Hidden from the jury
What the jury were not told...
One of the prosecution witnesses is a well know drug dealer in the Milton Keynes area. His real reason for being at Woburn was to dig up his STASH. Can you really imagine a drug dealer going to the police voluntarily, I for one don’t think so. This same witness then changed his testimony once in the witness box as he recognised one of the accused and was indeed recognised by one of them.
There could be a reasonable explanation but it does lead to the suspicion this witness was either coerced into giving evidence or was a police informer. He has recently been prosecuted by the police for drug-related offence.
Another of the witness called by the crown had two warrants for his arrest outstanding at the time he gave evidence, they have never been enforced,
Food for thought
In the crowns document Admissions three other known offenders were excluded because of fingerprint and DNA evidence, but in court the expert on fingerprints said there was insufficient ridge detail to be of evidentiary value, another EXPERT stated no DNA was recovered from the crime scene or the victim. Why were DNA swabs taken from Barri and Keith if there was nothing to compare the samples with?
Stranger and Stranger.
In the week after the CPS wrote to both defendants, stating that the case against them was being dropped because there was a “total lack of evidence”, a meeting took place with the police and expert witnesses, the instruction from the police to the experts is believed to have been FIND SOMETHING.
The forensic expert forgot to mention that the inside of the white van was extremely dirty and had not been cleaned in months. The crown did however make a big deal from the fact the outside of van was seen being washed on the Sunday after Rachel went missing. The soil at Woburn has some sort of unique signature as the soil expert was able to say exactly where Rachel’s boots had touched the earth at the golf club, a point midway between the gates and where she was found. He could not say that if she walked if she was carried and her feet were placed at the said spot while whoever carried her took a breather.
With this in mind, along with the inside of the front of the van not being cleaned recently, why was no evidence found to link the van with the soil of Woburn, not inside, not outside, not on the tyres, not in the wheel arches, not under the van, as I’ve already said there is no evidence that van was ever near the site where Rachel was found. The police had the van for a number of months and carried out test to find anything, they couldn’t. Both defendant’s clothes and numerous pairs of shoes from both men were seized and tested, including the shoes witnesses confirmed Barri was wearing that night, once again the test failed to find any trace of the soil unique to Woburn.