Olivia’s killer guilty - Minimum of 42 years

[Keeper!]

This part did confuse me somewhat, given the location of the trial:

I have to say, reading that article, she must have been a seriously compelling witness for the jury to be sure. Certainly seems doubt was at least raised by Cashman. She must have been a wholly plausible wintness. Only rational explanation.

Also sad that the witness will be living in fear for the rest of her life and will be serving her own life sentence, a very brave woman.

 

[paulchapo]

This part did confuse me somewhat, given the location of the trial:

I have to say, reading that article, she must have been a seriously compelling witness for the jury to be sure. Certainly seems doubt was at least raised by Cashman. She must have been a wholly plausible wintness. Only rational explanation.

I'm sure more details will come out in the press as time goes on after the conviction. The actual evidence against him seems quite circumstantial aside from the woman's testimony. Some witnesses described the shooter as being taller and slimmer than Cashman. Also he was supposed to have crashed through gardens and over fences but as he said there was no injuries on his body which would be consistent with him doing that. The other evidence was, I think, he had clothing on him matching the description the woman said she had given him on the night when he was supposed to have disposed of the clothing he wore in the shooting. As he said himself such clothing is pretty standard wear in Liverpool.
The accomplice part is interesting and I haven't seen that yet.

I sincerely hope they have the right person because it was an horrendous crime. Cashman is a wrong un of that there is no doubt, but was he the killer? There was huge pressure on the police to find the shooter as the crime shocked the nation, I hope they have.

I was amused to see the female witness shook the defence barrister and had him flustered. Having lived with a scouse woman in my chequered past, they are a ferocious opponent once riled and very adept at holding their own in an argument. Certainly no shrinking violets and I doubt he has encountered too many in his upbringing. She might not have the educational qualifications he had but streetwise they certainly are.

A brave lady as she has to change identity and I'd guess leave Liverpool to go into witness protection. As crazy as this might sound this actually may suit her, a new start. It appeared she was cheating on her partner with Cashman and could be fearful of repercussions from him. Also if Cashman was the shooter and acting on orders from a big player in the underworld, that big player would give her a pass to grass as it would save his skin. This would also be the case if he wasn't the shooter as again it takes the heat away from him. The government, police and the public have what they wanted, somebody for the murder, job done, everyone moves on.

As for this changing the landscape in Liverpool regarding crime, sadly I doubt it. The same was said after the Rhys Jones murder, yet sixteen years later here we are.

 

[shackattack]

He rented/ lived on Grenadier Drive in West Kirkby which is modern and house prices average around 250k, he wasn't top of the chain for sure or he wouldn't be running around shooting at people. He'd be paying someone to do his dirty work

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I'm sure more details will come out in the press as time goes on after the conviction. The actual evidence against him seems quite circumstantial aside from the woman's testimony. Some witnesses described the shooter as being taller and slimmer than Cashman. Also he was supposed to have crashed through gardens and over fences but as he said there was no injuries on his body which would be consistent with him doing that. The other evidence was, I think, he had clothing on him matching the description the woman said she had given him on the night when he was supposed to have disposed of the clothing he wore in the shooting. As he said himself such clothing is pretty standard wear in Liverpool.
The accomplice part is interesting and I haven't seen that yet.

I sincerely hope they have the right person because it was an horrendous crime. Cashman is a wrong un of that there is no doubt, but was he the killer? There was huge pressure on the police to find the shooter as the crime shocked the nation, I hope they have.

I was amused to see the female witness shook the defence barrister and had him flustered. Having lived with a scouse woman in my chequered past, they are a ferocious opponent once riled and very adept at holding their own in an argument. Certainly no shrinking violets and I doubt he has encountered too many in his upbringing. They might not have the educational qualifications but streetwise they certainly are.

A brave lady as she has to change identity and I'd guess leave Liverpool to go into witness protection. As crazy as this might sound this actually may suit her, a new start. It appeared she was cheating on her partner with Cashman and could be fearful of repercussions from him. Also if Cashman was the shooter and acting on orders from a big player in the underworld, that big player would give her a pass to grass as it would save his skin. This would also be the case if he wasn't the shooter as again it takes the heat away from him. The government, police and the public have what they wanted, somebody for the murder, job done, everyone moves on.

As for this changing the landscape in Liverpool regarding crime, sadly I doubt it. The same was said after the Rhys Jones murder, yet sixteen years later here we are.

Checked the defence counsel out and he’s got an insanely impressive CV and looks the absolute business, which makes her rattling him even more impressive. I doubt he’d have underestimated her, as he’ll have had to cross examine people who are smarter than they might appear on the face of it on numerous occasions. Cross examination is (in general terms) the part of advocacy that is the hardest to master but also the most satisfying to become skilled at - it can be such fun - and there’s no doubt in my mind this guy is one of the best - so fucking fair play to her for holding her own. Like I said, her evidence must have been compelling, and it certainly seems an awful lot to risk simply for being scorned.

There was a lot of circumstantial evidence, but that isn’t unusual these days. There is nothing inherently wrong with circumstantial evidence. ANPR, cell site analysis, mobile phone activity can all point a jury in the right direction; however it seems like old fashioned eyewitness evidence has done for him here.

Like you, I hope they have the right person. As I said, it’s a huge risk for her to frame him if he didn’t do it. These people are ruthless and well resourced and it’s much harder to go into hiding these days.

