Michael Shields given a Royal pardon [warning posts 24 / 59 / 162]

Mr Alan

Michael Shields has been give a royal pardon & released from prison.

****ing brilliant.

http://www.clickliverpool.com/news/national-news/126060-liverpool-fan-michael-shields-free-with-royal-pardon.html

Jailed Liverpool Michael Shields is being released with a royal pardon his solicitor has confirmed.

The long-awaited decision by Justice Secretary Jack Straw sweeps aside the 2005 conviction of the Liverpool fan for attempted murder of a barman in Bulgaria.

Michael, 22, has been eligible for a pardon since last December when the High Court ruled that it would be legal under UK law.

Since then the student's release has been hampered by legal red tape.

First a top QC reviewed the case for Jack Straw and that was followed by the Justice Secretary ordering a Merseyside Police investigation of the evidence in the case.

Michael's conviction for attempted murder of a barman in Bulgaria in 2005 was identified as a potential miscarriage of justice in the High Court Judicial Review.

~Rebel~

Mr Alan wrote: »

Michael Shields has been give a royal pardon & released from prison.

****ing brilliant.

cant believe it took over 4 years for that! Great news though, delighted for him

RasTa

~Rebel~ wrote: »

cant believe it took over 4 years for that! Great news though, delighted for him

Did he have anything to do with it at all? I know someone confessed that they attacked the Bulgarian but did Shields join in?

SWAR

AFAIK he was in bed at the time...so no

Rediculous that it took this long to free him.

Boggles

RasTa wrote: »

Did he have anything to do with it at all? I know someone confessed that they attacked the Bulgarian but did Shields join in?

He claimed to be in bed at the time.

Although he was picked out of a lineup by 9 witnesses.

astrofool

Is the guy that admitted doing it heading back the other way?

Mr Alan

Boggles wrote: »

He claimed to be in bed at the time.

Although he was picked out of a lineup by 9 witnesses.

because he was handcuffed to the radiator in the police foyer dressed in clothes he didn't own or have in his possession that were given to him by police to wear (they matched the clothes worn by the mans attacker) while the witness' arrived.

PiE

Boggles wrote: »

He claimed to be in bed at the time.

Although he was picked out of a lineup by 9 witnesses.

The whole royal pardon thing would suggest what "he claims" to be the truth, are in fact the truth.

_blank_

This is going to go well, I think

The Hustler

Jack Straw only let Shields out early to watch The Leeds

We're not famous anymore

Boggles

PiE wrote: »

The whole royal pardon thing would suggest what "he claims" to be the truth, are in fact the truth.

Hahahahha.

Are you serious???

mike65

Time line of events

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/timeline-football-fans-fight-for-justice-1784020.html#

Boggles

Mr Alan wrote: »

because he was handcuffed to the radiator in the police foyer dressed in clothes he didn't own or have in his possession that were given to him by police to wear (they matched the clothes worn by the mans attacker) while the witness' arrived.

Where did you pull that out of Alan in all fairness?

PiE

Boggles wrote: »

Hahahahha.

Are you serious???

DEADLY.

Mr Alan

from the documentary ITV did about the incident.

Boggles

Mr Alan wrote: »

from the documentary ITV did about the incident.

Was it brought up in court? The allegation not the documentary?

Mr Alan

I don't know to be honest.

There was numerous things that were not allowed into his initial trial, new evidence etc which is why he tried on numerous occassions to get a re-trail & why he has recd a pardon when the foreign office in the UK, when viewing all the evidence, gave him a pardon & declared him innocent.

el rabitos

Boggles wrote: »

Hahahahha.

Are you serious???

but clearly if he was a united fan and it happened in moscow, we'd be leaning towards believing the lad, right?

Boggles

el rabitos wrote: »

but clearly if he was a united fan and it happened in moscow, we'd be leaning towards believing the lad, right?

Why?

_blank_

el rabitos wrote: »

but clearly if he was a united fan and it happened in moscow, we'd be leaning towards believing the lad, right?

It didn't happen in Istanbul.

If a United fan allegedly attempted to murder someone in, say, Kiev on the night when United won the CL in Moscow, I'd say Liverpool fans would be taking much the same delight/disgust as United fans are currently showing towards Shields.

It's the natural way of the world.

Boggles

Des wrote: »

It didn't happen in Istanbul.

If a United fan allegedly attempted to murder someone in, say, Kiev on the night when United won the CL in Moscow, I'd say Liverpool fans would be taking much the same delight/disgust as United fans are currently showing towards Shields.

It's the natural way of the world.

Personally couldn't give a fook who they support.

Ian Huntley was a United fan, lots of bad people out there that support the team I do, doesn't mean I will base my opinion on what happened on who they support, to do so would be quite pathetic in fairness.

el rabitos

Boggles wrote: »

Why?

because its you, and your posts are ****?

Xavi6

el rabitos wrote: »

because its you, and your posts are ****?

Cut out that sort of crap.

Discuss the topic at hand or post on something else Liverpool related. That's what the thread is for.

That goes for everyone. No problem issuing bans if needs be.

PiE

Boggles wrote: »

Personally couldn't give a fook who they support.

