1. Missing MISPER file from 1976
In 1976 when Carol Park went missing again, the police conducted a comprehensive missing persons enquiry. The officers involved in 1976 were Williams and Wilkinson and Ken Johnston. Also, from Dalton: Keith Boyce and Keith Hardman. From Ulverston: Colin Towers. See "Officers Notes re Action 132 by DCI Kelly".
According to standing orders, the policy on weeding and retention of MISPER documents is such that all documents should be retained indefinitely.
Administrative Order A.1/1:
"Missing persons files - years before disposal = (indefinite if outstanding after 3 years)" applies to HQ, DIV-HQ, SUB-DIV-HQ, INSPRS-STN and SECTION-STN.
There is also a caveat to less serious items which enforces their importance: "Except cases involving: Murder and associated offences, … , Wounding with Intent, … , where life is endangered.".
Did the police in 1976 believe Carol Park’s life was not endangered so disposed of these files?
Did McBride (below) dispose of them?
All that has been disclosed to the defence are the two front sheets from the original MISPER entry. All the Police statements have gone missing or been withheld. There is a HOLMES action relating to PC Lawson and microfiche records but no resulting documentation.
Have the police searched exhaustively for these documents? Clearly this is a violation of a most fundamental policy.
2. Police Officer Involved with Carol Park
Witnesses have alleged that Carol Park was having sexual relationship with police officers Dawes and McBride in 1976. One of these bruised Carol Park’s wrists and was therefore capable of violence.
During the 2004 trial, DCI Churchman admitted that McBride was involved in the original 1976 missing persons investigation. Yet, there has been no attempt to contact Dawes or McBride or treat them as suspects. There is an action "Action 1058 Carry out background checks MCBRIDE", yet the police have not disclosed any information about the result of this action, or Dawes and McBride.
Is it usual for the police to ignore suspects who are also members of the police?
3. Police Officers’ Lies Under Oath
I believe exhibits Officer Nigel Burns lied about being the only person who had the key to access to the exhibits store in 1997. Raymond Thomas handled the PDB5 exhibits inside the store in Nigel Burns’ absence and Burns has no record of that incident. Clearly this is impossible.
PC William Lawson lied about a locked gate on the drive at Bluestones. If you stand in a position near enough to see the front door at Bluestones, there was never a gate anywhere near the house.
PC Carruthers said the Coniston lakebed is devoid of litter. Look at the video evidence taken by PC McMahon and you will see this is not the case.
PC McMahon lied about rocks on the lakebed also. He says in statement of 18th September 1997 the lakebed is "devoid of rocks or other hard materials". The video evidence contradicts this statement. Also, the side-scan sonar survey image shows a boundary with rocks only 2 metres away from their reported location of the body.
I believe the lies about rocks are to substantiate the claim that the rock PDB5/19 was unusual on the lakebed and therefore found and recovered.
4. Coaching of Prosecution Witnesses
During the interview of [Witness A] in 2002, the tape was stopped several times. [Witness A] said he was receiving a "bollocking". He then changed his story. Clearly, [Witness A] has severe learning difficulties (re: his intellectual and psychological problems and legal arguments about his competence, reliability, admissibility).
I believe the police have exploited these difficulties to extract a statement, which suited them. The police spoke to [Witness A] about the interview during the breaks and allowed his social worker to do the same.
The 2002 Video Recording of [Witness A] Statement, in essence:
- [Witness A]’ story in 2002 is based on media he has been exposed to in 1997.
- He changes his story during breaks in the interview (four breaks altogether) due to verbal prompts, physical prompts from the investigating officers, and even Yvonne Quinn his social worker.
- He changes his story due to rewards offered to him by Yvonne Quinn and Mick Wallace.
- [Witness A] is suggested several ideas and keywords by Mick Wallace which he then adopts into his statement.
- [Witness A] started off by saying Gordon Park "went to Blackpool with his missus … Well they had a drink on board on the pub. They went to pub ….. On the sh- er the yacht or something ….. I think it were a yacht or a motor something ….. whilst the kids were asleep at night", that the boat was "in the bay, in the docks", that he "he put like a powder- he said he put it in her glass ..… white powder where nobody can trace whatever it was ….. they started drinking and celebrating ….. something to do with their anniversary ….." and "he said she fell overboard" and "then he started on about some weights ….. In a bag ….. He said just chucked them overboard ….. Cause I thought it was rubbish bags".
- Clearly [Witness A] has a story in his head where Carol Park goes on a boat trip to Blackpool with Gordon Park, they are celebrating, he spikes her drink, she falls overboard, he throws some weights in rubbish bags over the side after her.
- This cannot be Coniston as the boat in [Witness A]’s story would have to be in the sea in Morecambe Bay.
- There is a 10 minute break in the tape recording while everybody leaves the room and Mick Wallace offers a cigarette and a cup of tea. [Witness A] is concerned at this point that he is not doing very well "The reason why I stopped for- for ten minutes was 'cause I was getting my head battering."
