Philip Joseph found Barry George far more competent than he made himself out to be to.
A media article stated;
Dr Philip Joseph, another leading psychiatrist who was called by the prosecution, said George was “far more competent” than tests would suggest and capable of lying in police interviews.
While some of his behaviour could be attributed to his epilepsy and cognitive impairment, his stalking of women appeared to stem from an “intense anger” caused by rejection, Dr Joseph said.
On the day he murdered Jill Dando, killer Barry George was seen by Julia Moorhouse at around 12.33pm.
Julia Moorhouse said that Barry George had crossed the road to talk to her around an hour after he had committed his murder.
Excerpts from a Guardian article read;
Mrs Moorhouse said she had been standing on the corner of a street close to the murder scene at 12.30pm on April 26 when a man approached and started talking to her about the helicopters hovering overhead.
“He said they were police helicopters. He gave details of what kind they were. He appeared to have technical knowledge… I turned to go. He came with me. I did not expect that.
“The whole situation struck me as slightly odd. He mentioned the Territorial Army. I think he may have said he had done training or was associated with it… either as an instructor or something”
Uncle Mike Burke referred to a conversation he had with his nephew Barry George’s barristers William Clegg and Jeffrey Samuels and stated;
Uncle Mike Burke
Outside the courtroom I spoke with Mr Clegg and Samuels.
We discussed Julia Moorhouse, the women who described being spoken to by a man who could have been Barry approx an hour after Jill Dando’s murder.
I felt her description of the man was too like Barry to be coincidence, and as she reported the meeting to the police straight away on that day it sounded genuine.
We agreed the man she met probably was Barry but disagreed as to whether they met before of after he had visited HAFAD.
The Crown claimed before, which would support their case
Excerpts from Mike Burke’s book Mike’s Story: The Battle to Clear Barry George of the Jill Dando Murder first published in June 2011– Source here
Barry George admitted he had spoken to Julia Moorhouse when he spoke to the media following his retrial.
As previously referred to in Part 18 of this blog series here, Mike Burke also highlighted this fact stating;
In their ‘World Exclusive’ he was quoted as saying ‘After leaving HAFAD I bumped into a woman who was later a prosecution witness and said I was stalking her…That was at 12.33pm…’
That was obviously a reference to Julia Moorhouse who he had always denied meeting.
Excerpts by uncle Mike Burke
One Of Umpteen Innocence Fraud Red Flags
Michelle Diskin Bates chose to ghost Julia Moorhouse and her evidence from a book she had published in 2018, preferring instead to refer to the actress Julia Roberts.
Yet she repeatedly claims;
When he was released from custody in August 2008, Barry George publicly stated he had met with Julia Moorhouse. He stated;
I walked with her for a bit and, from her perspective, maybe it was unwanted attention. But she didn’t make that clear.
It didn’t seem like she was telling me to go away.
If she’d told me to leave I’d have done so straight away.
That was at 12.33pm.
I know because just a minute before I’d made a call from my mobile to check how much credit I had left.
Statements by Barry George on 1st August 2008 – Source here
Michael Naughton, who was involved in the innocence fraud of killer Simon Hall, wrote the foreword for Michelle Diskin Bates.
According to a tweet made by hornswoggler Nick Wallis in November 2022, Eleanor Shaikh was a customer at Chirag Sidphura’s convenience store and post office franchise, called Simran’s, in Farncombe, Surrey.
An excerpt from his book on Eleanor Shaikh reads;
I had heard rumours some of the campaigners were intending to bring a banner.
They had.
It was a long strip of red canvas with white lettering which read:
‘SOS – Support Our Subpostmasters.’
The banner was designed and paid for by Eleanor Shaikh, a one-woman dynamo who had been radicalised by the treatment of her local Subpostmaster, Chirag Sidhpura
Excerpt by Nick Wallis from his book The Great British Post Office Scandal published by Helen Lacey & David Chaplin of Bath publishing via kindle October 2021
Eleanor Shaikh set up a petition on behalf of Chirag Sidphura after he was suspended by the post office when auditors found a “loss of over £57,000” (Read More here).
Chirag Sidphura was suspended by the post office on the 10th of October 2017.
According to Chirag Sidphura, on the same day the auditors found the massive shortfall he “offered a cheque for the full value on the spot”.
Photo of Chirag Sidphura (Originally published here)
In Nick Wallis’s 22nd April 2020 blog headed “Chirag’s story” here Chirag Sidphura is quoted as stating;
I offered a cheque for the full value on the spot to allow me to continue trading while an investigation took place.
This option was rejected by Ms Bravata.
Chirag Sidphura – published by Nick Wallis dated 22nd April 2020
According to Chirag Sidphura he claimed the post office gave him “two options; pay the money back immediately” or “be prosecuted and face the prospect of a 2 year prison sentence”.
Chirag Sidphura alleged his father-in-law bailed him out and on the 12th of October 2017 £57,543.92 “was paid over the phone via debit card to the Post Office”.
