0:00:06 > 0:00:07In 1996,
0:00:07 > 0:00:09the murders of Lin and Megan Russell
0:00:09 > 0:00:11and attempted murder of Josie Russell
0:00:11 > 0:00:15on a quiet country lane in Kent horrified a nation.
0:00:17 > 0:00:19- TV:- '..one of the most tragic events of the summer.
0:00:19 > 0:00:22'A case unprecedented in British criminal history.'
0:00:23 > 0:00:26The hunt for the killer was one of the biggest stories of the decade.
0:00:29 > 0:00:30'Since the investigation began,
0:00:30 > 0:00:32'more than 9,000 people have been interviewed
0:00:32 > 0:00:34'and a thousand witness statements taken.'
0:00:38 > 0:00:41A year-long manhunt led to Michael Stone being convicted...
0:00:43 > 0:00:44..and sentenced to life in prison.
0:00:46 > 0:00:50'The judge told him there can't be anyone in this country who does not
0:00:50 > 0:00:52'understand the horror of these offences.
0:00:52 > 0:00:56'At that point, Stone out shouted out, "It wasn't me, Your Honour.
0:00:56 > 0:00:57' "I didn't do it." '
0:01:00 > 0:01:02But since that verdict,
0:01:02 > 0:01:06the case continues to make headlines, with doubts being raised
0:01:06 > 0:01:08about Stone's guilt.
0:01:08 > 0:01:13Michael Stone's conviction hung on a very delicate thread.
0:01:13 > 0:01:16There's a considerable question mark about whether this kind of evidence
0:01:16 > 0:01:17can safely be used at all.
0:01:19 > 0:01:23And Stone himself has stuck to the same story.
0:01:24 > 0:01:26'I never murdered them people and I had nothing to do with it.
0:01:26 > 0:01:28'And that's why I'm innocent.'
0:01:30 > 0:01:33But is he a liar and a killer?
0:01:33 > 0:01:35Or could the wrong man be in prison?
0:01:39 > 0:01:41Now, 20 years on,
0:01:41 > 0:01:45a panel of independent experts with decades of experience in criminal
0:01:45 > 0:01:49justice has agreed to review the original case files.
0:01:49 > 0:01:54You're looking at a case from 1996 with 2016 eyes.
0:01:56 > 0:01:59Together they're testing the evidence...
0:01:59 > 0:02:02This one lace contained the key to who killed this family.
0:02:04 > 0:02:05..searching for new clues...
0:02:07 > 0:02:09This has left a lot of unanswered questions.
0:02:09 > 0:02:12The DNA can't be Michael Stone's.
0:02:12 > 0:02:17..and digging deep into one of Britain's most notorious crimes...
0:02:17 > 0:02:21To me, it puts him as prime suspect.
0:02:21 > 0:02:25..to see if justice has been done.
0:02:25 > 0:02:28If it's not Michael Stone, then who is it,
0:02:28 > 0:02:31and where's that individual been for the last 20 years?
0:02:47 > 0:02:51The case review is reaching its halfway point.
0:02:51 > 0:02:56For the last two days, the panel of leading experts from policing,
0:02:56 > 0:02:59forensic science and the law,
0:02:59 > 0:03:01have been examining the crime and investigation.
0:03:01 > 0:03:05It's a crime of a psychopath.
0:03:05 > 0:03:10All the victims have suffered blunt-force trauma to their heads.
0:03:11 > 0:03:15They've analysed eyewitness accounts describing a white man...
0:03:15 > 0:03:17That's the e-fit.
0:03:17 > 0:03:19..driving a beige car.
0:03:19 > 0:03:24He says, "I thought it was an old Escort in beige."
0:03:24 > 0:03:27They've examined evidence, including a blood-covered lace...
0:03:29 > 0:03:31..and towelling used to tie up the victims.
0:03:34 > 0:03:38They found that none of it directly connected to Michael Stone.
0:03:38 > 0:03:40Where does this put us?
0:03:40 > 0:03:43It's not providing any forensic link to Michael Stone, still.
0:03:44 > 0:03:47But they did discover that Stone was a known heroin addict
0:03:47 > 0:03:48with a violent side...
0:03:50 > 0:03:52He attacked a man he'd known from childhood,
0:03:52 > 0:03:54stabbing him in the chest while he was sleeping.
0:03:54 > 0:03:57..and that just days before the Chillenden murders
0:03:57 > 0:04:00he'd been making threats to kill.
0:04:00 > 0:04:03This makes the hairs on my arm come up.
0:04:03 > 0:04:05It's so cold.
0:04:06 > 0:04:08They heard that three prisoners
0:04:08 > 0:04:11testified that he confessed to the crimes in jail.
0:04:12 > 0:04:14It was like being told a horror story.
0:04:16 > 0:04:18But two of them were discredited
0:04:18 > 0:04:20and Stone's conviction was overturned...
0:04:23 > 0:04:25..and a retrial was ordered.
0:04:29 > 0:04:31The jury has begun hearing evidence
0:04:31 > 0:04:33in the second trial of Michael Stone,
0:04:33 > 0:04:36who's accused of attacking three members of the same family.
0:04:36 > 0:04:4041-year-old Michael Stone was brought to court to face two charges
0:04:40 > 0:04:41of murder and one of attempted murder.
0:04:41 > 0:04:43He denies them all.
0:04:44 > 0:04:48Stone's second trial started at Nottingham Crown Court
0:04:48 > 0:04:50in September 2001.
0:04:55 > 0:04:59But within days, it travelled 200 miles to rural Kent.
0:05:01 > 0:05:05- REPORTER:- Escorted by the police in a car with its windows blacked out,
0:05:05 > 0:05:09Michael Stone was brought to the isolated country lane.
