Skip to playerSkip to main contentSkip to footer
dmdmdtvs
  • 6/2/2025
The Jury Room S01E01
Transcript
00:00In the series you're about to see, we review real murder cases in which the convicted killer
00:11refuses to accept the guilty verdict. Days, weeks, even months of courtroom deliberations
00:17may have been held, but generally cases whittle down into a handful of key disputed points
00:23of evidence. Our specifically selected jury will review the original trial evidence alongside
00:29revelatory new evidence or analysis. Will you and the jury find the convicted killer guilty
00:36or perhaps not guilty?
00:42Hello, I'm Will Hanrahan. Welcome to the jury room. Today we're hearing the case of Michael Stone.
00:48Here's how it all began.
00:49On a beautiful country lane, a mother and her two daughters return from a swimming dollar.
01:01A man emerges threateningly, demanding money. He ties the hands of all three with toweling and then
01:06attacks them with a hammer. The mother and one of her daughters die whilst the other is so badly hurt
01:11that her assailant assumed she was dead. He killed the family dog, too. Michael Stone is found guilty
01:18of the horrific murders, but 20 years on he still denies it. Did he do it? The CBS reality jury room
01:25will debate the case of Michael Stone, a cold-hearted killer or an innocent suffering a miscarriage of justice.
01:31This is Michael Stone, a troubled man. He was attending a psychiatric unit because of his dark and menacing moods
01:50and, according to one nurse, fantasized about killing. Days after an e-fit photo representing an image of the man
01:57who had killed Lynn and Megan Russell appeared on TV, the psychiatrist at the same unit contacted police
02:03to say it could be his patient, Michael Stone. Arrested, he would eventually be found guilty
02:09by a majority verdict. In the jury room, 12 specifically selected citizens will be asked to revisit the case
02:17and consider evidence not heard by the original jury before reaching their own verdict.
02:22Will they find Michael Stone, guilty or not guilty? Throughout our series, we'll be hearing from Colin Sutton,
02:30a former senior Met detective. This is the case for the prosecution.
02:42As Lynn Russell and her two daughters, Megan and Josie, walked down the country lane in Chillingdon, Kent,
02:47they were to suffer a frenzied attack. It's one of those crimes that is in the memory of most people
02:55and, you know, you mention the names and even if people don't know the names, you say,
03:00yeah, you know the one where the woman was with the dog and the two daughters and they got hit with a hammer
03:05and two of them, oh yeah, I remember that, and then the little girl survived. Yeah, I mean, it's something that,
03:12yeah, fortunately it's something that we're just not accustomed to happening. Seemingly just a random,
03:19pointless, brutal attack on somebody doing something as innocently as taking her daughters home from a
03:27swimming gala. You know, it's one of those cases where the community, the country really as a whole,
03:36quietly demands a result, quietly demands that justice be done and the person responsible is
03:44brought to justice. A witness provided a description and an e-fit of the assailant was produced.
03:51The e-fit was corroborated by the surviving daughter, Josie. This image was subsequently shown on TV.
03:57Great response that comes back from the public because the public wants to solve this. So,
04:02you know, there's lots of calls in and suggestions as to who it might be. Amongst them is one from a
04:09professional person, from a psychiatrist. They recognize the picture or say the picture looks like
04:16a patient that they dealt with. That's Michael Stone and that during the treatment he confided in
04:24somebody that he'd had fancies about killing somebody. The witness who provided the original e-fit said
04:31that the man drove a beige escort. Other witnesses confirmed seeing a similar car in the area around
04:36the same time. There's a sighting of a car nearby which is a Ford which in a beige colour. Michael Stone
04:43actually owns a Ford. Following his arrest, Michael Stone, concerned the people in prison were trying
04:49to get confessions out of him, requested to be moved to a segregation unit. Whilst at that unit,
04:54he received a tirade of abuse from other prisoners, but not from his cellmate next door. His name,
05:00Damian Daly. Daly comes to his rescue and has such an effect and a kind of power over the other
05:09prisoners that he's able to provide Stone with some protection. And it's this protection that he offers
05:15that makes Stone trust him. And Daly then says that Stone tells him what really happened. And he tells
05:27him by talking, you know, along a metal pipe that goes between the two cells. Two other witnesses were
05:34presented at trial claiming that Stone had said things amounting to a confession. Stone says to one
05:41of the prisoners who he's having a bit of an argument with, you know, I may have made a mistake with
05:45that girl, but I'm not going to make the same mistake with you. Which it's alleged, and one can see
05:51why, that it infers that he, I didn't manage to kill all three of them at the Chillington murders,
05:57but I won't make the same mistake with you and I will be able to kill you.
06:06Damian Daly's evidence included knowing things about the murders that only the killer would know.
