When I was first training to be a lawyer, I attended as a "mini-pupil" (a form of internship or work experience) the original trial in Lewes of Siôn Jenkins.
This was back in 1998 and I was shadowing someone in the defence team.
I only attended the trial for a day or two, and I have never heard the full case against him or the entirety of his defence; I have not attended any of the appeal hearings; and, indeed, I have had no involvement in the case whatsoever since that visit to Lewes twelve years ago.
And if I was ever privy to any details of the case other than those in the public domain, I have completely forgotten them.
But what I do remember is my entirely subjective sense that there was a severe miscarriage of justice in the original conviction of Siôn Jenkins.
In The Guardian today, there is an interesting interview with the now acquitted Siôn Jenkins.
In this he makes the fair point that English criminal law does not provide for any means to prove innocence, even though this is the standard seemingly required for compensation for his period of (in my view) wrongful imprisonment.
Regardless of whether one is correct in seeing the original trial as an injustice, it appears to me that for him now not to have compensation is a new and fresh injustice.
No purely anonymous comments will be published; always use a name for ease of reference by other commenters.