means deliberate and dishonest.

To be woven into the general framework of the case, the general framework of his movements on that particular weekend of his lifestyle and those of his family generally.
It is a serious submission that I make to you.

That Simon Hall aided by members of his family his rehearsed story, which they know in important parts not to be true.

He’s done it for an obvious reason the Crown say to escape proper justice.

To stave a conviction for murder.

Others in his family have done it for a perfectly understandable reason, wrong though it is in the result. Perfectly understandable isn’t it?

Mrs Hall said as you would have expected to, they can’t she can’t begin to believe that he Simon could do the thing which he is accused of. And I’ll add to that what mother could?

Excerpts from the prosecutions closing speech by Graham Parkin (starting at the bottom of page 16 continuing onto page 17 here)

Simon Spence For The Crown Prosecution Service & The Three Court Of Appeal Judges

Simon Spence

Again, it is not known why Simon Spence on behalf of the crown prosecution service seemingly conceded with the CCRC in 2009/10 in relation to the fibre evidence.

It is also not known why three court of appeal judges (Lord justice Pitchford, Mrs justice Dobbs and Mr justice Kenneth Parker) would also be seen to magic away other central features of the original prosecutions case.

The court of appeal judges went on to state in their January 2011 judgement (at paragraph 3 and 5 respectively);

Before we embark upon a consideration of the evidence and argument adduced at this appeal we shall describe in summary the prominent features of the circumstantial evidence at trial

The Crown acknowledged that the central feature of its case against the appellant was the evidence of fibre analysis

Excerpts from January 2011 court of appeal judgement here

October 2009 Statement of Reasons

A copy of the CCRC’s statement of reasons of why they referred actual, factual guilty killer Simon Hall’s murder conviction to the court of appeal has been published here.

Link to Part 16 here