06:11He'd got that information from Michael Stone and something else. The witness who had described
06:16the man she saw that day was asked to attend an identity parade and described Stone as looking
06:22very familiar. Now, our jury has selected a foreperson who will be tasked with collating
06:27the opinions and delivering the not guilty or guilty verdict. Goprit has been chosen today.
06:34Just out of interest, somebody tell me why you chose Goprit as your foreman.
06:38Well, he'd been, he'd done jury service before, and so he had that experience, which was a good thing. A lot of us haven't.
06:45Okay. Trustworthy, experienced man, Goprit. Thanks for that. Let's first of all analyse what we've just heard, shall we, and I'll get some reaction from you.
06:53Did these other two witnesses to the confession, um, was that all at the same time as he was having the discussion through the pipe?
07:00So, no. So they overheard the conversation? No. That was different times, but what it's really clear for you to, to know is, I can only tell you what the original jury heard at this stage, so if I don't know the answer, it's because the jury didn't know the answer.
07:12Let's find out what your reaction is, uh, for the minutes, to the prosecution evidence that you've heard.
07:19Well, the evidence of the, to me, the psychiatrist and the nurse, people who's, who are trained to have, to have confidentiality about their patients, that they came forward seems to me to be a huge step.
07:35They wouldn't do that lightly, not with their training.
07:38I think the evidence given by, uh, Damien Daly, um, it's described as being evidence that would be only known to the killer, um, and without any knowledge of this information being broadcast in the public way, unlike today where it would be all on the internet, um, at that time, he wouldn't have had access to that, that detailed knowledge.
08:05It's also, it's also, it's also very circumstantial, because nobody's actually, nobody's actually got a confession face-to-face, they've heard somebody's voice, it sounded familiar to his voice, admitting to a murder, and circumstantial, they've seen a car in the area, like, he owned a car like that car, but not actually him driving that away to the crime scene, or away from the crime scene.
08:26Um, so, although it is pretty strong evidence, there's nothing that's 100%, no, nothing 100% for, against him.
08:35We've got Tracy over here, you've got a comment to make on that.
08:37Yeah, I feel like there's no forensic evidence, you know, there's no murder weapon with his prints, or anything that we've been told about, so it is, I agree, it is kind of circumstantial.
08:49I would like to, um, I would like to add that, um, the girls are quite young, so the survivor, um, girl, she, she could describe the murderer, and a young girl to remember such a thing, um, proves to me that she was there, she witnessed it, she suffered from it, and returning back, I don't know how many hours later, um, she explained the image of the, uh, victim, uh, of the murderer, sorry.
09:14But, if she could describe that at a young age, she knows she was there, she suffered, so I think having that e-image matched, um, the, Michael Stone proves to me that he might be the one, yes.
09:28So, you're listening to Geeta, if you're forming your opinion, and you disagree with Geeta, that's something that you might, uh, or, or find Geeta's observation not particularly relevant, that's something you'll raise with her a wee bit later.
09:38Don't forget that Josie corroborated, in a sense, the witness evidence.
09:42Another person saw what she thought was the person who looked like that e-fit that day.
09:47Josie saw her extra.
09:48We're about ready to move on to the defence case after the break, but is there anything else that you feel you should discuss between you, before we do, about that prosecution case you just heard?
10:00I find the personality, there's this Damien Daly next door, and this thing through a pipe, almost like something which is in a bad movie.
10:09It's, it's, it just feels very unlikely that he should turn himself into a confidant. Why would he do that?
10:17And not face-to-face, just through a pipe.
10:20Yeah, it seems unreliable.
10:21Well, of course, they were in cells, so face-to-face evidence can sometimes pass between pipes.
10:26Okay, a jury must find somebody guilty by a majority of ten to two or more.
10:31If a jury reaches a verdict of nine people saying guilty and three not guilty, then they must return a not guilty verdict.
10:38We'll have to remember that.
10:39Join us after the break, when we'll hear the case for the defence of Michael Stone.
10:44Welcome back to the jury room. It's time to hear the case for the defence, from barrister Matt Stanbury.
11:06Michael Stone's defence, in essence, was simply that he wasn't there, he'd never been to the area.
11:16There was no forensic evidence linking him to the offences.
11:20All along, the prosecution based their evidence on the fact that a beige Ford car had been seen near Cherry Garden Lane.
11:27One of the key witnesses described having seen a beige-coloured motor vehicle, and there was no evidence at all that Michael Stone had owned such a vehicle.
11:35The evidence was that he was connected to a red Ford Escort, but there was no evidence at all to connect him to the vehicle which was associated with the assailant in this case.
11:46Damien Daly's cell-based confession from Stone is crucial to the prosecution. The defence ridiculed this evidence.
11:53Michael Stone had asked to be segregated, moved to the segregation unit, precisely to avoid being incited to make confessions.
