29/03/2012

Elections

Parliament can fun for a maximum of 5 years - it needs to be dissolved by the Queen before an election. Ultimately, it can be dissolved at any time - if the Government no longer has a majority or an election can be triggered if the government loses a vote of confidence in the Commons. A vote of confidence in the commons is quite rare though. 
Jim Callaghan lost by 1 vote in 1979 - winter of discontent. Due to this one vote, Thatcher won the election and came to power. 
Locke - 'if your going to take things from people you must give them a voice'. John Locke, known philosopher, described the way in which you must be happy with the representation of people e.g. MP's etc. Another known philosopher, Rousseau, believed in a direct democracy which was on the spot. People should be involved in every aspect of this and by it being on the spot it it could be relating to such ways as texting and online for future voting prospects. 


Coalition government has passed a law fixing the date of elections every 5 years, the next occuring on the 7th May 2015.
Up until now, the Prime Minister fixed the date of the elections. It has been tradition to hold them on a Thursday, which has been around since 1935! Little fact of the day there for you!
In order to vote you have to register (on the electoral register) and since you are not automatically on it -even if you pay taxes- roughly 45 million people are already on the register. 


This year there is the US presidential elections and the French presidential elections. Consequently, we do not have a presidential election as our head of state is the Queen herself. We as a country do not directly elect our Prime Minister. 


Voting Polls
England - 37,912,549
Scotland - 3,885,148
Wales - 2,262,769
Northern Ireland - 1,134,983
(Source - BBC)


Citizens living overseas can vote but less than 15,000 of the estimated 5.5 million actually do. 


Who can't vote you ask? ...
- Under 18's
- Prisoners
- People with criminal records
- Members of the House of Lords
- European Union Citizens


Representation of the people act is the law that covers elections.
 In 1918 men over 21 and women over 30 were allowed to vote
1928 - universal suffrage (all adults over 21 were able to vote)
1969 - all adults over the age of 18 had the right to vote but it not compulsory (it is compulsory to vote in Australia)


Who can stand? - Citizens over the age of 18


First Past the Post, Not PR - whoever gains a majority in the constituency is elected. This means that national voting percentages are not reflected in seats. Furthermore, the election comes down to marginals as most votes in safe seats are wasted. There are not many marginal seats and the meaning of them is that it is undecided who will be there. Labour won half the seats in 2005 but only had 35% of the vote. This has lead to people voting tactically by trying to stop the party they dislike rather than choosing their own personal choice. This is tactical voting - for example, a labour supporter in Winchester. 
In the 2010 election most cities voted Labour, which is the working class, however the countryside voted mostly conservative. 


If you want to become an MP you must put down a deposit of £500. This money will be returned if you get at least 5% of the votes cast. This deposit used to be much less but it was changed due to many people running just for the fun as they had about £100 to spare. By having the increase it makes sure the people who are running are serious about it. Spoilt ballets are always disqualified, this relates to people drawing pictures or putting crosses by everyone's names. If there is a close result there can be a recount in some cases. 


Closer to home
In Winchester 1997, Mark Oaten won against Tory MP Gerry Malone by 2 votes in the local election that year. He went to high court and was granted a by-election, resulting in Oaten winning by a landslide. 

Schopenhauer and Nietzche


Schopenhauer's work comes within the general School of General Idealism of the 19th Century. He was a contemporary with Hegel who was someone Schopenhauer particularly hates. His position is that of immateralism which is to say that the apparent world does not exist independently of perception. In any ways Schopenhauer is similar to Kant, such ways are that they both believe that you can deduce by reason that there is a necessary pre-existent formless 'something' which is a necessary condition of the existence of anything at all. Yes, pretty confusing right. I'll have to get back to you on the meaning of that long and winding sentence and the meaning behind it. 

Kant - each object can be a 'thing in itself' separate from another 'thing in itself'. He argued that all experience could only come through us by our facilities and senses. In simpler terms, what we could experience ultimately depended on the nature of the facilities which we possess. 
For Schopenhauer there is only one undifferentiated 'thing in itself' and this is existence as a thing in itself. For this he uses the term 'WILL'. Consequently this can be confused with the term 'free will' and therefore is a bad choice. The concept of will in Schopenhauer is the same according to Nietzsche as 'eternal fire' in Heraclitus (a pre-Socratic). Nietzsche hated Socrates such as Plato and believed that the Socrates were only trying to think their way out of things and it would never work.