Sentencing will be interesting on Monday. I’ve thought about my predicted 45 years minimum term and I’m sticking by it. Starting point for a murder with a gun is 30. Aggravated by the egregious premeditation, the location of the killing, the motive, and of course the age of the victim and the impact upon her family. Not sure how much the doctrine of transferred intent applies to sentencing, but it will certainly have some impact. There are public policy reasons for sending out a message too. I think it would be wrong to impose a whole life order though, because it does not meet any of the criteria and should be distinguished from the likes of Mark Bridger, albeit to a pretty insignificant extent.

I find myself thinking about Olivia’s mum quite a bit. How she must torture herself about opening the door to have a look (a natural human reaction) and it being on the latch (a sign of good neighbourliness). It all seems so unfair and shows how as much as we all like to think we’re in control, we’re not. We’re all the spin of a wheel from our lives collapsing around us. Life can be so fucking cruel.

 

[Tugay One Cup]

Supposedly earning £5,000 a week. It's a stupid way of life as it ends in prison or death and you're always looking over your shoulder.

There are countless people who are in the same line of work who don't end up in prison or dead because they don't do stupid shit like he did.

I know it doesn't fit the stereotype but it's a business and the smart ones run theirs accordingly.

£5kp/w isn't particularly "high level" as has been reported. He just seems like your run of the mill thug who got more ambitious and wanted a reputation and to be seen living a certain lifestyle but without the intelligence or professionalism to make it sustainable.

High level guys usually don't go roaming the streets and blindly firing through people's front doors. And the ones who last usually make their money and then put it into more legitimate businesses.

 

[jacko74]

It's frightening that there are large swathes of the population there and in other places, that are so lawless and devoid of morals and empathy, that even the murder of a nine year old girl doesn't touch or change them. These "People" should be removed from the society they hold in such contempt and placed into one they do like. The freedom to live amongst normal people trying to make a decent life for their families should be removed from feral scum. The revolving door of prison isn't the answer. The French had Devils Island, we need a similar place for these people. Don't want to live by society's standards of decency? No problem, we'll fly you to Hellsville, we hope you'll be happier there.

The trouble is the benefits system is now set up in such a way that it encourages and rewards the most feckless and irresponsible degenerates in our society to breed.

 

[paulchapo]

Checked the defence counsel out and he’s got an insanely impressive CV and looks the absolute business, which makes her rattling him even more impressive. I doubt he’d have underestimated her, as he’ll have had to cross examine people who are smarter than they might appear on the face of it on numerous occasions. Cross examination is (in general terms) the part of advocacy that is the hardest to master but also the most satisfying to become skilled at - it can be such fun - and there’s no doubt in my mind this guy is one of the best - so fucking fair play to her for holding her own. Like I said, her evidence must have been compelling, and it certainly seems an awful lot to risk simply for being scorned.

There was a lot of circumstantial evidence, but that isn’t unusual these days. There is nothing inherently wrong with circumstantial evidence. ANPR, cell site analysis, mobile phone activity can all point a jury in the right direction; however it seems like old fashioned eyewitness evidence has done for him here.

Like you, I hope they have the right person. As I said, it’s a huge risk for her to frame him if he didn’t do it. These people are ruthless and well resourced and it’s much harder to go into hiding these days.

Sentencing will be interesting on Monday. I’ve thought about my predicted 45 years minimum term and I’m sticking by it. Starting point for a murder with a gun is 30. Aggravated by the egregious premeditation, the location of the killing, the motive, and of course the age of the victim and the impact upon her family. Not sure how much the doctrine of transferred intent applies to sentencing, but it will certainly have some impact. There are public policy reasons for sending out a message too. I think it would be wrong to impose a whole life order though, because it does not meet any of the criteria and should be distinguished from the likes of Mark Bridger, albeit to a pretty insignificant extent.

I find myself thinking about Olivia’s mum quite a bit. How she must torture herself about opening the door to have a look (a natural human reaction) and it being on the latch (a sign of good neighbourliness). It all seems so unfair and shows how as much as we all like to think we’re in control, we’re not. We’re all the spin of a wheel from our lives collapsing around us. Life can be so fucking cruel.

Brilliant post mate and appreciated as I know you have knowledge in the legal field.

A mistake highly educated people often make is they underestimate how intelligent somebody who hasn't had their education or acquired their qualifications can be. There are a lot of highly intelligent people out there who just didn't have the opportunities or want to go down the academic route.

I agree on the tariff, he's going to get hammered, 45 minimum is my guess too. That scrote who killed the drug dealer in Manchester, featured on the Detectives programme, got 39 years if I remember correctly and he didn't kill a child, although there were some playing in the street at the time. Either way it's as good as a full life tariff.

The poor mother will forever torment herself for opening the door. When I first heard about the incident my first reaction was "Why did she open the door??" As you rightly say no matter how streetwise and safety conscious we like to think we are it just takes a split second to drop your guard and it can all unravel, sometimes with devastating consequences, as in this case.

 

[shackattack]

One of his key defence witnesses turned up in monterrain tracksuit and cruyff trainers to prove every scally in dovecot wore such clothes - not the brightest of moves I'd say

 

[Worsleyweb]

One of his key defence witnesses turned up in monterrain tracksuit and cruyff trainers to prove every scally in dovecot wore such clothes - not the brightest of moves I'd say

Such a strange place Liverpool.

 

[shackattack]

Such a strange place Liverpool.

It's become a parody of itself now, so glad to have got away when I did