0:05:09 > 0:05:12Without leaving the vehicle, he then watched as the trial judge,
0:05:12 > 0:05:17lawyers and the jury of nine men and three women spent 45 minutes seeing
0:05:17 > 0:05:20for themselves the scene of this horrific attack.
0:05:21 > 0:05:26The prosecution case against Stone argued the location could explain
0:05:26 > 0:05:28Michael Stone's motive for the murders.
0:05:32 > 0:05:34And this is where the panel begins
0:05:34 > 0:05:36the next stage of its review of the case.
0:05:42 > 0:05:48There is Chillenden, Michael Stone lived the other direction,
0:05:48 > 0:05:50not even on this map.
0:05:50 > 0:05:54The prosecution case was that Stone was a known burglar and thief,
0:05:54 > 0:05:59that he travelled from Chatham, one of the Medway Towns,
0:05:59 > 0:06:01to the village of Chillenden -
0:06:01 > 0:06:03it's about 40 miles -
0:06:03 > 0:06:05to commit a burglary or a robbery.
0:06:05 > 0:06:07This was to feed his drug habit.
0:06:08 > 0:06:11'With every case that a barrister does,
0:06:11 > 0:06:14'you have to think about what the motive'
0:06:14 > 0:06:17might have been. You don't need a motive to prove a case,
0:06:17 > 0:06:21but without a motive, you might not be able to prove a case
0:06:21 > 0:06:23if you're prosecuting.
0:06:23 > 0:06:25One thing that puzzles me is
0:06:25 > 0:06:28it's believed that
0:06:28 > 0:06:31this crime could be a robbery gone wrong.
0:06:31 > 0:06:36But then you look at what items capable of being stolen of value
0:06:36 > 0:06:39were still left at the scene and not taken.
0:06:40 > 0:06:44Lin Russell had a necklace on that was left on her,
0:06:44 > 0:06:46and in a pocket she had a watch
0:06:46 > 0:06:49of which the strap had partially broken.
0:06:49 > 0:06:53So that leads me to believe that potentially
0:06:53 > 0:06:56the motive wasn't robbery.
0:06:56 > 0:06:57It doesn't sit right.
0:06:57 > 0:07:00This has taken time and effort.
0:07:00 > 0:07:04The perpetrator has actually dragged three people into trees,
0:07:04 > 0:07:06tied them up,
0:07:06 > 0:07:09hit them repeatedly over the head with a hammer.
0:07:09 > 0:07:11It wasn't a quick attack.
0:07:16 > 0:07:18I mean, it's going to take us 45 minutes
0:07:18 > 0:07:20to drive from Chatham to Chillenden.
0:07:20 > 0:07:23And there isn't any other way to do it.
0:07:23 > 0:07:27If he was looking to rob people, it's a bit out-of-the-way.
0:07:27 > 0:07:29You're not going to find that many people.
0:07:33 > 0:07:38Journalist Barry Keevins was based in Kent and covered the case.
0:07:39 > 0:07:42If you've come here to rob,
0:07:42 > 0:07:43there's nothing here.
0:07:47 > 0:07:50You can look around, 360, and see one or two buildings,
0:07:50 > 0:07:52but there's nothing else here.
0:07:55 > 0:07:56If you've come down...
0:07:56 > 0:08:00If you've driven 45 minutes from Chatham to try and find somebody
0:08:00 > 0:08:03or something to rob, this is not the place.
0:08:08 > 0:08:10'I didn't know the area.
0:08:11 > 0:08:15'I've never been there. Like, I've never been there to go there.
0:08:15 > 0:08:19'I have driven all around Kent and just been out in the car.
0:08:19 > 0:08:22'I've just gone around roads and driven wherever the roads go,
0:08:22 > 0:08:24'you know what I mean?
0:08:24 > 0:08:26'But I don't specifically remember going there and
0:08:26 > 0:08:29'if I've ever been down there, it was maybe once or twice.
0:08:29 > 0:08:32'But not down there, down there, do you know what I mean?'
0:08:34 > 0:08:35During the trial,
0:08:35 > 0:08:39Stone's claim that he didn't know the Chillenden area well
0:08:39 > 0:08:42became a focus for the prosecution's attack.
0:08:42 > 0:08:44- REPORTER:- Mr Sweeney explained that Michael Stone
0:08:44 > 0:08:48had told a whopper during police interviews when he repeatedly denied
0:08:48 > 0:08:50knowing the area where the murders
0:08:50 > 0:08:53were committed. The QC called it utter nonsense,
0:08:53 > 0:08:57and he invited the jury of nine men and three women
0:08:57 > 0:08:59to ask themselves why he had lied.
0:09:01 > 0:09:05Former senior detective Jane Antrobus is investigating
0:09:05 > 0:09:07just how well Stone knew the area.
0:09:09 > 0:09:12In the case files, she makes a discovery.
0:09:13 > 0:09:16Michael Stone says he doesn't know Chillenden at all,
0:09:16 > 0:09:18yet I've got a statement here from John Henry Porter,
0:09:18 > 0:09:22who was a friend of his, and he goes back to 1991,
0:09:22 > 0:09:25just four years before.
0:09:25 > 0:09:28He said they were out and about looking for houses,
0:09:28 > 0:09:30farm houses to burgle.
0:09:30 > 0:09:33He even says, "He knew the area like the back of his hand."
0:09:37 > 0:09:40The prosecution relied quite heavily on the issue of
0:09:40 > 0:09:42the lies which were told in interview.
0:09:45 > 0:09:50And one of the first that they relied on was that Stone said that
0:09:50 > 0:09:53he had no knowledge of Chillenden and the surrounding areas.
0:09:54 > 0:09:58What he said was, "I don't know this precise area."
0:09:58 > 0:09:59Well, that's a lie, cos he does.