All experience is subject dependent. Therefore we could see reality in 2 ways (which is named the double aspect theory). Things in themselves independent of experience. Similar to Kant’s theory of noumnea, but for Schopenhauer all noumnea are the same thing – a ‘everything as a thing in itself’. This is an example of his term the will. His work was securely in the mainstream of Western Philosophy and he knew about Buddism and Hinduism. Due to this, he was the only major Western Philosopher to draw parallels between Western and Eastern thought.

Nietzsche believed in the term ‘good is dead’ and thought that the future would be full of violence. Not only this but also thought that humanity was a passing phase, ultimately branding him anti-human/Christian. Nietzsche’s main book was named The Birth of Tragedy and focused on the art form that transcended the pessimism of a meanless world. 

28/03/2012

Weber Seminar - Summary

4 Fundamental types of social action;
1. Instrumental rational action - Performed due to social status and security factors. Ultimately doing something to further yourself.
2. Value rational action - It is a good thing to do
3. Affectual emotional action - Emotional reason behind it
4. Traditional - what you believe should be done in society. 'Just because'. 


Weber believes there is no absolute knowledge. This could possibly be related to Hegel and the way in which Hegel believed knowledge is the instrument used to get hold of the absolute. 
The first bureaucratic state was the German Empire. The Prussian army was the heart of the state and was also highly bureaucratic. 
A bureaucracy is a rule conducted from a desk/office. The world comes from the French word 'Bureau' meaning desk. 


Weber and Bureaucracy
- Weber was a German socialist and at the time of the German empire people were directed by rules which were impersonally applied. 
- These were staffed by full time professionals who lived off a salary. 
- Credentialism relates to the preoccupation with formal educational qualifications. 
- The 'ideal type' of bureaucracy is ensuring efficient functioning of the organisation. 
- Capitalists seek machinery to enlarge profits
-  Karl Marx had a class interest
- Nietzche - believed we should never be obedient. What we believe is right.  
- Weber said that truth is rationalisation. E.g. going out drinking to meet friends. Ultimately, I see it as kind of the excuse you make to do something. 
- Prussian Bureaucracy - created new jobs and therefore a new class; the middle class.
- Non-teleological idea belonged to Weber
- Weber thinks that you can use a hypothesis in human behaviour not just science - scientific method.
He believes that you can use scientific methods on humans.
- If you create a hierarchy in 1 country then one in another the hypothesis is that you will create a war.
- Weber is a social scientist and this relates to his 4 types of social action shown at the beginning of this post.
- Bureaucratics HAVE to stick to the rules. They get paid a salary to stick by these specific rules.
- The state is a monopoly of legitimate violence. We can not take the violence into our own hands as that is the states job.

Weber - Lecture

The Big 4
Marx (class, ideology, economics)
Nietzshe (morality, culture)
Weber (power, legitimacy, domination)
Freud (sexuality, irrationality, sub-conscious)


Max Weber came up with a general theory of rationalisation. Weber believed the death of civilisation is through bordem and that creative people are seen as lunatics. Marx's theory is that classes have to beat other classes and so on. An example of this is the Paris Commune and how for the first time in History the establishment was overturned, even if only for a few days. After the 1870's along came anti-semitism, corruption, Moulan Rouge, prostitution, racism and war. This all results in the start of WW1. 


1871- Franco-Prussian War
        - There was a big impact on Germany; Germany turns into the German empire after the win of Prussia. Germany was a geographical region with different countries who spoke German. With the defeat of France, all the German speaking countries except Austria join to create the German empire. 
Germany was the 1st modern bureaucratic state. 
BUREAU- French word for office
CRATIC - Political


Nation building requires officials such as doctors, factory inspectors etc. German bureaucracy was incredibly efficient and the universities at the time were very similar to the military. University students wore similar uniforms to the military.
50% of parents in this generation work for the state in places such as schools, offices, police officers, doctors and so on. Karl Marx believed our parents who do work in bureaucratic jobs would be dead/struggling at this time. However it actually allowed for the rise of the middle class with loans and banking etc. 
Max Weber analysed the state as a whole and believed that in some way we would all be a cog, connected to one another, then other connected to the state. Weber (much like Marx) is Kantian and believed that humans can not know the objects in themselves, no absolute reality; we only have a mental picture - the ideal types of organisation such as socialism, nationalism and liberalism. 
The meaning of Teleological is that we are going somewhere, the known process of development. 