12:02And the jury are then asked to believe that having done so, and having been removed from association, that he's then voluntarily, and with his head against a pipe in his cell, made a confession in circumstances where that's precisely what he was seeking to avoid being pressured to do.
12:23Initially, there were three prosecution witnesses who gave evidence of alleged confessions.
12:28The defence case was always that these were unreliable witnesses, they were prisoners, convicted people not to be trusted, and people who had their own motives, perhaps, for giving a false account.
12:47That's Matt Stanbury, a defence barrister. Let's analyse the case now for the defence with the jury.
12:54And first, let's talk about the witnesses and their role, and what Matt Stanbury there representing the defence had to say.
13:00Does anything strike anybody that the confession evidence was vital to the prosecution, but from unreliable people?
13:07Yes, very unreliable, because it comes from convicted criminals. They could have their own agenda, they could have, as I said, when he went to prison, not many people took to him.
13:16He never had many friends, he made friends with Damien Daly, but he could have his own agenda against those. I don't think he's very reliable at all.
13:30But against that, you have to say that in prison, there's a general hatred of child killers, and this random attack in broad daylight of a woman and two children is the kind of thing which outrages the most hardened con.
13:48You know, they don't like that kind of thing. So I take your point, but I would say the other side, they would just, hardened guys would just say, yeah, but that's out of order, that's a step too far.
14:00Yeah, but just adding on from what you said as well, so like, the general, like, paralysis of when people are in prison, so if there's like, or like a little thought that he might get out, maybe he might make that story, like to add, like, because it is like that general relationship that prisoners have, that they don't want one over the other and stuff like that.
14:19So yeah, I don't think it's, for me, reliable enough from that standpoint.
14:24Yeah.
14:25And what were his actual words when he confessed? Did he actually confess specifically to the crime? We heard something about, he made a comment about, I made some mistake with that girl, and I won't make that mistake again with you.
14:38Did he actually categorically confess to the crime, or did he make some comment that might suggest he was confessing?
14:46Can I ask that?
14:47That's the evidence the jury had to consider.
14:49The psychiatric illness, was there any schizophrenia there? Had he been hearing voices? Was he talking through the pipe? Because there was a voice from the other end of the pipe talking to him.
15:03And I think that needed to be looked at and explained to the jury.
15:08Can anybody respond to that, from what we've heard?
15:11Well, he had already got psychiatric problems, we know that, because his psychiatrist and the nurse said about him having homicidal thoughts.
15:22But going back to Bell's point earlier about the prisoners hating child killers, particularly, or people that commit crimes against children, it might, could it then be argued that the prisoners gave the evidence they gave because they thought that he had done it, and they wanted to make sure he couldn't get out and do it again?
15:41On that point, we hear or we heard that some of the evidence given by Daley would only be known by the killer themselves.
15:56Now, if that detail had been passed over as part of this confession from the cell, then why would he know that?
16:06But the police would have to know it, wouldn't they?
16:09Yeah, the police would know it.
16:10The police would know, but how would the next door cellmate know that information, unless he'd been told by somebody?
16:18I think what Jess is saying there is that possibly he's been told that in the police process. I don't know.
16:25Also, coming to the car, he said that there's no physical evidence of him owning such a car.
16:32Yeah.
16:33It's a red car.
16:34Yeah, it's a red car that he owns. There's no investigation that's been made to the fact that he may have bothered this car.
16:41This car's been stolen. This car was found abandoned. So they don't know who was driving this car. It could be completely circumstantial to any evidence.
16:49Yeah, no way.
16:50Brin, you're a former police officer. I am.
16:52Do you imagine that they didn't investigate the provenance of that car?
16:55They would have investigated and they would have looked at his associates to see who may have had a car like that.
17:02I don't know the ins and outs of the case in the investigation of this particular murder.
17:08But we would look at all associates, trying to tie in cars, trying to eliminate vehicles and people and where they would walk about, you know, the locations.
17:22Sorry, I also find it very hard to believe that there wasn't any forensic evidence considering the fury of the attack.
17:29Where was the murder weapon? Where was the actual murder weapon found?
17:32And surely there must have been some forensic of himself, you know, it was quite a vicious attack.
17:36Any DNA left on the victims?
17:38The dog may have bitten the guy.
17:40Yeah, no, for me, I think...
17:42The fact that there's no forensic evidence, that's...
17:44And the weapon, I think, is a big thing for me.
17:46Because if you can't put a weapon in the murder case, then how do you actually prove that he did it?
17:53It could have been anywhere else or it could have been exactly somebody else.
17:57But how do we know? So, for me, it's a big one.
18:00If you can't put the weapon with the crime, then how can you prosecute someone?
18:04You also can't put the person at the place.
18:06No, that's the biggest thing.
18:08You can't say that the person drove the car because the police looked at it
18:11and there doesn't seem to be any time with him using the car.
18:14There's no 100% concrete evidence really against him at the minute.
