Innocence Project. Mr Warner case, CCRC

In 1991 Neil Warner was convicted of two murders of Mr and Mrs Pool. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. Mr Warner appealed 9 years later to the CCRC, an organisation who review appeals and decide whether it the case should go to the Court of Appeal. The CCRC eventually decided that with all the new evidence it had proven to make the case more formidable. Therefore they decided not to refer this case to the Court of Appeal.

I have looked at the case myself and decided whether the CCRC were correct in doing this.

In Mr Warner's new statement he said that he had been into the elderly couple lived on the night they were murdered, but never went upstairs. This was where the body were found. Mr Warner's v neck jumper was found at the house but downstairs. Mr pools jumper was found at Mr Warner's caravan where he lived. Mr Warner said he entered the house on a drunken spurge of the moment with the intent to steal.

Mr Smith, a witness, told police he had seen suspicious behaviour around the house that night. Mr Warner wanted this witness to be considered as the murderer as well a known sexual offender Mr Rodgers known as the Vampire.

The CCRC did a section 19 as they wanted to find new evidence. In the new evidence fibres upstairs were identified to be Mr Warner's. This new evidence tells us that Mr Warner lied in his statement about going upstairs. Finger prints were identified near a knife, considered to be the murder weapon. DNA testing identified Mr Warner once again.

Mrs Pool was sexually assaulted before she was murdered and saliva was found on her on her right breast. The saliva was retested and DNA results were 'inconclusive' therefore this is still a mystery.

Now we know there was a sexual motif behind this offence.

Also in the new findings Mr Smith's finger prints were found on the porch of Mr and Mrs Pools house. Mr Smith lived in a block of flats near the house which could suggest why had been identified and there wasn't any evidence to say he had gone in the house. However Mr Smith is known by the police to have sexual harassments claims. This was never provided to the defence. I think Mr Smith is a suspicious suspect to consider but the new evidence isn't enough to be 'beyond responsible doubt,' therefore by adding new suspects to the case just makes the case more complicated. Mr Warner is still a suspect and the new evidence against him is more formidable.

I think the CCRC made the right decision to not refer this to the Court of Appeal. The new evidence is even more formidable which makes me believe Mr Warner did the murders as he lied in his appeal that he didn't go upstairs surely you wouldn’t make that mistake. Ideally I would of liked more evidence to be found against Mr Smith because of the idea that he could have had a sexual motif, but there wasn't any formidable evidence. The CCRC have made a safe decision if the case was to go to the Court of Appeal it would more than likely fail there too.