Method in sociological is Kantian - scientific - hypothesis + successive approximation to truth. 
There is no absolute knowledge, but it is possible to be honest and to have reasonable truths. 
Kant believed of the internal feeling when being honest. Journalists use opinion as you can't know the actual truth about a murder etc. So J's often use such ideas of Kant. 


Weber has 4 fundamental types of social action
1. Instrumental-rational action (social status + security factors)
- when you did it for rational good
2. Value-rational action
- It is a good thing to do e.g. coming to the lecture. It shows values and is educationally good
3.-emotional affirmation/disaffirmation (oriental)
- Because you have affection for someone. Coming to a lecture as you love someone who is in it.
4. Traditional (rational inheritance-anticipating) orientation. Affectual
- It is tradition. E.g. Family BBQ's, you have to go as it is a family tradition etc.


There are also different types of authority;
- Traditional (family, ceremonies, ritual submission)
- Charismatic- people who we obey (doctors; even though they give us weird pills we trust that they know what they are doing) 

08/03/2012

Politics

It won't surprise me if anyone reading this has stopped simply by reading the title. Yes I know, Politics, for many people the most boring thing you could ever listen to. I mean at least if your watching it on the TV or hearing it on the radio you hardly need to concentrate. Yet reading it on someone's blog, hmmm no thanks. But in order for such information to sink in it is a good idea for me personally to write up my notes. Although I don't find Politics very interesting, it is a very important topic for a Journalist -no matter what type- to know so therefore this is the reason I am blogging about it. 


When talking about Local Politics, the top level of Politics is the County Council, then followed by City/District Councils. Ultimately, both can be kind of put together therefore creating a unitary authority. People who are in the 'Cabinet' (were not talking of a place you keep your glasses or fine china), are the highest ranking members of the Government. The Shadow Cabinet relates to rival parties. The often order would go - MPs - Cabinet - Shadow Cabinet - PMQ's. 
Civil Servants are the people who make/stop things from happening. These people are NOT elected, yet get paid a large sum of money to do their job. These people are neutral and are not on one specific political side. Ultimately, they are servants of the public. 


National Politics
The press are named the 4th estate in National Politics. Journalists sniff for corruption and check the politicians are doing their job. Not only this but Journalists have privilege to allow them to talk and write stories. The Police allow Journalists to do so as they want to show that they are doing their job properly, therefore allowing Journalists this privilege. 
John Wilkes is a hero of Journalism. He is also the only Journalist who has a statue which is situated off fleet street; the street where all the large newspapers were situated. 
Wilkes was forced into exile numerous times and called the King a liar. All of which are obviously defamatory statements. His newspaper was named The North Britton and attacked a number of people including Lord Brute, an MP. All in all Wilkes established privilege for us Journalists allowing us to write about parliament and allow for free speech and the constitutional basis of free speech. The rules of privilege means that you can report basically anything said in the House of Commons but as a Journalist you must not forget the Sub Judice rule which is contempt. 


Now going on to fair comment, it provides a defence if a comment is an opinion, supported by facts, is honest and is in the matter of the public interest. With your comment you can basically say what you like about politicians and in newspapers there is no need for balance. Consequently, in TV and radio you are expected to be balanced. 


Voting in the commons is formally called a 'division'. The parties try to control the way in which their MP's vote through whipping, unless there is a free vote. Whipping relates to tough people who keep everyone in line. They are the parties enforcers and they threaten punishment for party members who ensure that they vote according to the official party policy. These people are selected by the Prime Minister. 
The people in the House of Lords are not elected, they are sometimes experts in their fields and also are often rich. All laws have to be approved by both Houses of Parliament and Lords. 
- The lords are not elected and do not represent any particular constituencies.
- They are not paid a salary, though they can claim expenses
- Lords are allowed to vote on changes to taxation and finance. 
-They never have the final word, though the Government may sometimes choose to compromise. 
The same amendments must be agreed by both Houses. In the event of a disagreement, the lords do not have the power to reject legislation. 


Green Paper = Consultation document, the start of a law. E.g. 'We think everyone in the UK should have a slice of pizza every day'. 
White Paper = When it comes back and is actually made into some sort of law. E.g. 'We like the idea of this but we think it should be two slices of pizza.'
This white paper then gets sent to the committee stage and experts will check the laws.
Hansard is the written document in Parliament. It can be described as the official report of the proceedings of Parliament and are published daily. 
Party Funding relates to subscriptions from members, donations from wealth donors and state funding. The number of party memberships have fallen dramatically so parties often rely heavily on wealthy donors. This then leas to claims of cash for honours - Lloyd George sold them openly. 