0:09:59 > 0:10:01He doesn't know Chillenden.
0:10:01 > 0:10:03He does, cos this statement...
0:10:03 > 0:10:05- Yeah.- ..of John Henry Porter...
0:10:05 > 0:10:08says, in 1991...
0:10:10 > 0:10:13..it said they were driving about, going up farm tracks,
0:10:13 > 0:10:16looking at farmhouses and obviously up to no good.
0:10:16 > 0:10:21You know, the area, he knows within half a mile of the murder scene.
0:10:21 > 0:10:23Yeah, yeah.
0:10:23 > 0:10:24So, to me, that's the area.
0:10:24 > 0:10:26I mean, his answer to that in interview
0:10:26 > 0:10:28was that "Porter and I are enemies"
0:10:28 > 0:10:31and Porter said in his statement, "He is my enemy,
0:10:31 > 0:10:33"he stole my girlfriend.
0:10:33 > 0:10:38"He's not a nice person," and so he may have been lying.
0:10:42 > 0:10:45But there was other evidence used to link Stone to the area.
0:10:52 > 0:10:56The jury heard that he'd lived in a children's home close by.
0:10:56 > 0:11:00It's a four-mile drive from the scene of the crime, and his sister,
0:11:00 > 0:11:02Barbara, remembers being there with him.
0:11:03 > 0:11:07It wasn't one of the best times of my life and I kind of maybe would
0:11:07 > 0:11:09have forgotten it anyway if, um...
0:11:09 > 0:11:12You know, this has brought it back to my attention because it's
0:11:12 > 0:11:15suddenly become part of the evidence in the murder trial.
0:11:17 > 0:11:20So, Mick, I believe, might have been in this block here.
0:11:24 > 0:11:28Cos all the time on the way here I thought I would be staying with him
0:11:28 > 0:11:31and it came as quite a shock when they separated us.
0:11:31 > 0:11:32I remember crying for him.
0:11:32 > 0:11:34That's why I remember it at all, to be honest,
0:11:34 > 0:11:36cos it upset me so much.
0:11:39 > 0:11:42But the fact is, we were aged, what, six,
0:11:42 > 0:11:46seven maximum for myself, and eight, nine for Mick.
0:11:46 > 0:11:47We were only here for three weeks.
0:11:49 > 0:11:53Can't remember once stepping out the door and playing or anything.
0:11:53 > 0:11:57Everywhere we went we were supervised, we had staff with us.
0:11:57 > 0:11:59And they certainly didn't take us out on long rambles.
0:12:00 > 0:12:03So there's no way that Mick could have got to know the local area.
0:12:09 > 0:12:13But then evidence was revealed which the prosecution claimed didn't just
0:12:13 > 0:12:16link Stone to the area, but to the crime scene.
0:12:18 > 0:12:21- REPORTER:- The murder trial of Michael Stone has heard evidence
0:12:21 > 0:12:24about a bootlace found near the place where Lin and Megan Russell
0:12:24 > 0:12:27were battered to death. A forensic scientist has said
0:12:27 > 0:12:29that marks on Megan's neck suggested
0:12:29 > 0:12:31the lace had been used as a ligature during the attack.
0:12:31 > 0:12:35But he said it could also have been used as a tourniquet by a drug user.
0:12:37 > 0:12:41While the bloodstained bootlace had offered no forensic connection
0:12:41 > 0:12:43to Michael Stone,
0:12:43 > 0:12:46if the claim it was a drug's tourniquet was true,
0:12:46 > 0:12:48then THAT use gave the prosecution its link.
0:12:50 > 0:12:54- REPORTER:- The jury heard uncontested statements from a number of witnesses saying,
0:12:54 > 0:12:57as a tourniquet sometimes he used a bootlace, and that is the connection
0:12:57 > 0:13:00which the prosecution is trying to make.
0:13:04 > 0:13:07So we're trying to get to the bottom of why you would think it was
0:13:07 > 0:13:12a tourniquet. In the second trial, Roger Ide, the expert,
0:13:12 > 0:13:15originally said in his statement that there was stretching
0:13:15 > 0:13:16that was more likely to be a result
0:13:16 > 0:13:18of the lace being used as a ligature,
0:13:18 > 0:13:22ie, some kind of restraint, and not just as a bootlace.
0:13:22 > 0:13:24No mention of a tourniquet.
0:13:24 > 0:13:27Then, during the trial, when he was actually giving evidence,
0:13:27 > 0:13:29the Times reported that he changed his mind
0:13:29 > 0:13:32when he considered how heroin addicts use laces to bring up veins
0:13:32 > 0:13:34to help with injecting the drug.
0:13:36 > 0:13:40But it was also argued that the presence of three knots in the lace
0:13:40 > 0:13:41made it a more likely tourniquet.
0:13:43 > 0:13:47I have the transcripts of the drugs counsellor.
0:13:47 > 0:13:51"In terms of the knots themselves, the larger knot,
0:13:51 > 0:13:53"the one knot that's placed over the centre,
0:13:53 > 0:13:55"it shows with this type of material,
0:13:55 > 0:13:59"that it's along the line of what somebody would use with somebody
0:13:59 > 0:14:00"that IV injects."
0:14:02 > 0:14:05If you conclude that it's a tourniquet,
0:14:05 > 0:14:10then it narrows the field of who the offender may be,
0:14:10 > 0:14:13ie, an intravenous drug user like Stone.
0:14:13 > 0:14:15But if it's NOT a tourniquet,
0:14:15 > 0:14:21then it's just any old bootlace that any white male with a beige car
0:14:21 > 0:14:23could have had.
0:14:23 > 0:14:28And so that means the pool of suspects is so much larger.