Why would Chirag Sidphura’s father-in-law need to bail him out if only two days before he was planning to pay the £57,543.92 back “on the spot” with a cheque?
Dupe Eleanor Shaikh
Eleanor (El) Shaikh
Eleanor Shaikh now appears to be “campaigning” on behalf of Diana Garbutt’s guilty, manipulative and fraudulent murderer Robin Garbutt..
On 28th March 2023 Eleanor Shaikh published the following series of unfounded tweets on twitter (now known as X);
Jane Metcalfe appears to have been groomed, conned and exploited by guilty murderer Robin Garbutt into doing his bidding, as previously referred to in Part 9 of this blog series;
In response to Eleanor Shaikh’s tweets Innocence Fraud Watch asked the following question;
Eleanor Shaikh ‘liked’ Innocence Fraud Watch’s retweet without reading or giving any thought to the content of what she had retweeted.
Eleanor then ‘followed’ Innocence Fraud Watch.
After seemingly realising Innocence Fraud Watch was not retweeting in support of the content of her tweets, dupe Eleanor Shaikh blocked Innocence Fraud Watch.
It would be interesting to hear what Charig Sidphura thinks about Eleanor Shaikh choosing to also push the innocence fraud narrative of dangerous and manipulative murderer Robin Garbutt, who pretended “robbers” held him up at gunpoint in an attempt to evade facing the consequences of his murder of his wife Diana.
Link To BBC’s Expert Witness: Murder At The Post Office On Dangerous Murderer Robin Garbutt
No one trashes your name, more than someone who is afraid you will tell the truth
Scott C Forbes
Scott C Forbes has chosen to “trash” Mark Kane’s name, and many other peoples names, not because these people are “afraid” as he claims, but because Scott C Forbes thinks he is entitled to do this.
Scott C Forbes also thinks he is entitled to say or write whatever he wants about the family members of Jodi Jones.
All of whom were ruled out as suspects!
Scott C Forbes’s “trashes” the name of anyone he chooses to target or who disagrees with the trash he chooses to talk and write about.
There will be more on Scott C Forbes statement “No one trashes your name, more than someone who is afraid you will tell the truth” in further parts of this blog series.
However to reiterate from Part 1 here, Scott C Forbes has chosen to not publish a copy of his witness statement, which he made about Mark Kane – which is a massive red flag!
There are numerous red flags regarding Scott C Forbes behaviour, far too many to count.
Scott C Forbes showed no real interest in Jodi Jones’ sadistic and psychopathic killer’s innocence fraud until around 2006.
If Scott C Forbes was really concerned about his “friend” Mark Kane’s behaviour, why did he leave it so many years before he finally tracked down and spoke to Jodi Jones’ killer’s mother Corinne Mitchell?
And why did Scott C Forbes choose to speak with Jodi Jones killers mother?
If Scott C Forbes was so sure Mark Kane was responsible, why didn’t he speak to the police?
Why did Scott C Forbes wait so many years before speaking out?
And why did Scott C Forbes only jump on Jodi Jones’ killer, and his enablers, fraudulent public relations innocence fraud spin campaign in/around 2006?
More importantly, why did Scott C Forbes contact the former RUC officer on the “confidentialhotlinenumber” here when he did (as referred to in Part 1here) and why wasn’t Scott seemingly speaking to Sandra Lean?
Again, where is the hard evidence that Scott C Forbes has ever been a practicing lawyer in Scotland? Has anyone bothered to ask him to provide documentation to back up his numerous assertions?
Instead of publishing his own statement, what Scott C Forbes has chosen to do is manufacture stories, seemingly from his warped imagination (or the warped imagination of others) and has attempted to attribute these manufactured stories to people like Mark Kane – who passed away in May 2018.
Mark Kane obviously cannot defend himself against Scott C Forbes false allegations, manufactured stories and preposterous nonsense.
Is the reason he hasn’t published his statement, because Scott C Forbes knows the content will cast yet further doubt on his false, malicious and manufactured allegations.
Many of the people who have chosen to listen to, or read, Scott C Forbes false and malicious claims and manufactured stories, know very little about Scott’s history and previous actions in murderer Luke Mitchell’s fraudulent public relations spin campaign.
Scott C Forbes stated;
Reading statements from staff at Newbattle Abbey College I couldn’t believe just how pathetic the police were.
One statement from an English teacher, Ms. McGillivray, who was asked if she had a copy of an essay about a man killing a ‘woman in the woods’ written by Mark Kane, denied having one and this somehow confirmed Kane wrote no such essay.
John Beckett, QC argued to the appeal court that a lecturer who receives thousands of essays in her career and who couldn’t remember receiving one essay, “confirmed Kane wrote no such essay”. This wasn’t even challenged by the defence.
Total Lack of Reasoning
It is not surprising Scott C Forbes appears unable to recognise his own lack of reasoning.
However it is unlikely a female English teacher, or any female, who could have read and received “thousands of essays in her career” would forget about one of her students writing an essay about “a man killing a woman in the woods”.