Anti-Semitism

So, I thought I normally didn't understand Philosophy very well until I came across this topic. Well, I had it easy up until now. Much like my classmates I found Anti-Semitism and the idea of Nationalism all a bit long-winded and confusing. On the up side I do enjoy learning about some parts of History and the Jews and the Holocaust I find quite interesting. The reason for this is through College and my Film Studies course. We studied documentary and watched a handful of films relating to the Jews and the Holocaust. The one which affected me the most was named Night and Fog. It was a half an hour documentary showing the concentration camps and the way they looked and how the Jews were treated. Images were shown of hundreds of dead bodies of the Jews piled on top of each other in a ditch. Not only this but rooms full to the top of hair, another of reading glasses. The images I saw were completely disturbing and it brang to light the seriousness of the Holocaust and how people were treated. 


Lazare is  Journalists and he was first to defend Dreyfus in the Dreyfus Affair. If you are reading this -quite unlikely- then I mentioned Dreyfus in my past philosophy blog post. Lazare had Jewish parents yet he himself was not religious. In this day and age Jews were apparently unsociable people and were disliked them as they were not part of their specific culture. At the beginning of Lazare's book he suggests that Jewish people are responsible for their own downfall. Just this alone can portray the way people found it easy to isolate Jews. 
After Israel failed to defend their own liberty, the Jews were placed across the world, split up from their small community they had. Ultimately, this was quite an important factor as the Jew's enjoyed having company of other Jew's due to their particular views and morals. Originally the Jew's were the ones who were named God's people on earth and therefore they believed the laws were made specifically at them. Some may guess what happens next as religious classes such as who were God's people are fairly common. The Jewish and Christians had a large issue with one another. The Christians believed they were the chosen ones from God, which inevitably made the Jews and visa versa extremely frustrated. 'Letter to Diognetus' was a letter written by Christians and was the first Anti-Jewish writing to convert them to the world of Christ. The Jews therefore came up with stories to humiliate the Christians in return However it was a very difficult time for the Jews as it was the time between the Reformation and the French Revolution and Jew's were sometimes banished from the Ghetto's which was were they were essentially 'kept'. 
In France, 1791, the Jews were granted rights as actual citizens. During the French Revolution, the Bourgeoisie who were the owners of the factories etc teamed up with the Jews. The reason for this was because the Jewish people were able to give aid in the sense of promoting the combination of capital. 
Jew's were long associated with the financial sectors. Today many people believe Jew's to be greedy and tight, yet in the Renaissance the Jew's opened the first banks around. In this day and age there are now Muslim banks which are only for Muslims. The common reason for this is segregation due to certain rules and beliefs of that religion. The Muslims have their own banks as with stuff such as interest, they will not take it as they see it as gambling. During the time that the Jew's themselves were isolated, there were religious loopholes were people went to the Jew's for help out of necessity rather than common kindness. 


Nationalism
Nationalism relates to the way we take pride in our nation and also the way in which we class ourselves. If we are born in Britain but have foreign parents, can be be classed as British? It is an ongoing issue which could ultimately be debated 24/7 but there is no clear answer. 
America have a great amount of national pride and this can be relate to such ideas as the 'American Dream'. In primary school in America they all pledge allegiance to the flag. Just this alone can portray the way the Americas have a large amount of pride in their country. It can be said that nations exist whilst people still have common beliefs and interests. 



Television New Media and Convergence

A rising question which has been occurring for years is whether 'new' media such as the internet result in the extinction of television? A number of early theorists of new media argued 'yes' this was based on an assumption of radical difference between old and new. New technologies will directly impact upon people and cause them to change their practices. People will then move on where old media like TV will not be as relevant as before. 
1920 - The arrival of radio terrified the Newspaper industry, yet papers adapted to the change
1950 - Arrival of television was a threat to cinema. Cinema adapts to the change releasing the wide screen, horror genre and luxury seating. Not only this but television learnt to feed of cinema e.g. film music night.




By the end of the 90's people still enjoyed watching television but they also started consuming television media in different ways and spreading the 'textual love'. Sounds like something from the 60's there peace, love and all that jazz.
In 1974 media theorists Raymond Williams talked of 'planned flow'. The meaning of 'flow' relates to movement of media texts. Television programmes cant be understood as a set of discrete texts rather they must be understood in terms of texts that exist on TV. 
An example is the 2011 X-Factor final where 13.1 million people watched the show. This can be related to traditional 'appointment to view' television but with new media interactivity. 
Livingstone (2000) found that young people spent more time with new media not at the expense of old media, but other activities.