18:18When you find a car, you'd think you'd find footprints.
18:21Fingerprints.
18:22But they only said that they thought the car was beige.
18:27I think that's a very good point. Thank you for raising it.
18:29There was actually discussion amongst all services.
18:32Prosecution and indeed the defence cases as well discussed what the colour of the car was.
18:37What was established? There was a Ford car nearby.
18:39Okay.
18:40That's been established.
18:41It's also established there were different arguments on the different case that Michael Stone had lots of cars,
18:47one of which might or might not have been in Ford.
18:49Yeah.
18:50On the other side of the coin, there was an allegation and suggestion from the prosecution side that he had had such a car.
18:54So that was something that the jury had to weigh up.
18:56Do we believe what is being said to us? Do we not believe what is being said to us?
19:00But I think it would be fair to ask, I wonder, would you expect a murderer to keep the murder weapon?
19:07No.
19:08No.
19:09So could it surprise us that no murder weapon was found?
19:12I think there's surely some sort of DNA evidence on the victims.
19:16Could be on the victims.
19:17Yeah, always both.
19:18And even the car.
19:19Yeah, exactly.
19:20Hair, nails, anything as such.
19:22Muddy shoes.
19:23There's so many big factors missing.
19:25Not even one has been found.
19:28Sorry, the fact was he wasn't arrested straight away so everything could have been discussed
19:35and sterilised and that wouldn't be found anyway unless by chance it was found in a bin or something like that.
19:44And nobody said it was actually him, they all said he looked similar to the person that carried out the crime.
19:52Nobody actually said it's definitely him, he looks similar.
19:56But for the record it was a psychiatrist who saw the e-fit and said that's Michael Stone and it was a psychiatric nurse who said he'd given this comment to her about having homicidal tendencies.
20:05I think the evidence is taken, the prosecution would argue that you take the evidence in the totality.
20:10But if you individually go for bits of evidence and try to destroy them that you're missing the bigger picture they would say that.
20:16Of course the defence would argue completely differently.
20:18The totality is made up of individual bits of information and you've got to assess them individually.
20:23Okay, thank you very much.
20:25Convicted prisoners are not automatically granted an appeal.
20:29They have to go through something called the Criminal Cases Review Commission and they have to send to that commission with the defence team's new evidence
20:36which the CCRC deems as worthwhile enough to put to an appeal court where three judges sit and can quash the conviction altogether.
20:46In 2001, five years after the murder, Michael Stone was granted an appeal and this is why.
20:53Well of course at the first trial there was three witnesses who claimed to have heard confessions from Michael Stone.
21:03There was then the retrial after one of the prisoners retracted his account of having heard a confession.
21:15And another witness was shown to have received substantial payments from the media for his account of hearing a confession.
21:22The appeal court held that the conviction against Michael Stone was not sound, it ordered a retrial.
21:29A jury now heard from just one witness to a confession as well as the other evidence offered at the first trial.
21:36By a majority of ten to two, that second jury found Michael Stone guilty.
21:43But in part three, we're going to hear new evidence which Michael Stone supporters believe prove he's an innocent man.
21:52Join us after the break.
21:56In 2005, Michael Stone was granted a second appeal.
22:13The defense argued that the original trial judge had not stressed enough to the jury that the prosecution witness, Damien Daly, was a known liar.
22:22Daly had said that he knew details from the murder site that only the killer would know and which he'd got from Stone.
22:29Perhaps the court was told he'd got that information from the media.
22:33That appeal was dismissed.
22:36But on this episode of the jury room, we're going to bring you new evidence which Stone's defense campaigners believe prove he's innocent.
22:43And it rests on a simple theory that another man was guilty.
22:56Around that time, there was a notorious killer who preyed on young girls and women when out.
23:01He attacked them at random.
23:02There is another potential killer in this case, namely Levi Belfield.
23:06Levi Belfield has been convicted of killing three other women and girls and is suspected of possible involvement in other crimes as well.
23:17Stone's defense team believe that he fits the description and used the same modus operandi when killing.
23:23Test the exhibits for his DNA, they say, and it might prove him, Levi Belfield, to be the real killer.
23:30One of those exhibits is a shoelace that was found at the scene.
23:35That appears now to be unavailable to have disappeared from the police property store.
23:42There appears to be some residue from it left, but not sufficient for testing comparison.
23:48And also there are other exhibits that the defense would want to examine.
23:52There's some toweling that was used to bind the hands of the victims in this case.
23:57And those acting for Michael Stone would want to have that examined to ascertain whether there is any forensic possibility of exonerating Michael Stone.
24:10Central to the case against Stone has been confession evidence heard by a solo witness.
24:15Now, of course, it was known about at the time that Mr. Daly was a convicted criminal, that he'd been involved with drugs, he'd been involved with violent offending.
24:28But subsequent to giving his evidence at Mr. Stone's trial, he was released and he went on to commit murder himself.