Ian Huntley was a United fan, lots of bad people out there that support the team I do, doesn't mean I will base my opinion on what happened on who they support, to do so would be quite pathetic in fairness.

So if you're not basing your opinion on bias and you're not basing it on fact ("fact" being he's just been pardoned)... what exactly are you basing it on?

el rabitos

Des wrote: »

It didn't happen in Istanbul.

If a United fan allegedly attempted to murder someone in, say, Kiev on the night when United won the CL in Moscow, I'd say Liverpool fans would be taking much the same delight/disgust as United fans are currently showing towards Shields.

It's the natural way of the world.

if a united fan was basically cleared of the incident by the person that actually did it, i'd probably be leaning towards supporting the utd fan tbh.

but lets not let that get in the way of turning this into another united vs liverpool wind up

Boggles

PiE wrote: »

So if you're not basing your opinion on bias and you're not basing it on fact ("fact" being he's just been pardoned)... what exactly are you basing it on?

Several Courts including the European Human Rights court ruling the the trial was sound.

What you basing yours on? The ITV documentary?

_blank_

PiE wrote: »

So if you're not basing your opinion on bias and you're not basing it on fact ("fact" being he's just been pardoned)... what exactly are you basing it on?

He's been pardoned. But what does that mean?

The UK has just ridden roughshod all over the Bulgarian justice system.

Jack Straw and his cronies ave decided that another sovereign state's justice system is not up to standard, and have over-ruled them. A state which is a part of the EU, so their human rights must be in order.

Don't forget, the UK justice system has a history of dodginess about it.

This whole thing has a bad smell about it, on both sides.

Liverpool fans "believe" he is innocent, the Bulgarian justice system believe he is guilty.

Why the disparity?

el rabitos

clearly its a political issue, if he was convicted in bulgaria and then let go over to serve his time in england only for the british to go an release him...

you dont think it makes a mockery of the bulgarian justice system? or at least in their minds. i dont think its quite as black and white an issue as some would like to make it out to be

Mr Alan

the michael shields thing is about more than football, he's a young lad who'd never been in any trouble in his life, and he has just had 4 years of his life wasted needlessly.

if it was a Utd fans case that was handled as shambolicly as Michaels, i would feel exactly the same way.

Dodgykeeper

He was found guilty by a Bulgarian Court and has been pardoned by the British Govt who have exploited a loop-hole, what happens to the next British person who gets jailed in Bulgaria no chance of them been allowed serve their sentence in a British Jail.

Anyway delighted he is free will give the scouse grief junkies one less thing to bleat about!

_blank_

Dodgykeeper wrote: »

He was found guilty by a Turkish Court and has been pardoned by the British Govt who have exploited a loop-hole, what happens to the next British person who gets jailed in Turkey no chance of them been allowed serve their sentence in a British Jail.

Anyway delighted he is free will give the scouse grief junkies one less thing to bleat about!

You really shouldn't comment on things on which you have absolutely no clue about, tbh. It kind of makes you look foolish, especially that last line of your post.

PiE

Boggles wrote: »

Several Courts including the European Human Rights court ruling the the trial was sound.

What you basing yours on? The ITV documentary?

I've never seen the documentary. I'm basing it on the fact that he's been pardoned and released. If he gets re-arrested and sent back to jail, I'll send you a card saying you were right.

Mr Alan

Des wrote: »

Liverpool fans "believe" he is innocent, the Bulgarian justice system believe he is guilty.

Because possibly Liverpool fans & the British Government are taking all the information into account, whereas the Bulgarian Juducial system aren't & were interested in covering up their dodgy as **** trial & conviction, hence the reason they allowed him to go back to the UK, so Shields could be freed if the UK goverment saw fit after examining all the evidence, but without them having to admit their conviction was a farce.

Spud83

Mr Alan wrote: »

Because possibly Liverpool fans & the British Government are taking all the information into account, whereas the Bulgarian Juducial system aren't & were interested in covering up their dodgy as **** trial & conviction, hence the reason they allowed him to go back to the UK, so Shields could be freed if the UK goverment saw fit after examining all the evidence, but without them having to admit their conviction was a farce.

Were the EU also interested in covering up the Bulgarians dodgy as **** trial & conviction?

Boggles

PiE wrote: »

I've never seen the documentary. I'm basing it on the fact that he's been pardoned and released. If he gets re-arrested and sent back to jail, I'll send you a card saying you were right.

A Royal Pardon doesn't mean he was guilty or innocent!!

Black Beard got A Royal Pardon FFS!!!

Mr Alan

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Were the EU also interested in covering up the Bulgarians dodgy as **** trial & conviction?

No idea.

Why would the British Government pardon him if they felt all the evidence (some of which was not allowed at his initial trial) did not prove beyond any doubt he was innocent of any crime?

Mitch Connor

Mr Alan wrote: »

No idea.

Why would the British Government pardon him if they felt all the evidence (some of which was not allowed at his initial trial) did not prove beyond any doubt he was innocent of any crime?

Public pressure?

Mr Alan

Boggles wrote: »

A Royal Pardon doesn't mean he was guilty or innocent!!

