Where next for Sam Hallam?

Where a first appeal has been dismissed, the only means of securing a further appeal hearing is by referral from the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) based in Birmingham. The CCRC is empowered by Parliament to investigate alleged miscarriages of justice and to decide whether convictions should be referred back to the Court of Appeal.

In most cases, the CCRC will only refer convictions back to the Court of Appeal  where new evidence casting doubt on the safety of the conviction emerges which was not capable of being raised at the trial or previous appeal. Since Sam Hallam’s trial and unsuccessful appeal, significant new evidence has emerged which casts serious doubt on the safety of his conviction. None of this evidence has ever been considered by any court. The fresh evidence includes:

• Statements from five witnesses who admit that they were present at the murder scene and who confirm that Sam Hallam was not there. .

• Material which casts serious doubt on the truthfulness of the chief prosecution witness at Sam’s trial.

• Statements from witnesses that police failed to disclose to defence lawyers evidence which supported Sam Hallam’s account that he was not at the murder scene.

An extensive dossier of fresh evidence in the case was presented to the Criminal Cases Review Commission on 20^th February 2008.

The case pointing to Sam Hallam's innocence also consists of what evidence was not found:

• No forensic evidence linking him to the murder was ever brought forward 

• There was no evidence that he ever owned (or had access to) a silver BMX bike such as the 'white boy' in question was supposed to have ridden (at the time of his arrest, he did not have a bicycle).

• No clothing meeting the description of that worn by the youth on the BMX bike (a 'Gap' jumper) was ever found in Sam Hallam's possession

• Before they named Sam Hallam, both witnesses stated the youth in question had blond hair. Sam Hallam has noticeably dark hair

It has long been recognised that identification evidence which is uncorroborated by other evidence is inherently unreliable and that witnesses' memories are vulnerable to error.  A notorious recent example was media interviews given by eye-witnesses immediately after the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell underground station in July 2005. Although the witnesses gave what they sincerely believed were honest and factually accurate accounts, CCTV footage showed that their recollections were wrong in almost every detail.

There were numerous contradictions and inconsistencies in the interviews, statements and testimony given by PH and BK, It was unsafe for Sam Hallam to be convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment based on this evidence alone.

Justice for Essayas Kassahun has not been achieved by the imprisonment of an innocent young man for his murder. Sam Hallam will only win justice when he is released and exonerated.