24:39His conviction for murder still further undermines his credibility in the eyes of any jury.
24:45And secondly, there's this important aspect about another potential suspect, namely Levi Belfield, and how that links to the forensic exhibits that the defense would want to have examined.
24:58The conditions and failures add up to a very suspicious establishment case, according to Stone's defenders.
25:03The key witness to the confession, already an admitted liar and drug abuser, has further confirmed how erratic he can be by being convicted of murder himself.
25:13All things considered, it's time, they say, for a reassessment of the case against Michael Stone.
25:19Well, this is the reaction of Colin Sutton to that evidence, and he knows the Levi Belfield case intimately.
25:38I have very good knowledge of the Levi Belfield case, and indeed of Levi Belfield, the man.
25:44What I would say was, our investigation into Levi Belfield told us that on the day of the Chillenden murders,
25:51Levi Belfield was in West London, Surrey Borders, having a meal with his then-girlfriend and some family to celebrate a birthday,
26:00and couldn't have been in Kent at that time.
26:03His attacks were using something like a hammer, in some cases.
26:13He always attacked people that were alone, and I have no reason to suspect that Levi Belfield would actually attack a child with a hammer.
26:24His hammer attacks were on adult women, and he had very distinct and discreet areas where he offended.
26:36Taking all that together, I don't believe that he killed Megan and Lynn Russell.
26:42Damien Daly has been convicted of murder since the trial.
26:46Stone's campaigners believe he would now be considered even more untrustworthy by the original jury that convicted Michael Stone.
26:53The fact that Daly and Daly is now himself a proven murderer, again, I don't have too much of a problem with,
27:02because, you know, even amongst murderers there is a line, I guess, and a random hammer, violent, brutal attack on a mother and her two daughters
27:17is probably beyond the line of most people, including most murderers.
27:23Evidence not disclosed at the original trial could strengthen the case against Michael Stone.
27:29If a new jury were given all the available information so that they could come to a new decision,
27:36they would also have to be given the information that Michael Stone himself
27:41has previously attacked people using a hammer as a weapon and been charged with it.
27:45And the original jury at either trial weren't given that information.
27:50So, I don't think Levi Belfield committed it.
27:55I think if we believe the confession evidence and the past evidence that's there about Michael Stone's propensity to attack like that
28:05and the psychological evidence, I think, taken together, it is a reasonable decision for a jury to come to to convict him.
28:12So Sutton, the man who investigated Levi Belfield, believes the theory that Levi Belfield is the killer is incorrect.
28:24Ken police, by the way, have said of the forensic evidence, that's the physical evidence, the shoelace and the towels,
28:30that they've been often tested for DNA. No new, or no new revelations have been made as a result of that.
28:36No new evidence has cropped up. And to retest and retest simply makes the Russell family's suffering go on.
28:43So that's the latest evidence. I mean, Balmooney, how did you react when you heard that if we are to reveal new evidence,
28:52which might lean towards defending Michael Stone, we should also reveal that he'd been arrested beforehand
28:57for attacks with a hammer in a violent attack and that was never told to the original jury.
29:01Well, that shocked me. Yeah, that took me aback. I was going down a particular path and that stopped me on that path
29:07because that's pretty damning. I would love to know more detail of it.
29:12I mean, it's presumably why he was having treatment or what. Are other stories known?
29:18Well, you'll recall, Bal, in the 90s, previous convictions weren't admissible.
29:22No, no, I know, no. And so that wasn't admissible. And it was a conviction for an offence.
29:27So we know that. That we'd have to know now. We also discover that the killer, according to the defense team,
29:34may have been Levi Belfield. Where do we sit with that now, having heard from Colin Sutton 2? Nicole?
29:39No, I don't. I mean, that was very near where I lived, the Lee Belfield cases.
29:44And I just don't think it follows with this crime. They were all individual girls on their own,
29:50sometimes late at night with just a hammer. I can't imagine that Levi Belfield would attack a mother and two girls.
29:58And it was out of the catchment area as well. All those crimes were very near to where I lived.
30:05Generally, the crimes tend to happen, don't they, sort of, within their area,
30:09because they know the areas of where the complacent body and things.
30:11Exactly. And I just can't imagine him travelling there.
30:13He also had an alibi of being at a meal. Of being away, yeah.
30:16And there was... He was somewhere else. Yeah, he had an alibi as well, so...
30:19Was that a milestone alibi? He was having a meal?
30:22Well, what we know is that the alibi was given by Levi Belfield's girlfriend, who despised him,
30:28and had given evidence to the police, which led to the conviction of Levi Belfield.
30:33So it wasn't in her interests to lie, to say Levi Belfield was somewhere, that it wasn't.
