Protection for witnesses at last after Notts couple's gun deaths
A NATIONAL witness protection scheme is being brought in eight years after a couple from Notts were gunned down in a revenge killing.
John and Joan Stirland were murdered at their Lincolnshire bungalow in August 2004.
The couple had fled to Trusthorpe, Lincolnshire, after shots were fired at their home in Carlton in 2003.
They had been traced by men working for Bestwood crime boss Colin Gunn and murdered in revenge for the killing of Marvyn Bradshaw by Mrs Stirland's son, Michael O'Brien.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Friday, May 31 2013
At the couple's inquest in 2010, Karon Monaghan QC, assistant deputy coroner for Lincolnshire, said a national witness protection scheme should be looked into.
And now the Government has announced the launch of its UK Protected Persons Service.
A Government spokesman said the new service would introduce better co-ordination and the sharing of intelligence between police forces and other services., so people would be protected wherever they chose to live in the country. It will come in to force in December 2013 and will be run by the National Crime Agency.
"People afforded protected person status due to a real and immediate risk to their lives will receive expert protection from a national service to support those who help bring criminals to justice," the spokesman said.
At the inquest into the deaths of Mr and Mrs Stirland, Ms Monaghan expressed concern the couple were offered witness protection before their deaths, but it had been conditional on them giving evidence into the death of Marvyn Bradshaw – not as witnesses to the shooting at their own home in Carlton.
The inquest also accused Notts Police of failing to share intelligence about the threat posed to the couple by Gunn's gang.
Marvyn Bradshaw was a friend of Colin Gunn's nephew, Jamie Gunn.
Jamie reportedly never recovered from seeing Mr Bradshaw's death and died of pneumonia in August 2004.
The Stirlands were shot dead the same month Jamie Gunn died and, in 2006, Colin Gunn, Michael McNee and John Russell were jailed for a total of 90 years for conspiracy to murder. O'Brien was convicted and jailed for Mr Bradshaw's murder in 2003.
Notts Police Temporary Assistant Chief Constable Ian Waterfield has since been involved in a national group working on the new scheme.
He will work alongside the Ministry of Justice and Association of Chief Police Officers to make sure it is introduced across the country.
Mr Waterfield said: "The introduction of the UK Protected Persons Service will ensure witnesses are supported no matter where they are in the country, as all forces will have a consistent and co-ordinated approach.
"Following the terrible murders of John and Joan Stirland in 2004 Notts Police implemented wide-reaching changes around witness protection and remains committed to ensuring all witnesses are afforded expert protection."
Notts Police and Crime Commissioner Paddy Tipping welcomed the move, saying it could help more witnesses come forward.
He added: "This in turn will see an increased number of criminals held to account for their actions."
Sue Younger, senior service delivery manager for the witness service section of Victim Support Notts, said she thought the deaths of the Stirlands were a "contributory factor" in forcing change.
She added: "If a scheme is working right across the country to the same high standards it will help victims and witnesses to feel safer when they are in court giving evidence.
"Care for victims and witnesses has come to the forefront in the last few years and improvements are being made all the time."
Comments
by ShockG
Tuesday, January 01 2013, 3:54PM
“copperjohn,
Thanks for the response, and Happy New Year to you too.”
by bestwoodbob
Tuesday, January 01 2013, 10:27AM
“I think its best left there now gents, we,ve all had a say..........and its pointless going on and on”
by copperjohn3
Tuesday, January 01 2013, 2:30AM
“Thanks ShockG for the clarification, as often happens actual information is shrouded in misinformation. I think the 'actual' truth sometimes takes time to surface, and then occasionally never does. That the Stirlands were unable to make any representation for themselves at their inquest, and in subsequent investigations into these events will I fear mean this is one of the latter.
I have to say it is a genuine pleasure to have my comment and opinion challenged so efficiently and eruditely. It is refreshing to encounter a poster who does not need to resort to abusive and childish behaviour in order to offer conflicting information or opinion. Genuinely.
Happy New Year.”
by ShockG
Tuesday, January 01 2013, 12:51AM
“Copperjohn, everyone knows what happened with the shooting/mistaken identity etc. This was a national story that had massive coverage.
You and Bob are misinterpreting the police's role however, I'm struggling to find new ways to word this, so I'll give you a brief rundown of events so hopefully you can understand.
After the stirlands house was attacked, they fled to Bridlington. The police didn't know about this until after.
Notts police visited them, and offered them protection - if Joan Stirland testified against her son. She wouldn't (understandably) so she was not eligible for witness protection.
They then moved to Goole, where they couldn't settle.
After this, against the advice of police, they moved to Trusthorpe. The reason they were advised against it is because as bob suggests, it's a holiday retreat for half of Nottingham. - including those who'd taken out the contract.
What happened to them was horrific, which is what's led to the change in law regarding witness protection. To say that the police moved them there, or suggested it as a sensible destination however is totally inaccurate.
This is all information you can get yourself, with a simple search for the IPCC report into the incident.”
by copperjohn3
Monday, December 31 2012, 11:26PM
“"The inquest also accused Notts Police of failing to share intelligence about the threat posed to the couple by Gunn's gang."
In addition to this failure to inform the Lincs Police of intelligence held regarding the possibility of violent retribution being sought against the Stirlands, a number of Notts Police officers were found to have been informing the gang about the progress of the Police's own investigations.
Bobs comment regarding the foolhardiness of relocating the Stirlands in an area known to have been frequented, and somewhat under the influence of the gang, is a credible one. It was a ridiculous decision compounded by the above mentioned failures.
Bobs assertion that Marvyn Bradshaw was not the intended target is indeed correct, sadly despite this grave error Michael O'Brien never displayed remorse. On the contrary he reveled in his actions, some of his outbursts at trial are simply too awful to repeat.
Why do the media continue to demonise Bestwood? These events took place EIGHT years ago!”
by bestwoodbob
Monday, December 31 2012, 6:09PM
“shock G
What you read in the post is very often far from the truth, i was there that night and i know the full story, and i know a lot of truth that was never published, i just think its best left in the past now, and for the media to stop "digging" it all up time after time, which in turn gets peoples goat , that leads to other things happening!
if its took the police 8 years to sort "A NATIONAL" witness protection scheme out it just shows how far behind they really are!!
Bobby Stokes happy new year to all my "red arrow friends" xx”
by Trentend1967
Monday, December 31 2012, 3:45PM
“Must have been Inspector non Clouseau who moved the poor couple to Nottingham- by-the-sea.”
by ShockG
Monday, December 31 2012, 3:32PM
“Bob, why do you think the Police moved the Stirlands? Where are you getting this information from? You're clearly reading a different article to the rest of us.”
by bestwoodbob
Monday, December 31 2012, 2:27PM
“So shock G
YOU think o brien shot a marvyn bradshaw then went home and told his mum?
your a joker!!!
it wasnt a revenge killing either , o brien went back to the pub after being hit by someone and went back to kill or hurt him.......but he got the wrong person....................
"At the inquest into the deaths of Mr and Mrs Stirland, Ms Monaghan expressed concern the couple were offered witness protection before their deaths, but it had been conditional on them giving evidence into the death of Marvyn Bradshaw – not as witnesses to the shooting at their own home in Carlton."
the reason the police moved them was because of the shooting in carlton!”
by ShockG
Sunday, December 30 2012, 9:47PM
“Bestwoodbob - Everything you need is in the article. They were potential witnesses in the Marvyn Bradshaw murder (ie if her son had mentioned it to her). You're probably getting confused with eye-witnesses, which are a different thing.
Also, the Police didn't move them anywhere, which is kind of the point of the article if you bother to read it.”