- [Witness A] was questioned on the length of time he was in HMP Preston with Gordon Park and replied "for a few months" and "ages". Mick Wallace suggests after a break in the recording "How long do you think- you're a little bit unsure, how- how good are you with sort of times and things like that, you know, length of times, do you struggle a bit with them?". Then [Witness A] is asked again about his stay with Gordon Park whereupon [Witness A] says "Roughly about four days …. Four- between four and five days"
- [Witness A] says "Cause I thought at one point, I though he was like giving me a bollocking then" in relation to his mistake about periods of time. [Witness A] is clearly being manipulated by the interviewing officers to change his story to one that suits them.
- PC Mick Dick suggests "What like a jetty or something or ….. " and "a slope, is that like where you launch something or?" and [Witness A] changes to "No it's not a beach it's a lake, a boating lake" and "And then he took the kids to Blackpool for the day out"
- Mick Dick mentions "bin bag" twice and Mick Wallace mentions it twice: "Did he tell you anything more about how he put this body in a bin bag or?" suggesting the body went into the bin bag and not the weights as [Witness A] described earlier but [Witness A] says "No, he didn't tell me that part", and "So there's a bin bag" but [Witness A] does not respond to this.
- [Witness A] never mentioned "bin bag" at all during the 3-hour interview.
- Mick Dick suggests "And then he told you that he put her over the side of the boat" which is in contrast to "she fell overboard" from [Witness A] earlier.
- [Witness A] changes his story to the general gist below, which is the general summary of his written testimony, in contrast to the version above.
- Gordon Park took his wife on his boat, not a yacht, to a boating lake, without the kids who were left at home without babysitters, to celebrate an anniversary (a golden one) and they argued about the child arrangements, then Gordon Park spiked her drink with a white powder (undetectable poison), used a black bag "with weights in it to weigh something down to the bottom", "And then he told you that he put her over the side of the boat" [Mick Dick] and took the kids to Blackpool the next day.
The 2004 Testimony - Extracts from Cross Examination:
- Q – you chatted to Yvonne Quinn [social worker present before and at the interview] about Gordon Park ?
- A – I probably have
- …
- Q – The interview started at about 25 minutes you were talking on the tape and then there was a 10 minute break. It was doing your head in. Do you remember that?
- A – Yes
- Q– Did anybody talk to you in the 10 minute break?
- A – Yes I was talking to my Social Worker
- Q – And the Police?
- A – Yes
- Q – You were trying to get your head around what Mr Park had said
- A – Yes
- Q – You were talking to the Police and your Social Worker?
- A – Yes…..
Summary
- [Witness A] admits talking to Yvonne Quinn about Gordon Park’s confession before the police interview,
- He admits talking to the police and Yvonne Quinn during the breaks in the interview tapes,
- Keywords are suggested to him by Wallace and Dick.
5. Recording of Exhibits from the Lake-Bed
The following facts show contradictions between the stories of Brookes, Wallace, Burns, Smith and Thomas. Who is telling the truth and who is lying? Where did the rock come from? When was it included in the exhibits? Who wrote the exhibits sheets? There are inconsistencies in the recording of who handled these exhibits before and after 4th October 1997.
The items PDB5/1-19 were split according to Raymond Thomas in the order they were retrieved from the black bag. He claims they were taken one by one from the bag and photographed individually before handling the next item. He claims this took over an hour and a half. Yet all the items seem to be recorded in category order. All the items were miraculously ordered in the black bin bag according to Thomas before he removed them [see attached exhibits sheets]. Jewellery then shoes then clothing then the rock.
There is no evidence the rock PDB5/19 was ever recovered from Coniston.
I believe the items were handled and sorted before Thomas got to them or, he did not handle them in the way he said.
Was the rock planted and were the exhibits sheets manipulated by a police officer either in 1997 or retrospectively in 2004?
- The police diver whose name was associated with the discovery of the rock is PC Philip D Brookes (PDB). He admitted in court that he didn’t remember collecting a rock, that he would not be looking for a rock and that if he had picked one up he would have put back on the lake bed. When cross examined about this point Mr Brookes, a fit and healthy diver, nearly passed out and had to take 15 minutes break. He didn’t remember emptying a rock from his netting bag to the container on the shore: "I handed them to Scenes of Crimes Officer Smith at the Police vehicle. I just tipped them into another bag". [please read court transcript]
- PC McMahon said there was no mention on the dive log of a rock, only "a mixed quantity of clothes and jewellery" and under cross examination "Q: You probably did not know what you had found? ; A: Yes"
- PC McMahon on the same day admitted the following under cross examination: "I had come out of the water, took my things off and walked to the van with the evidence bag. I am not too sure if Mr Smith, Scenes of Crimes Officer, was there at the time. If he was the items would have been given to him. The mesh bag was not labelled. The contents of the bag would be emptied and given to Mr Smith. ; Q: You don’t know what you recovered? ; A: Correct, yes. ; Q: The person you gave the items to was Mr Smith? ; A: Yes. ; Q: You probably emptied the bag in his presence? ; A: If he was there. ; Q: What if he was not? ; A: The mesh bag would be placed into another bag, probably into a bin liner. The contents would be sodden. The whole lot perhaps into an exhibit bag. ; Q: Were the exhibits recovered were put into a bag and labelled by the person who found them, the label would be attached, is that what happened to your exhibits? ; A: I can’t recall doing that, I assume it would have been done. ; Q: Your Exhibit is KM4 and that was at Barrow Police Station on the 30th September 1997 when Mr Smith had it? ; A: Yes. ; Q: You don’t know how it was identified at that stage or how it came to be in his possession? ; A: No. ; Q: Do you have a recollection of yourself finding a variety of things in the vicinity including a ladies comb and hairbrush? ; A: No. ; Q: If I asked you to look at any item which you found at the bottom of the lake you would not know? ; A: Correct. ; Q: If I ask whereabouts at the bottom of the lake you found it would you be able to state? ; A: It is not clearly marked on this dive plan."