30:38I think the point, Tracey, I'll ask you, the point is, what weight do you give Colin Sutton for saying,
30:44as the investigating officer into Levi Belfield, I looked at this and I don't believe he was the guilty man?
30:48That actually changed my mind, to be honest, because, especially after now knowing that they've tested and retested
30:57and there was forensic evidence, I'm sure he wouldn't come to that conclusion lightly without checking,
31:05and it looks like he has done his.
31:07I have a few different points. If you compare the images, Mr. Belfield has a very distinct forehead line,
31:14and so does the image, whereas Mr. Stone doesn't. His is very, very light, so that's one point,
31:21which I think it could be Belfield. Second point was, because it's his girlfriend,
31:26could be just covering up for him, so I don't believe the alibi at all.
31:31The third point was that Belfield has been proven that he attacks with a hammer to somebody who's alone,
31:37adult women, said by the prosecution, but it could be that the mum was alone,
31:42the daughters were still in the swimming pool or two.
31:44No, no, they were together.
31:45All three of them were together. Okay, that, ignore the third point, the first two, it is then.
31:50Can anybody respond to that?
31:51Yes. So, first of all, I agree with the first point you made with the distinct mark on the forehead.
31:56I picked that up myself, that it was quite similar. The second point you raised in terms of the girlfriend,
32:03we said that the girlfriend despised him, right?
32:06There was no love lost between them and girlfriend. It was extremely helpful to the conviction of Levi Belfield.
32:10So, yeah, so for me, if she had a dislike against him, but she puts him somewhere there, then I can probably believe that.
32:20So, obviously, they must have had, like, problems before in the past, so if she's going to have a way to say that he was there,
32:27then I think I believe that. But I think that's the...
32:30She said that at a certain time, and then in a later date, they gave evidence that put him away for another crime.
32:35Is that true? So, at that time, she might have been under pressure to say they were at a mill.
32:40Were there any waitresses or bartenders or anyone who collaborated at them?
32:44Yeah, it's debatable in terms of that point, either way, but I think that's the only point for me,
32:50or one of the points that says he might not have done it. But, yeah.
32:55And what about, Belle, the fact that this chap, Damien Daly, he was attacked as an unreliable witness in the original trial.
33:02Now we've discovered he's been released from prison for the offence that he was in, and he's become a murderer.
33:07Does that tell us...
33:08Yeah, he's a bad guy. Definitely a bad guy. That very much puts me off.
33:13Yeah, I think, yeah, makes him more unreliable. It has to.
33:20The whole thing that worries me slightly is, I mean, sorry, not just...
33:24Is the point that the country...
33:29Prosecution said the country as a whole demanded a result.
33:33And I'm still feeling that a lot of this is circumstantial.
33:38I mean, you don't want to feel that an innocent man is behind bars, whether he's attacked people before, he's got mental problems, all the rest of it.
33:49You know, we've had... There are cases where the police are very, very keen to secure a conviction.
33:54And I'm a great admirer of the police, I have to say.
33:57And it worries me that, you know, there's a lot of pressure to get a conviction here.
34:01And that could put an innocent man away. And this is kind of niggling me, because he made that point.
34:06Which also means there's a guilty man still out there.
34:08Yeah, exactly. And the only real evidence we've got is the confession from Damien Daly.
34:15If you look at everything, that's the only final point from Ben.
34:19I also don't believe it has to be Levi Belford or Stone. I don't believe it has to be one or the other.
34:23I think that maybe the police have concentrated so much on one or the other that they've completely convinced themselves it isn't Levi Belford, there must be Stone.
34:31Well, these, you've very clearly now established all the issues that you're going to have to debate in part four,
34:36which is when I'm going to ask you to come to a verdict.
34:38So, it's their turn next. Join us in part four.
34:42Welcome back. It's time. Time for our jury to come to their verdict.
35:03Is Michael Stone guilty or not guilty? First, a summary of the prosecution and defence case.
35:10In a horrific case, a mother and two daughters were attacked.
35:18Lynn Russell and her little girl Megan were killed.
35:21The other daughter, Josie, survived her appalling injuries.
35:24Michael Stone was arrested.
35:26Witnesses claimed they had seen someone like him at the scene of the crime, saw a car the like of which he owned.
35:32Police also point to a psychiatric nurse who said that Stone had fantasised about killing.
35:38And then there is the confession he made to a fellow prisoner whilst on remand.
35:43Two juries believed Damien Daly, the man who heard Stone, admit his guilt.
35:48The defence points to a mystery about disappearing evidence which might clear Stone,
35:53the unreliability of the confession evidence made even more pronounced by the latest revelation about the man to whom he confessed.
36:00Then there's the failure of the police to really prove Stone ever owned,
36:03the sort of car scene at the murder scene and the absence of any forensic evidence.
36:08So, to our jury, Gurpreet, over to you.
36:17Alright, so you wanna just, shall we just start from the top and just work our way down for our opinions and what we think?
