Silly me. I forgot the main purpose of the thread.
Barry George should not - under present rules - be entitled to compensation since nothing went wrong with his trial except that evidence was presented which was subsequently ruled inadmissable. There's no suggestion that anything improper took place, such as distortion of the evidence by forensic scientists.
Contrast the Guildford 4, where the suspects were beaten (tortured, in other words) to extract a confession.
Bookmarks