It is also not surprising why someone like Scott C Forbes does not appear able to recognise or understand why an essay by a student about “a man killing a woman in the woods” would stand out to most females reading it.
The below photograph is a screenshot from a 2003 promotional video here for Newbattle Abbey collage, and the person playing snooker is the late Mark Kane.
According to another tweet made by Scott C Forbes, he claimed Mark Kane was “onmethadone, valluim, speed, hash and alcohol on day Jodie was murdered” (sic);
Does the footage of Mark Kane from the Newbattle Abbey college promotional video here look like he was clean from drugs, like his mother Norma stated in 2021;
OK, he was a drug addict years ago but he was turning his life around.
He got off the drugs completely and was accepted into college.
In reality, it sounds like Mark Kane may have got drunk on that particular night and might of fallen over and got a “tiny” scratch on his face from falling.
All of this I reported to the police. Just to set a couple of things straight I never had big cuts on my face the day after the murder I had a tiny scratch is all, he did not drive me to the police station the day after
Mark Kane – 1st of August 2014
If Scott C Forbes has nothing to hide, he would have no problems publishing his witness statement in full, with no redactions, so the public can see for themselves what he told police.
On 2nd of March 2021 Scott Forbes tweeted the following;
Screenshot of statement made by Scott Forbes on Twitter on the 2nd of March 2021
The same Newbattle Abbey collage promotional video here also includes footage of Scott C Forbes.
Still of Scott Forbes taken from the Newbattle Abbey college promotional video
Behaviour Patterns of A Sexually Deviant & Dangerous Adolescent Killer
Murderer Luke Mitchell didn’t have any real hobbies around the time he chose to commit his murder, instead he appears to have been fixated on having sex with numerous girls and threatening and harming them with knives.
Some people reading this may view this as normal behaviour for a 14 year old boy, and some people reading this may think it’s normal for a 12 year old boy to threaten an 11 year old girl with a knife for a kiss.
It isn’t and it’s disturbing!
These patterns of behaviour in a young boy are not normal, and alarm bells should be ringing loudly, especially to all the parents with young children of their own, who have chosen to blindly support murderer Luke Mitchell’s fraudulent public relations campaign.
None of the people who are blindly being taken in by Scott C Forbes stories, have the knowledge of all of the intimate details and behaviour patterns of murderer Luke Mitchell.
A few photos of the killer as a young child with a pony, does not paint the picture of the murderer he was turning into.
He had a fixation with knives and a sexually deviant streak.
He had been showing signs of sexual aggression since at least the age of 12.
You won’t hear about these behaviour patterns from people like Scott C Forbes, because he chooses to play down these behaviours patterns, and pretends they didn’t happen.
Excerpts from a 2005 media article, which has been reproduced in full here read;
The girl, who was just 11 at the time, was visiting Mitchell’s father Philip, a family friend. Mitchell, who was only 12, was also staying in the house in Livingston and the two youngsters were sharing a twin bedroom. In the middle of the night, he climbed on top of her, held a knife to her throat and demanded she kiss him. Last night she said: ‘I just can’t tell you how I feel about the verdict.’
Excerpts from a Daily Mail article by Grace McLean dated the 22nd of January 2005
The above wasn’t an isolated incident.
Showing signs of sexual aggression at the age of 12, and holding a knife to an 11 year old girls throat to coerce her into submission for a kiss, is a violent act.
Other young girls made similar allegations, which demonstrated a pattern of behaviour that was developing over time.
The sadistic, adolescent murderer was seeing several girls at the same time, and playing them off against each other.
A Killers ‘Well Being’ & His ‘Token of Remembrance’
The below photograph shows a memento murderer Luke Mitchell chose to inscribe and keep.
Many types of criminals will keep “trophies” or “Souvenirs” as a memento of their crime.
In most cases these same items will be used against them later as evidence and direct links to their involvement of the crimes.
But why do criminals do this? It seems like a strange thing to do especially in cases where the person has made extra efforts in other areas not to get caught, such as clearing evidence from the crime scene that may link them to it, or disposing of other evidence such as the weapon used or clothing worn during the crime itself.
Well the answer to this has many reasons behind it, and the types of trophies kept will vary from criminal to criminal.
Humans as a species are known to collect items we put value onto. This value can vary from sentimental or sexual value to monetary value.
Many adults will collect things that remind them of their childhood for example or will have a passion or hobby for something that requires them to accumulate a collection over time such as a coin or card collection.
A person may have no real use for such items to get them through daily life, however having these items will give them a sense of well-being.
This is a permanent reminder of the events leading up to that persons death, its a personal connection to them for the Killer and in many ways is symbolic of the perceived relationship they have with their victims.
Their successful crimes are achievements, in the eyes of a criminal they are worth remembering and what better way to remember than to keep a piece of it for yourself that you can look back on and relive the moment.
The items are valuable to the criminal in some way, as discussed above it could be to relive the moment, it could be for pride to display, it could be for gratification or even comfort.
INNOCENCE FRAUD WATCH 