36:23Is that alright, yeah? That's fine.
36:24Right, yeah, perfect.
36:26I don't think there's enough evidence.
36:29Everything points to someone like Stone, a car like, a nurse's statement, one nurse's statement.
36:41And if he's got mental health issues, most mental health patients might state something like that.
36:51It was the prisoner who said he was the witness to the admission of the murderer, who was a murderer himself.
37:00There are no forensic evidence to commit him whatsoever, no actual 100% proof.
37:11The only two credible witnesses, really, are a psychiatric nurse or a nurse, who he could well have been trying to impress with the news of this horrendous thing that had been going on, who knows.
37:21And the psychiatrist, who has no reason to, you know, not state that he thinks that's his client, but therefore, if he's wrong,
37:30I think an awful lot of the evidence sort of goes around those two people.
37:34Because for the DNA, which was tested and tested and tested, they haven't come up with anything on Stone.
37:38So, if they've tested it to the point they have, okay, they might have ruled out Bellfield, et cetera, but they haven't ruled in Stone.
37:46For me, the ephid image wasn't enough of a resemblance to Michael Stone.
37:53And the only evidence we've got is an unsafe confession through a pipe.
37:59There's just not enough evidence for me.
38:02Yeah, and on the point of the witnesses, I remember saying, someone like him.
38:07Is that enough, someone like him, to put him away for doing this crime, someone like him?
38:13For me, that's not, yeah, so that's not liable for me if you say someone like him.
38:19Bryn, can I hear from the ex-Bobby?
38:21Was he put on an ID parade? I'm sure we heard that, he's put on an ID parade.
38:26The witness who'd seen the man in the park, who gave that ephid description,
38:29described Michael Stone as looking particularly familiar.
38:32Yeah.
38:33But could that be because he's local?
38:35He wasn't that local.
38:37No, he wasn't local.
38:38He was local enough, but he wasn't that local, he wasn't there every day.
38:41There's no evidence to suggest he was there every day.
38:43The fact that he'd actually, I know he'd committed another crime with a hammer,
38:48but it was a robbery, I believe, which is quite different to a murder, I would imagine.
38:55It was single women, was it?
38:57No, that was Belfield.
38:58No, Levi Belfield murdered single women that were alone on a common or walking down the road.
39:05But Michael Stone, I believe, had committed some other crimes.
39:10He'd committed a GBH crime with a hammer.
39:12Oh, GBH crime.
39:13Yeah, and it was a robbery.
39:15And evidence was given by Josie that the man who attacked her mum and her sister,
39:21and Josie herself, had asked for money.
39:23I think that's in the public record.
39:26Oh, OK.
39:27I look at this and it is confusing.
39:29Belfield, yeah, he was put in by who?
39:32By a defence solicitor.
39:33A defence solicitor at his job to try and undermine the case of the prosecution.
39:38Yeah.
39:39Slipping, let's put in a little bit of doubt.
39:42But the person that did the e-fit, they said they saw this gentleman in the area,
39:48that they didn't actually see him commit any crime.
39:50He just happened to be walking in the area.
39:53And the victim said it looked similar.
39:56Where does Damien Daly fit with that picture?
40:00Well, I can tell you that...
40:01Well, exactly.
40:02You tell me.
40:03Because this is a man who was on remand and subsequently served a sentence
40:07for drugs and violence-related crimes.
40:09And he's subsequently been released and he's got himself...
40:12He's still in the drugs culture and he has committed a murder,
40:15for which he's been convicted.
40:17That's the star witness that the prosecution puts throughout this case.
40:21And he got out early because of the testimony.
40:24I can't comment on that.
40:25Claiming he's had that confession made puts him into a sort of starry role,
40:29you know, which he would want.
40:31You know, you know how people want to sort of star in their own mini-drama
40:35within the bigger drama.
40:36So he's a key witness.
40:38That's what muddies the waters with that.
40:41For his credibility.
40:42However, because he's a murderer, should not automatically disclude him from anything.
40:49To Bell's point, Bell made the point earlier that there's a particular vilification
40:53inside prisons for child murderers.
40:55Do you think that's relevant?
40:57It is relevant because, you know, there is a line.
41:02It's in lots of different cultures.
41:04There is a line which should never be crossed.
41:07But he's in prison.
41:09We don't know where he's got this information from.
41:12Whether he's read in the newspapers.
41:15We don't believe it was put into the media.
41:18The exact detail which Daly has actually told the police.
41:23Or had he been fed the information on purpose by a prison guard or whatever.
41:28We don't know that.
41:29But that's never been proven.
41:32Nobody's ever suggested that.
41:34That he's been given the information by a prison officer or a police officer.
41:38He's just come up and said, I've got some information for you.
41:42I don't want to kind of take on the fact that he was convicted of murder after the fact.
41:48Because we don't know enough about that case, what kind of case.