Television has survived and flourished as its content flows off the screen and into other media's. TV remains the central medium but is joined by other media which result in a rich ecology of forms of media delivering themed content/events. It can be said that new media forms seem to converge on content. It now exists in a multi-directional ecology. 
An example of this is Channel 4's Embarrassing Bodies. It has online videos, online health guides, an online health checker and a 'share your pictures' forum. Channel 4 claims to support 'knowledge communities'. 


Paratexts relate to extra-textual elements that offer additional resources in interpreting texts. Such as websites which have character 'back stories' e.g. E4's Skins. Not only this but it can be related to blogs and online spoilers also. 
Within the Narrative Theory, paratexts can provide non-linear narratives, prequels and sequels and spoilers providing foreknowledge of narrative resolutions. 
Henry Jenkins (2006) conceptualises all this in terms of audience empowerment. Fan energies can be 'commodified' by corporate interests such as Jamie Oliver and his line of goods and adverts with Sainsburys. 


Convergence is a meaning which relates to making improvements within texts. It is the way in which new and old media converge together to make it better, much like TV and Cinema did in the 50's. 

07/03/2012

KONY2012



Please take a minute of your time to watch this inspiring video. It is a campaign by  aimed to stop Joesph Kony and capture him. Kony abducts young children in Uganda and uses the girls as sex slaves and trains the boys to fight and kill others, even their own parents. This man in my opinion is the worst kind of person and the more he is known the more the American military will look for him. The publicity is needed due to the fact that since Kony realised the American army were after him he has gone into hiding, making it even more difficult to capture him.


Make a difference in the world and a better future for younger generations.

06/03/2012

Dreyfus Affair

So, putting it bluntly this new blog post is about a man named Dreyfus who didn't really do a lot, and a man who wrote an article named J'Accuse, who actually did a great deal.
During 19th Century France, the Franco-Prussian war occurred due to the growing power and influence of Prussia under Bismack. Bismack was the chancellor who tempted Napoleon the 3rd into war through media manipulation. In 1871, the French suffered a great defeat and Napoleon was captured. Humiliation was the greatest word to describe the emotions of the French, they had lost a war of which they believed they should of won. Ultimately, the Prussians came into France and the French had to admit defeat. Yet quite nobaly Paris still fights.
After which, the Prussians forced the French to pay indemnity for a war they didn't want, therefore ending up in the French paying them a large amount of money to say 'sorry'. As people in Paris were still fighting, there was a sum of 2 million people in Paris, including the Germans who were surrounding them. An obvious worry was the fact that with all these people, feeding became quite an issue and people ended up having to slaughter animals such as Horses in order to eat. France during this time was quite a nightmare and the people of Paris were trying their hardest to save it as a country, they began to send out messages by using Pigeons but the Germans caught on and brought in Hawks to eat the Pigeons, brutal if you ask me.
Germany had created an extremely powerful nation and ultimately this was bad news for the French army who felt both defeated and humiliated.


Paris Commune
Landlords came over to Paris during this time and demanded rent and interest from the people. At this point there was a new national government which had a majority of royalists. Eventually Germany left France and once they did all of the rich came back and began to charge the poor who could never of afforded to leave.
All in all, the Paris Commune relates to how the people took over Paris and the French government were put out. This Commune was created on March 18th and lasted only until the 28th May 1971.
Karl Marx celebrated the Commune as 'the dictatorship of the'. During this time it introduced social reforms such as setting up nurseries so women could go to work, they improved working conditions doing things as abolishing night work and then there was female sufferage, allowing women to vote. 
protarian
The rulers in Europe were surprised by the Commune and in the end the Commune was ruthlessly destroyed due to the high potential it had. This potential was the fact that normal people could take control and over rule the rulers themselves. During this time, 20,0000 - 30,000 people were executed and  when doing this they concentrated on the working class areas of Paris. These people were rounded up and shot. Ultimately, they believed that if you were in Paris, you were guilty. 


