Sally Clark

Sally Clark 1964-2007





 
 
Sally Clark

Continuing case history written in January 2002 by Sally's father, Frank Lockyer

Frank Lockyer

It is two years since my last update and Sally has just spent her third Christmas in prison.

The first appeal

Given that everyone at the original trial (including we're told the Crown Prosecution Service) did not expect her to be convicted, we appealed with confidence. It was "inconceivable" that Sally could lose. But she did - much to the surprise of the experienced journalists present - which may account for the unswerving support we have since received from the media, including legal and medical journals. How did it go so wrong?

The consensus is that the jury were influenced by that prejudicial statistic. But the Appeal Court, whilst accepting that the statistic was wrong, thought it would not have influenced the jury unduly; and that there was other evidence. This ruling has been described by a leading QC (not connected with the case) as a "breathtakingly intellectually dishonest judgment".

The Appeal Court accepted the controversial evidence of the initial pathologist, crediting him as a "paediatric" pathologist, which he is not. Supported as he was by one expert who presupposed the pathology to be competent. It seemed not to matter that five eminent paediatric pathologists were scathingly critical of that pathology and disputed the findings. Nor that three of the prosecution's experts disputed much of the pathology and thought that the deaths should be `unascertained'.




Site last modified Wed Oct 12 09:58:06 BST 2011