0:14:31 > 0:14:35To establish if it's possible to prove the lace was a tourniquet,
0:14:35 > 0:14:38the panel call their own independent expert.
0:14:40 > 0:14:43You've obviously seen the e-mail of the alleged tourniquet?
0:14:44 > 0:14:48'I've got the pictures of the boot lace, yes.'
0:14:48 > 0:14:52What's your opinion of it, whether you think it is a tourniquet,
0:14:52 > 0:14:55or you think it's not, or you can't tell either way?
0:14:59 > 0:15:02But do the presence of the knots give you any indication one way or another?
0:15:10 > 0:15:14Would you stand up in court and say this is probably a tourniquet?
0:15:32 > 0:15:36And we asked him about what test we might be able to do to try and
0:15:36 > 0:15:39verify whether it could have been used by a drug user
0:15:39 > 0:15:41and he suggested you could test it for heroin.
0:15:41 > 0:15:46He says, you don't really even need to know how much heroin was there,
0:15:46 > 0:15:48you just need to know is it there or not?
0:15:48 > 0:15:50He said that would be quite straightforward to do.
0:15:50 > 0:15:52I think the main thing at the moment is,
0:15:52 > 0:15:54if there is doubt over this being a tourniquet,
0:15:54 > 0:15:55if it isn't a tourniquet,
0:15:55 > 0:15:59then there's no link to Michael Stone.
0:16:02 > 0:16:04By day four of the trial,
0:16:04 > 0:16:07the jury had heard evidence about the tourniquet
0:16:07 > 0:16:09and Stone's apparent lies.
0:16:09 > 0:16:12But it was about to take a dramatic turn.
0:16:15 > 0:16:19- REPORTER:- Sheree Batt told the jury that she saw blood on
0:16:19 > 0:16:21Michael Stone's white T-shirt from the neckline to the chest area.
0:16:21 > 0:16:23When she asked him about the stains,
0:16:23 > 0:16:27the defendant is alleged to have zipped up his hooded top
0:16:27 > 0:16:29and explained that he'd been involved in a fight.
0:16:31 > 0:16:33What's her relationship to Michael Stone?
0:16:33 > 0:16:36So, she knew him via her boyfriend,
0:16:36 > 0:16:40who she says would go out and spend a lot of time with Stone
0:16:40 > 0:16:44and she does remember distinctly one morning,
0:16:44 > 0:16:47it would have been around the 10th,
0:16:47 > 0:16:49she saw blood on his top.
0:16:51 > 0:16:53I think that was quite powerful evidence
0:16:53 > 0:16:57in the sense that that would be a massive coincidence that this man,
0:16:57 > 0:17:01who we have all these other potential links to -
0:17:01 > 0:17:02this area, the offence,
0:17:02 > 0:17:04the type of offence and things like that -
0:17:04 > 0:17:07is a man that on that day had blood on his clothing.
0:17:10 > 0:17:13Every piece of evidence has more than one side to it.
0:17:14 > 0:17:18It is important to look as deeply into the detail as possible because
0:17:18 > 0:17:23you will often find that the truth, or, um,
0:17:23 > 0:17:25the lies, are revealed.
0:17:30 > 0:17:34Although Sheree Batt couldn't be precise about when she saw Stone,
0:17:34 > 0:17:38the prosecution estimated it was the 10th of July,
0:17:38 > 0:17:40the day after the murders.
0:17:40 > 0:17:43If you look at her statement...
0:17:43 > 0:17:47So Stephen and Sheryl return to the case files to see if anyone else saw
0:17:47 > 0:17:48Stone on that day.
0:17:51 > 0:17:54So, looking at the time on the 10th
0:17:54 > 0:17:58that Sheree Batt says she saw Michael Stone,
0:17:58 > 0:18:02she said that he called around at the address around late morning
0:18:02 > 0:18:03or early afternoon.
0:18:05 > 0:18:10But Stone had an appointment with his psychiatric nurse at about
0:18:10 > 0:18:12lunchtime on the 10th.
0:18:15 > 0:18:19There was a policeman who also gave a statement in the case and he said
0:18:19 > 0:18:21he saw Stone on that same day,
0:18:21 > 0:18:26the 10th, at about 1.30pm, and he'd noted that he looked clean and tidy.
0:18:27 > 0:18:31And none of them recounted seeing blood on his top.
0:18:32 > 0:18:37And so, you have to balance that against somebody who's saying he IS
0:18:37 > 0:18:41appearing with blood on his top, so has he changed his top?
0:18:41 > 0:18:43Is there a mix-up as to dates
0:18:43 > 0:18:48and that may undermine the whole value of Sheree Batt's evidence?
0:18:50 > 0:18:54So we're back to the point of, I guess, maybe the pendulum
0:18:54 > 0:18:57or the scales going one way and then the other.
0:19:07 > 0:19:10But there was evidence the jury didn't get to hear
0:19:10 > 0:19:11about Sheree Batt.
0:19:14 > 0:19:19My involvement started through a conversation I had
0:19:19 > 0:19:21with my then editor.
0:19:21 > 0:19:26He said the case was something he'd like me to look at
0:19:26 > 0:19:29because there were question marks over it.
0:19:29 > 0:19:36I went down to Chatham and met with Harold and Jean Batt,
0:19:36 > 0:19:39the parents of Sheree Batt.
0:19:42 > 0:19:47They ushered me into an immaculate front room and began telling me how
0:19:47 > 0:19:49they were disowning their daughter,
0:19:49 > 0:19:52that they believed her testimony was false.
0:19:56 > 0:19:59She alleged that bribes and threats were offered...
0:20:02 > 0:20:05..to persuade her daughter,
0:20:05 > 0:20:10Sheree, to go to court and support the prosecution.