Dreyfus Affair
France became extremely materialistic and their army was seen as a symbol of French identity. The French were worried about another war with the Germans. Due to this worry of war, there was a large increase of spying by all European countries. The Dreyfus Affair puts right against left. 
The right = The Army, Church, Monarchists 
The left = Republicans, Jews, Socialists. 
Now for the story of the Dreyfus affair and how it came to light. 
There was evidence of a secret and the French military found this in a waste basket in the German embassy. The army immediately implicated Captain Dreyfus for the reasons that he was bright, intelligent, from the alsace (where the Germans took over) and was a Jew. Dreyfus was framed for this and was sent to Devil's Island in 1894. The army held a secret court martial and find him guilty of treason. Ultimately, Dreyfus was convicted without evidence apart from the fact that his handwriting was similar to the one on the note. However, they would not show anyone this evidence and simply said it was a 'secret' and society had to trust them. This problem is very similar to that of terrorism in the 21st Century. 




Later on, an officer took on the case and finds that a man named Esterhazy is actually guilty and Dreyfus was actually innocent. The reply he got was "Yes but he is a Jew." This portrays the way in which they didn't care who was actually convicted, as long as it was someone they believed to be guilty of something, and in this case they disliked Jew's therefore believed Dreyfus is worthy of being on Devil's Island for this reason. 
The most important part of the Dreyfus affair for me as a Journalism student is Emile Zola. Zola was a French novelist and a Journalist. He see's what is happening to the Jew's and Dreyfus himself and decides to write an article called J'accuse; I accuse in English. The whole of his article is defamatory, naming and shaming all of the men that wrongly convicted Dreyfus. In this time it was an incredibly brave thing for Zola to do as there was a lot of hate around for Jews. Zola was then trialed and convicted for libel and was fined and sentenced to prison. He decides to flee to London, similarly to many other known philosophers before him. After Zola flee's, many Anti-Jewish riots occur all over France and right-wing papers call for Jews to lose their citizenship. The army recognise the weaknesses of the case happening with Zola and more documents are created (forged) by an officer named Henry. Later he was praised for his patriotic forgery even though it was wrong. In prison Henry feels so bad about what he did, he slit his own throat, but when he is discovered he was seen by the right side as a hero. 


All in all, the Dreyfus Affair can be said as having great importance to the Journalism world we have now, and the way in which with people like Emile Zola, the truth can come out through courage and great reporting. 

01/03/2012

Public Affairs Test

Neil Warner applied to the CCRC for a review of his conviction in June 2003. Many issues were raised in order to prove Warners supposed innocence. After reviewing the case again, new evidence came to light that could portray this. Miss Lawson who worked for a taxi firm stated that somebody came to the taxi office covered in blood and was driven away by Mr Peters. This person was not Mr Warner and this new evidence given brought to light that maybe there are other people who could of committed this crime.
During this time, there was a known sexual rapists around who was nicknamed the Vampire. Ultimately, he had still not yet been caught and could of been around the area of Easthampton during the time of the murders. Not only this but Mr Martin Smith, who reported seeing a suspicious man wondering around the area on the night of the murder, was found to have a connection with harassment; which was found when the case was reopened. Also Mr Smith's fingerprints were found on the Pool's porch. By the CCRC reopening the case with a section 19 it allowed the correct suspect to come to light.


Personally, I believe Mr Warner committed the murders of Mr and Mrs Pool, due to formidable evidence. Mr Warners fingerprints were found in the place where the murder weapon; the knife, was kept. Not only this but his fingerprints were also found at the points of entry, the dining room door, on the blue v neck pull over and footprints were found which related to his DNA. Mr Warner stated that he wondered into the house when he was drunk and disorderly only to steal some of their possessions. Consequently, Mr Knox who shares a caravan with Warner stated that Warner came home at 2:45am but Warner stated he was lying and he actually came home around 12am. By looking at this evidence due to inconsistencies it seems there is something not right about the whereabouts of Warner that night. When the CCRC originally reopened the case with a section 19, putting a senior officer on to the case, the evidence was formidable and even more so now. Fibres from Mr Warner were found upstairs and along with his fingerprints all over the house, the evidence against him became even stronger.


I believe the CCRC did the correct thing by closing the case. Although I feel that some strings have been left unattached regarding the case of Mr Smith and Mr Rogers 'the Vampire', there is too much evidence that points towards Mr Warner. I agree with the fact that they reopened the case with a senior officer as I felt that more evidence was needed to convict Mr Warner and prove his guilt. The fact that Warner took Mr Pool's jumper, had his jeans washed at 3am that morning and the time of his arrival home had inconsistencies seems to portray the verdict. Concluding, I believe Mr Warner committed the murders of Mr and Mrs Pool due to formidable evidence regarding his fingerprints near where the weapon was kept and on the points of entry.

Radio News Bulletin - Final

Pages