Sevcik v. Sandoval and Jackson v. Abercrombie

Gilfoyle, Nathalie F. P.; Smith, Paul M.

doi:10.1037/e507972014-001

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

The Court Of Appeal2

A Statement By a Handwriting Expert Differed Little1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2018

Publication Types

Select...

Article1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent1

Authors

Journals

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The case has been to the Court of Appeal twice. [6][7][8] The Court has given two judicial versions of the facts. In the first, the appeal was rejected on three grounds:…”

Section: The Court Of Appealmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The decision not to call Professor Knight, a forensic scientist, at the trial was reasoned, and therefore his evidence could not be admitted as fresh evidence. 10…”

Section: The Court Of Appealmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…from his evidence at the trial and therefore was not admitted. 11 In the second appeal, the application to admit the evidence of six experts as fresh evidence was rejected:…”

Section: A Statement By a Handwriting Expert Differed Littlementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Gilfoyle: A miscarriage of justice?

Samuels¹

2018

Med Sci Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The accused's wife was found hanging in the garage on 4 June 1992. It looked like suicide: there was a suicide note, there were no signs of a struggle and there was nothing to suggest anything other than suicide. The police subsequently suspected murder. Eddie Gilfoyle was charged with murder, tried at Liverpool Crown Court and convicted. He has always asserted his innocence. His assertion has been widely supported, or at least his claim of wrongful conviction, by very responsible people. He refused parole, showed no remorse and was eventually released in December 2010 after serving 18 years in prison.

show abstract

“…The case has been to the Court of Appeal twice. [6][7][8] The Court has given two judicial versions of the facts. In the first, the appeal was rejected on three grounds:…”

Section: The Court Of Appealmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The decision not to call Professor Knight, a forensic scientist, at the trial was reasoned, and therefore his evidence could not be admitted as fresh evidence. 10…”

Section: The Court Of Appealmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gilfoyle: A miscarriage of justice?

Samuels¹

2018

Med Sci Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Sevcik v. Sandoval and Jackson v. Abercrombie

Cited by 1 publication

References 0 publications

Gilfoyle: A miscarriage of justice?

Gilfoyle: A miscarriage of justice?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About