0:20:14 > 0:20:18Those allegations were never proved, but Jo-Ann Goodwin's article
0:20:18 > 0:20:21questioning Sheree Batt's evidence and Michael Stone's guilt
0:20:21 > 0:20:23was published.
0:20:24 > 0:20:29In no way do I set myself up as a critic of the police, I'm not.
0:20:30 > 0:20:33I just, you know,
0:20:33 > 0:20:36went after this case cos I felt that there was something wrong with it.
0:20:44 > 0:20:47As the trial entered its final days,
0:20:47 > 0:20:49the prosecution called its star witness,
0:20:49 > 0:20:52a former prisoner named Damien Daley.
0:20:53 > 0:20:56- NEWSREADER:- The jury in the trial of Michael Stone,
0:20:56 > 0:20:58the man accused of murdering Lin and Megan Russell,
0:20:58 > 0:21:01has been told that a former prison inmate heard him
0:21:01 > 0:21:02confess to their murders.
0:21:02 > 0:21:06Daley was an inmate at Canterbury Prison, who claimed Stone
0:21:06 > 0:21:11confessed to him through a pipe in the wall of their adjoining cells.
0:21:11 > 0:21:14None of the other pieces of evidence would have led to a case to bring to
0:21:14 > 0:21:16a jury,
0:21:16 > 0:21:20and the confession is the direct evidence of him saying, "I did it,"
0:21:20 > 0:21:22which made their case.
0:21:24 > 0:21:28But Daley was just one of many prisoners claiming Stone confessed.
0:21:30 > 0:21:31At his first trial,
0:21:31 > 0:21:35two others testified against him but were discredited.
0:21:37 > 0:21:41And while on remand, several made claims he talked about the crimes.
0:21:45 > 0:21:49So the panel dig deep into the prison files to find out more about
0:21:49 > 0:21:51who Stone was talking to.
0:21:53 > 0:21:57And criminologist Richard Hobbs makes a surprising discovery.
0:21:58 > 0:22:02We've got some letters written by Stone, apparently with a woman
0:22:02 > 0:22:04who's befriended him.
0:22:04 > 0:22:06It's kind of interesting the way I think that people want to befriend
0:22:06 > 0:22:08someone who may be a murderer.
0:22:08 > 0:22:11This is an emotional connection that's been struck up between
0:22:11 > 0:22:12him and this woman.
0:22:12 > 0:22:15It's almost a promise of a domestic future,
0:22:15 > 0:22:18the promise of something beyond prison for Michael Stone
0:22:18 > 0:22:20that's being hung out in front of him.
0:22:20 > 0:22:21This is Michael Stone.
0:22:21 > 0:22:24"I like the idea of going somewhere where there is
0:22:24 > 0:22:26"a lot of sun and sand with you when I get out,
0:22:26 > 0:22:28"and sharing special moments. It sounds very interesting."
0:22:30 > 0:22:35This woman is asking him very clear questions about the case, about him,
0:22:35 > 0:22:36about how he's feeling.
0:22:41 > 0:22:45But the author, Pat, isn't what she appears to be from her letters.
0:22:50 > 0:22:52You have to be a bit chameleon-like, really.
0:22:52 > 0:22:56You write to him as the person you think they'll respond to.
0:22:58 > 0:23:01He's murdered a female
0:23:01 > 0:23:03so he's clearly interested in females,
0:23:03 > 0:23:06so you have to write to him as a female.
0:23:06 > 0:23:08The girl's name is Patsy Scanlon.
0:23:12 > 0:23:14In the 1990s,
0:23:14 > 0:23:17Bernard O'Mahoney worked with the tabloid press
0:23:17 > 0:23:20to elicit confessions from high-profile murder suspects
0:23:20 > 0:23:23by writing to them as a potential pen-pal.
0:23:24 > 0:23:26I wrote to Ian Huntley.
0:23:27 > 0:23:28He wrote to me and said,
0:23:28 > 0:23:33"Send me a photograph of yourself in a Manchester United shirt."
0:23:33 > 0:23:34And if you remember,
0:23:34 > 0:23:37the two girls he murdered were wearing Manchester United shirts.
0:23:37 > 0:23:39Now, how sick is that?
0:23:39 > 0:23:42- INTERVIEWER:- So why do it? - Why?
0:23:42 > 0:23:48Because some people protest about the ozone layer,
0:23:48 > 0:23:51some people protest about whales,
0:23:51 > 0:23:54God knows what else, cats and dogs.
0:23:54 > 0:23:57I don't like people who kill children
0:23:57 > 0:23:59and I do something about it.
0:23:59 > 0:24:01It's a difficult thing to do, to get them to confess.
0:24:01 > 0:24:05The line always was, "It's not fair what they're doing to you.
0:24:05 > 0:24:07"I feel sorry for you.
0:24:07 > 0:24:09"It's awful for you."
0:24:09 > 0:24:12You know, and it's like a ray of hope for him
0:24:12 > 0:24:14and he grabs it with both hands.
0:24:16 > 0:24:20O'Mahoney wrote to Stone as a single mother from Essex.
0:24:23 > 0:24:24He started writing back.
0:24:28 > 0:24:31But Michael Stone never confessed.
0:24:34 > 0:24:38He found out my true identity via a journalist,
0:24:38 > 0:24:41so he wrote back saying, like, your cover's been blown,
0:24:41 > 0:24:43I know who you are. I said, "Well, I think you're guilty."
0:24:43 > 0:24:46"No, I'm not." I said, "All right, I'll listen to you.
0:24:46 > 0:24:48"I'll listen to what you got to say."
0:24:48 > 0:24:53So he told about this guy, Damien Daley, and said, you know,
0:24:53 > 0:24:54he stitched me up, blah, blah, blah.
0:24:54 > 0:24:58So I said, right, benefit of the doubt, I'll write to Daley.