- The dialogue above is full of words that show reasonable doubt: "probably", "not too sure", "would be", "would have", "I can’t recall…", "don’t know". Essentially PC McMahon is not prepared to say anything of use to the prosecution about the rock PDB5/19 and admits that it was not recorded at the time.
- PC McMahon admitted he drew the diagram showing approximate positions of the clothing on 5th March 2004, seven years after finding the relevant items.
- The SOCO [Philip Smith] who received the items KM4 and PDB5 on the shore from PC Brookes and PC McMahon on 30th September 1997, received them into black plastic bin bags. Phil Smith tied the knot in the black bin bags, labelled the bags as miscellaneous and didn’t recall a rock. He took them to Barrow Police Station.
- SOCO Phil Smith gave the bags KM4 and PDB5 to DC Burns Principal Exhibits Officer at Barrow Police Station on 30th September 1997.
- DC Burns said he did not open the bags and he left them in a locked "major incidents store room". He kept the only key. The items remained there until 4th October 1997
- DC Burns handed the two knotted bags to Raymond Thomas to formally split the exhibits on 4th October. Raymond Thomas took the exhibits to the cycle store at Barrow Police Station and photographed them one by one.
- Raymond Thomas then allowed the items to dry for several days there before bagging and labelling each item individually, before leaving them there "for the attention of the exhibits officer".
- DC Burns says he kept the only key for that also but he says he was not present when Raymond Thomas split the exhibits. This seems a contradiction.
- DC Burns says he went into the cycle store during the drying period and "The rock was there openly on the exhibit floor, on the floor" and not on a piece of white paper, drying like the other 18 exhibits.
- After the exhibits were split they were returned back to the "major incidents store" which DC Burns admits was the garage at Barrow Police Station in 1997.
- DC Burns says the exhibits "were transferred into the major property store at Barrow Police Station at 10.30am on 17th October. At that stage Mr Thomas went and collected and I assisted."
- DC Burns logs the SOCO as PC Braddock (as opposed to Smith) for all of PDB5 and KM4 exhibits.
- DC Wallace (involved in the case since 1997) has made an entry in the exhibits register against PDB5/19 marked as "handling".
- DC Burns admits that "handwriting Braddock to Thomas" in the exhibits log is handwriting of DC Wallace.
- DC Burns admits that there is no record of the movement of the exhibits PDB5 and KM4 between the cycle store and the major incident exhibits store on 17th October when Raymond Thomas returned them.
- When DC Burns was asked "Mr Thomas split exhibits on the 4th October 1997. According to him and the record nobody knew the rock was in it?" he answered "absolutely correct, yes"
- The exhibits were handled by about 5 or 6 police personnel: they are recovered, bagged, transported, dried on the floor in a police bike shed, then "split" by a police individual who photographed them and recorded their individual details in an evidence log 2 weeks after first contact with them.
- The first recording of the presence of a rock in amongst the exhibits, is on this exhibits log which is several days after the rock was alleged to have been recovered from the lake bed.
- The names and signatures on the police evidence log are not consistent. Who made those entries and when?
6. Police Lies and Circuitous Route to Coniston
[see this page]On Tuesday 11th January 2005 the jury at the above trial were taken from Greenodd to the Cabin, Coniston. There are only 2 right turns and one left turn required to complete this route. The prosecution literally misled the jury up a different route using many more turns and roads which were much narrower than the shortest and most obvious route. The jury were misled back down a different route.
DCI Keith Churchman when questioned in court said that the route was taken to make access using a minibus easier. When questioned again he admitted the return route was different and lied about the route taken [see transcript]. In fact the route back was not the direct route as can be seen from the attached information. The routes used were more difficult for a minibus to use than the direct route.
I believe the police officer who directed the coach driver up and down these circuitous routes did so to make the jury believe the route from Greenodd to The Cabin, Coniston was so narrow and complex, only a local man familiar with the location would know how to get there.
7. Origins of Rock PDB5/19 and Lies
Covered in (5) above.