41:52We don't know if it was a child.
41:54He still might have a line and felt that...
41:57It was drug related.
41:58It was an argument between a drug scheme.
42:01I feel like to discredit someone because they committed a murder.
42:06And it's actions after giving evidence is somewhat by the by.
42:12It's, you know.
42:13I think I did that before.
42:14And I'm hearing you.
42:15And I think you're very fair.
42:16I think it's true.
42:17So you can all have to morally separate off the guy who was in prison.
42:23Who could well have heard this and could well be telling the truth.
42:26And the fact that he was in the drug culture and then committed a crime.
42:30And they could be separate.
42:32Damien, is there any way he could have heard?
42:34Because you say it's only stuff that only the murderer would know.
42:37The defence at appeal argued that he could have got it from the media, the information.
42:40He could have got it?
42:41What, sorry?
42:42That was argued at appeal that the evidence that Damien Daly said he had heard, he could have got from the media.
42:47That was an argument used.
42:49Okay.
42:50But you couldn't have heard it from...
42:51I mean, do you not know when you're in prison?
42:53When you're in prison, I would imagine that you hear who's in for what.
42:56There are things which are withheld deliberately from the press and the media.
43:00Yes.
43:01Because people don't need to know these things.
43:04So, if those details haven't been publicised, then Damien has heard that from the horse's mouth.
43:14But surely unless they were the killer, they wouldn't know specific details that even in interrogation, surely the police, if they want you to trip yourself up, they don't want you to be fed the information to say, well I definitely didn't do this, this and this.
43:29That's also why they hold back information, because sometimes people will say they're guilty when they're in fact innocent as well.
43:35To cover for relatives and family.
43:36I can't see there's anything definitely, there's no definite evidence here at all.
43:40Apart from two credible witnesses, one might have been trying to be impressed and the other one, it might be wrong.
43:46For me, the two strongest parts of the evidence are the psychiatric nurse, the psychiatrist, the psychiatric nurse, and the fact that he'd committed a hammer attack before.
43:57Because, I don't know, obviously specifically the psychiatrist, how many patients they have, but to look at a picture, hear a crime, and think, oh hang on a minute, that sounds very much like this person that I'm looking after.
44:10It's just, for me, that's quite a big flag, that's probably quite reliable.
44:16So I'm going to ask you all to come to your verdict.
44:18Gurpreet, get ready, you're doing the sums.
44:21Go that way.
44:22I'm going to start with Bell, who I think we heard from early on, when we first started analysing the various pieces of evidence.
44:32I'm going to ask you the simple question, do you find Michael Stone guilty or not guilty?
44:37And Gurpreet's going to pronounce on our verdict at the end.
44:39So, Bell Moody, do you find Michael Stone guilty or not guilty?
44:44Not guilty.
44:45Kim, I'm going to go over to you on your side of the jury.
44:53Do you find Michael Stone guilty or not guilty?
44:58Not guilty.
44:59Jess, next to you, do you find Michael Stone guilty or not guilty?
45:06Guilty.
45:07Coming back over to your side, Gurpreet, Bryn, do you find Michael Stone guilty or not guilty?
45:15Guilty.
45:16Nicole, next to Bryn, what's your verdict?
45:19Do you find Michael Stone guilty or not guilty?
45:22Not guilty.
45:23And Ben, do you find Michael Stone guilty or not guilty?
45:28I send the evidence not guilty.
45:30Geeta, on your side of the jury, do you find Michael Stone guilty or not guilty?
45:35Not guilty.
45:36Not guilty.
45:37Trevor, next to you, guilty or not guilty?
45:38Not guilty.
45:39Tracy, moving along that line, guilty or not guilty?
45:57Guilty.
45:58Gary, your verdict please on Michael Stone, guilty or not guilty?
46:00I don't think it's enough to convict him, so not guilty.
46:02verdict please. Do you find Michael Stone guilty or not guilty? Not guilty. Finally to you Gerpris.
46:11Do you find Michael Stone guilty or not guilty? I'll go to you. Okay, you'll have to do your sums.
46:18You simply have to pronounce on the basis that if 10 people found Michael Stone guilty,
46:23then he's guilty, 10 or more. If it's fewer than 10, then he's not guilty. Please stand to deliver
46:30your verdict. What is the jury room verdict in the case of Michael Stone? Is he guilty
46:38or not guilty? Not guilty.
46:45Thanks Gerpris very much and thank you to our jury room for considering the evidence and coming to
46:50your verdict. This has been a for television trial based on the facts and the evidence established
46:55in the case against Michael Stone. The jurors are members of the public. The defense team
47:00believe Michael Stone's case should be examined again by the Criminal Cases Review Commission.
47:05They believe him not guilty. What's your verdict? We'll see you next time on the jury room.
47:26so
47:30Transcription by CastingWords