0:24:59 > 0:25:04But I did and, you know, Daley stood by what he said.
0:25:08 > 0:25:12I wasn't 100% sure Stone was guilty but then again,
0:25:12 > 0:25:16the police don't convict you, the judges doesn't convict you,
0:25:16 > 0:25:18your peers convict you.
0:25:18 > 0:25:20On the whole, the system works.
0:25:28 > 0:25:30By the time of Stone's retrial,
0:25:30 > 0:25:33the only confession evidence that made it to court
0:25:33 > 0:25:35was that of Damien Daley.
0:25:37 > 0:25:39When Daley arrived at court,
0:25:39 > 0:25:43he walked past the dock where Stone was obviously surrounded
0:25:43 > 0:25:45by prison guards.
0:25:45 > 0:25:48He gave him the most amazing glare
0:25:48 > 0:25:52and he continued glaring at him throughout his entire evidence.
0:25:55 > 0:25:56He was very believable.
0:25:56 > 0:25:59Under cross-examination, he stuck to his guns.
0:25:59 > 0:26:03He was accused in very robust terms by Stone's lawyer
0:26:03 > 0:26:05of making it all up.
0:26:07 > 0:26:10This evidence was crucial for the prosecution.
0:26:10 > 0:26:12It was crucial for the police.
0:26:12 > 0:26:13In fact, the judge said,
0:26:13 > 0:26:16"If you don't believe this, then Michael Stone has to walk."
0:26:20 > 0:26:23The panel make Daley's evidence the focus of the next stage of
0:26:23 > 0:26:24their review.
0:26:26 > 0:26:27This is what he said.
0:26:27 > 0:26:31I'm going to summarise but, on Tuesday the 23rd of September 1997,
0:26:31 > 0:26:33about 8pm, I was alone in my cell
0:26:33 > 0:26:38when I became aware of a prisoner in a cell next to me.
0:26:38 > 0:26:42He said Michael Stone said to him, "If it wasn't for that slag,
0:26:42 > 0:26:44"I'd be OK."
0:26:44 > 0:26:45"He said she'd picked him."
0:26:45 > 0:26:48"I understand he may have been talking about an identity parade."
0:26:50 > 0:26:54"I'd been given a copy of 23rd of September's Daily Mirror by a prisoner above me.
0:26:54 > 0:26:58"I had begun to read the first two pages when Stone began to speak to me again.
0:26:58 > 0:27:02"I stopped reading the newspaper and listened to him.
0:27:02 > 0:27:06"He then said, 'I tied them up with the towels but I didn't need to
0:27:06 > 0:27:09" 'because they were out of the game.' "
0:27:09 > 0:27:14And then he got the impression that Stone was actually getting off on
0:27:14 > 0:27:16telling this story.
0:27:16 > 0:27:21He said the towels were wet and mentioned something about shoelaces.
0:27:21 > 0:27:26Then he talked about the dog barking and, he says,
0:27:26 > 0:27:30told Stone to shut up because he was sickened by what he was hearing,
0:27:30 > 0:27:34and he said, "I told him I'll tell the screws what you've said."
0:27:34 > 0:27:37And then he ends his statement by saying, "I've got nothing to gain by
0:27:37 > 0:27:41"telling you this." So that is Daley's story.
0:27:41 > 0:27:48And so the question is, how reliable is it and how did it come about?
0:27:50 > 0:27:54The panel starts by investigating whether Daley's account of how Stone
0:27:54 > 0:27:57spoke to him from the neighbouring cell was possible.
0:27:59 > 0:28:03Jane has tracked down the former head of security at Canterbury Prison.
0:28:04 > 0:28:09What's your experience of prisoners actually speaking to each other
0:28:09 > 0:28:12through the walls, through heating vents, etc?
0:28:54 > 0:28:59I've just had a conversation with a prison governor at the time.
0:28:59 > 0:29:03He said, yes, it was quite possible to speak through the heating pipes.
0:29:03 > 0:29:07In fact, a test was done and that was proved.
0:29:07 > 0:29:09So I said,
0:29:09 > 0:29:13"Well, what's your opinion about did the confession happen or not?"
0:29:13 > 0:29:20He said, "Well, I was made aware that elements of information in that
0:29:20 > 0:29:24"confession were not in the public domain."
0:29:24 > 0:29:26- Is that what he said?- Yes.
0:29:26 > 0:29:29In that case, we'll examine that, compare it to Daley, his statement,
0:29:29 > 0:29:32and see where it takes us.
0:29:32 > 0:29:33Yeah.
0:29:34 > 0:29:38The thing that may make a cell confession actually quite
0:29:38 > 0:29:42a compelling piece of evidence is if, for instance,
0:29:42 > 0:29:47there is information in that alleged confession that is not
0:29:47 > 0:29:49in the public domain.
0:29:52 > 0:29:58So, for instance, maybe a piece of information that ONLY the offender would know.
0:30:00 > 0:30:04To test if there was anything that Daley claimed he heard that could
0:30:04 > 0:30:05only have come from Stone,
0:30:05 > 0:30:08Stephen and Sheryl cross-refer his statement
0:30:08 > 0:30:10with what was already in the press.
0:30:12 > 0:30:15So, in the confession, the thing about the towels,
0:30:15 > 0:30:18it says, "I tied them up with towels."
0:30:19 > 0:30:23"Josie has said the killer told them, 'I just want to tie you up while I drive away,'
0:30:23 > 0:30:28"after binding her wrists with strips from one of the towels."
0:30:28 > 0:30:29And that's in the Daily Mail.
0:30:32 > 0:30:35There's a reference to a shoelace.
0:30:36 > 0:30:43"Six-year-old Megan was partially throttled with a boot lace tied twice around her throat."