Black Beard got A Royal Pardon FFS!!!

Jack Straw seems to think it does.

Jack Straw wrote:

I have concluded, having looked carefully at all the evidence now available, that Michael Shields is telling the truth when he says he is innocent of the attempted murder of which he was convicted in Bulgaria.

Boggles

Mr Alan wrote: »

No idea.

Why would the British Government pardon him if they felt all the evidence (some of which was not allowed at his initial trial) did not prove beyond any doubt he was innocent of any crime?

Because the British Government have never lied to suit there own agenda, no?

Boggles

Mr Alan wrote: »

Jack Straw seems to think it does.

Pretty sure Jack Staw isn't a judge AL.

Mr Alan

Boggles wrote: »

Because the British Government have never lied to suit there own agenda, no?

Is there a government in the world that hasn't?

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Public pressure?

:rolleyes:

PiE

Blackbeard (Blackbeard??!) and now a Government conspiracy to push your point?

Clutching at straws Boggles, even by your standards.

Spud83

Mr Alan wrote: »

No idea.

Why would the British Government pardon him if they felt all the evidence (some of which was not allowed at his initial trial) did not prove beyond any doubt he was innocent of any crime?

I get there was further evidence, and I'm not saying he is innocent or guilty but some people are taking a very black and white version here.

He is innocent because the British Government say so.

He is guilty because the Bulgarian judicial system say so. A judicial system that was looked at by the EU courts and which ruled that trial was fair.

You are asking why the government would release if they did not prove beyond doubt he was innocent.

I'm asking why the Bulgarians convict if they had proved beyond doubt that he was guilty? And why would the EU uphold that ruling after examining not only the case, but how the case was constructed.

Mr Alan

Boggles wrote: »

Pretty sure Jack Staw isn't a judge AL.

he is the secretary of state for justice.

i'd imagine he is more familiar with the facets of the case than you or the rest of the Utd fans who are pathetically foaming at the mouth after this decision.

Mr Alan

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

I get there was further evidence, and I'm not saying he is innocent or guilty but some people are taking a very black and white version here.

He is innocent because the British Government say so.

He is guilty because the Bulgarian judicial system say so. A judicial system that was looked at by the EU courts and which ruled that trial was fair.

You are asking why the government would release if they did not prove beyond doubt he was innocent.

I'm asking why the Bulgarians convict if they had proved beyond doubt that he was guilty? And why would the EU uphold that ruling after examining not only the case, but how the case was constructed.

as far as i'm aware, the EU trial was not a retrial on the attempted murder charge.

It was on the procedural elements of the original trial, to see if a retrial should be granted, & they found that the Bulgarians trial was ok. I'd imagine the Bulgarian government did all they could to cover their asses for that one. Then when it was complete they shipped him back to the UK & told them they could pardon if they wished. Obviously wanting nothing more to do with the sorry mess they'd created for themselves.

spockety

Based on having to read the last three pages of posts, I wish Michael Shields was still in prison.

:eek:

Spud83

Mr Alan wrote: »

as far as i'm aware, the EU trial was not a retrial on the attempted murder charge.

It was on the procedural elements of the original trial, to see if a retrial should be granted, & they found that the Bulgarians trial was ok. I'd imagine the Bulgarian government did all they could to cover their asses for that one.

I know it looked at the procedural elements of the trial. Yeah I'd say they tried to cover the asses (if they need to), just like the British government or Shields lawyers would have done everything to expose it.

Mr Alan wrote: »

Then when it was complete they shipped him back to the UK & told them they could pardon if they wished. Obviously wanting nothing more to do with the sorry mess they'd created for themselves.

According to the timeline Mike65 posted the EU did not rule on the case until 6/7 months after Sheilds was back in the UK. It took them a year after shipping him back to say that it is up to the British Government to pardon him, as he was under their jurisdication now.

I just think it's a very messy affair and people should not be frothing at the mouth over him being released or celebrating it either, as it is very murky.

redzerdrog

fair play mr alan for answering the ********* questions without losing the head.

michael shields is innocent, the man that commited the crime has come out and said he done it.

michael shields has passed a lie detector text with flying colours

the poor man has lost 4 years of his life that he will never get back and to me it doesnt matter who the **** he supports no innocent person should have to suffer what he did

Mr Alan

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

I just think it's a very messy affair and people should not be frothing at the mouth over him being released or celebrating it either, as it is very murky.

If people believe he is innocent, as i do & many others do (incl the British government), based on all the information thats available, its fair enough to celebrate it. If Boggles & co. wish to cling to a verdict that did not take into account all the evidence available, or the fact that another man confessed to the crime, thats their perogative, but there can be no reasonable reason to do that other than ridiculous club rivalry imo. matters as important as this should be way above ridiculous club rivalries-today has unfortunately proven that they're not.

Paul Tergat

Arguing over something like this is pretty stupid. It'll be more complex than any of you will like to admit. We don't know the facts of the situation, we just hear different things on tv. It's hard to know what to believe really.

Boggles

Straw could have lost his job over this, Proof of Public Pressure.

http://sofiaecho.com/2009/08/24/774057_michael-shields-father-may-stand-against-jack-straw-at-election