0:30:43 > 0:30:46Which again matches what's out there in the media.
0:30:48 > 0:30:50All the stuff about one getting away and being brought back...
0:30:50 > 0:30:52Yeah, that's in this report.
0:30:53 > 0:30:56"She was caught by the man and dragged back."
0:30:59 > 0:31:03They find all of the details from Daley's account of the confession
0:31:03 > 0:31:05could have been picked up from the press.
0:31:07 > 0:31:09But with one important exception.
0:31:12 > 0:31:13In his statement,
0:31:13 > 0:31:18Daley said Stone complained about being picked out in an ID parade.
0:31:18 > 0:31:21The prosecution claimed that this must refer to a line-up held the day
0:31:21 > 0:31:24before, attended by Josie Russell
0:31:24 > 0:31:27and a witness called Nicola Burchell,
0:31:27 > 0:31:30whose sighting of the killer was the basis for the e-fit.
0:31:32 > 0:31:35Although neither of them positively identified Stone,
0:31:35 > 0:31:38Nicola Burchell did say he looked familiar.
0:31:40 > 0:31:43This detail was kept secret from the press,
0:31:43 > 0:31:47so, according to the prosecution, only Stone would have known it.
0:31:50 > 0:31:53The Crown's best point was the ID pick-out, right?
0:31:53 > 0:31:56In the so-called confession he said,
0:31:56 > 0:32:00"It wasn't for that slag picking me out..." - right?
0:32:00 > 0:32:04The fact that the ID parade had produced a result of sorts,
0:32:04 > 0:32:07the police had deliberately kept out of the public domain,
0:32:07 > 0:32:12so how did Daley know Stone had been picked out unless Stone had been
0:32:12 > 0:32:15talking about it to him? And it's a good point.
0:32:16 > 0:32:19But Stephen and Sheryl think there's another possibility.
0:32:19 > 0:32:2123rd September.
0:32:22 > 0:32:24On the day Stone allegedly confessed,
0:32:24 > 0:32:28the press were running stories about Josie attending the ID parade.
0:32:30 > 0:32:34Right, so the main news story both in this and other papers that day is
0:32:34 > 0:32:37that there'd been an ID parade.
0:32:37 > 0:32:41"The Crown Prosecution Service lawyers are now considering whether
0:32:41 > 0:32:43"to charge a suspect with killing
0:32:43 > 0:32:46"Josie's mum, Lin, and sister, Megan."
0:32:46 > 0:32:47And then he turns up in your next-door cell.
0:32:49 > 0:32:52Is it possible those stories led Daley to believe
0:32:52 > 0:32:55that it was Josie Russell that picked out Stone?
0:33:01 > 0:33:04By reading one of the articles that was printed on the day of
0:33:04 > 0:33:08the confession, you will see the information was in the public domain.
0:33:11 > 0:33:14Police released information to be printed on that day.
0:33:14 > 0:33:18If you could just put up what the headlines were and what it says?
0:33:18 > 0:33:20And it's from the Mirror,
0:33:20 > 0:33:24so that's obviously the newspaper that Damien Daley says
0:33:24 > 0:33:28he had in his cell, leads with Josie Russell facing an ID parade,
0:33:28 > 0:33:33and all the newspapers at the time were running with that story.
0:33:35 > 0:33:37And it says, "Schoolgirl Josie Russell
0:33:37 > 0:33:39"has been brought face-to-face with
0:33:39 > 0:33:43"the man police think murdered her mother and sister.
0:33:44 > 0:33:49"The result was not revealed but Crown Prosecution lawyers
0:33:49 > 0:33:51"are now considering
0:33:51 > 0:33:53"whether to charge a suspect with
0:33:53 > 0:33:56"killing Josie's mum, Lin, and sister, Megan, six..."
0:33:57 > 0:34:00There's been an ID parade by the girl.
0:34:00 > 0:34:04We're not telling you what the result was but the CPS are now considering charging a man.
0:34:04 > 0:34:08What else would you think, other than that she picked him out?
0:34:10 > 0:34:12The more you look into the detail,
0:34:12 > 0:34:16the more you actually see everything in the statement
0:34:16 > 0:34:19is in the public domain - most of it that day.
0:34:29 > 0:34:32I've done no deals with the police at all.
0:34:32 > 0:34:36People saying, oh, I done it for money or I done it to, you know,
0:34:36 > 0:34:38get my face in the papers and whatnot,
0:34:38 > 0:34:40it's, I didn't want none of that.
0:34:40 > 0:34:41So there's no self-gain here at all.
0:34:43 > 0:34:48But the review also turns up evidence about why Stone was in
0:34:48 > 0:34:50the cell next to Daley in the first place.
0:34:52 > 0:34:53When he was remanded in custody,
0:34:53 > 0:34:57he told the prison officers that he wanted
0:34:57 > 0:34:59to be put in the segregation unit
0:34:59 > 0:35:05because people in the prison were saying that he was confessing
0:35:05 > 0:35:09to them, and this is recorded in the prison documentation, that that was
0:35:09 > 0:35:11my reason for wanting to be put in segregation.
0:35:11 > 0:35:12It's called Rule 43.
0:35:17 > 0:35:20'The police had already said that other prisoners had said that
0:35:20 > 0:35:22'I'd confess to it.
0:35:22 > 0:35:26'I said I want to go in the segregation and I want to be
0:35:26 > 0:35:31'in a cell on my own and I don't want to be going near other prisoners.
0:35:31 > 0:35:35'I don't want them to, to make statements to say that I confessed.
0:35:36 > 0:35:39'And then the governor come round.
0:35:39 > 0:35:42'I asked him to write the reason why on the GOAD form.
0:35:43 > 0:35:45'And he wrote it on there.'
0:35:49 > 0:35:51- STEPHEN:- The man who's in custody
0:35:51 > 0:35:54brought into segregation sees himself in
0:35:54 > 0:35:58the papers as the suspect,
0:35:58 > 0:36:01says I want to be here cos people are saying I'm confessing,
0:36:01 > 0:36:05and then he gets into a cell and confesses through a wall to
0:36:05 > 0:36:08an unknown person to being the man.
0:36:08 > 0:36:09How does that work?
0:36:09 > 0:36:13Given Stone's mental state...
0:36:15 > 0:36:20..his mental illness, his addiction, maybe he WOULD have done it.
0:36:20 > 0:36:22Maybe he WOULD have owned up.
0:36:22 > 0:36:23Maybe he DID confess.
0:36:23 > 0:36:25Maybe he did.
0:36:27 > 0:36:30The judge summed up to the jury that
0:36:30 > 0:36:35everything else in the case is circumstantial.
0:36:35 > 0:36:40You can only convict this man if you accept as the truth
0:36:40 > 0:36:43Damien Daley's evidence.
0:36:44 > 0:36:49Michael Stone's conviction hung on a very delicate thread.
0:36:54 > 0:36:57After a trial lasting nearly a month,
0:36:57 > 0:37:00the jury retired to consider its verdict.
0:37:03 > 0:37:08It was a very difficult case to call but I was quite close to
0:37:08 > 0:37:10a very senior officer in the case
0:37:10 > 0:37:14and he said to me, "If the jury believe Daley, he goes down.
0:37:14 > 0:37:17"If they don't believe Daley, Stone walks."
0:37:23 > 0:37:28- NEWSREADER:- Michael Stone has been found guilty of the murders of Dr Lin Russell
0:37:28 > 0:37:32and her daughter Megan, along with the attempted murder of Josie Russell.
0:37:32 > 0:37:36In the public gallery, Michael Stone's sister Barbara shouted, "Oh, no, not again!"
0:37:38 > 0:37:41Michael Stone convicted for a second time of a crime
0:37:41 > 0:37:43which ripped a family apart.
0:37:48 > 0:37:51People did come forward afterwards
0:37:51 > 0:37:54to say that Daley told us that he lied
0:37:54 > 0:37:57and had stitched Michael Stone up,
0:37:57 > 0:38:01but then the difficulty was they have a particular background,
0:38:01 > 0:38:04so they are also of that criminal world,
0:38:04 > 0:38:09and so it raises the question about THEIR credibility.
0:38:14 > 0:38:16I was friends with the Daley family.
0:38:16 > 0:38:18You know, we're going back getting on for 50 years.
0:38:20 > 0:38:24They came round and asked me to go and visit Damien while he was on remand
0:38:24 > 0:38:27for petrol bombing a nightclub just along the road there.
0:38:27 > 0:38:31I sat down and he said to me, "Do you know Michael Stone?"
0:38:31 > 0:38:33I said, "No, I don't know Michael Stone.
0:38:33 > 0:38:34"I've never heard of Michael Stone."
0:38:34 > 0:38:36He said, "Well, he's a nonce case.
0:38:36 > 0:38:39"He's been arrested for murder.
0:38:39 > 0:38:41"Them children that were killed at Chillenden."
0:38:41 > 0:38:43So I said, "What's that got to do with you?"
0:38:43 > 0:38:48My advice to him was, it is your duty as a normal con to do him.
0:38:48 > 0:38:50If you think he's done children,
0:38:50 > 0:38:52it's your duty to attack him if you can.
0:38:52 > 0:38:55But you do not give evidence against anybody else in this prison.
0:38:55 > 0:38:58And that was the end of that conversation with Damien Daley.
0:38:58 > 0:39:00About two weeks later,
0:39:00 > 0:39:02and I see Damien Daley walking up the road
0:39:02 > 0:39:05and I actually called across to him and asked him
0:39:05 > 0:39:07how the hell he's out of prison
0:39:07 > 0:39:10and he replied, "They call me the Teflon Dame now.
0:39:10 > 0:39:12"They can't make nothing stick."
0:39:12 > 0:39:16And I said, "More like you're giving evidence against that guy, isn't it?
0:39:16 > 0:39:17"You've done a deal with the police."
0:39:17 > 0:39:21I went, "You're fitting Stone up, aren't you?" And he said yes.
0:39:21 > 0:39:23He admitted to me that he was fitting Stone up.
0:39:28 > 0:39:30Looking at the criminal background of those people,
0:39:30 > 0:39:31are they trustworthy?
0:39:33 > 0:39:35Do they have any axes to grind?
0:39:37 > 0:39:40And so it becomes really, really difficult to be able to unpick
0:39:40 > 0:39:42where the truth actually lies.
0:39:44 > 0:39:50Has anyone gone through the process of speaking to Damien Daley?
0:39:50 > 0:39:51Where is he now?
0:39:51 > 0:39:55He's now convicted of murder, and is serving a life sentence.
0:39:56 > 0:39:58Just to clarify.
0:39:58 > 0:40:02The evidence was provided by a man
0:40:02 > 0:40:05- who is now serving a life sentence for murder?- Yes.
0:40:09 > 0:40:13The allegations that Daley had lied form part of two appeals
0:40:13 > 0:40:15for Michael Stone.
0:40:16 > 0:40:17Both failed.
0:40:20 > 0:40:24But as part of those appeals, more sophisticated forensic tests were
0:40:24 > 0:40:26carried out on key evidence.
0:40:26 > 0:40:29And they reveal something unexpected.
0:40:31 > 0:40:35With respect to the towel, the testing that was done in 2010,
0:40:35 > 0:40:37they actually targeted the ends of the towel.
0:40:37 > 0:40:41They swabbed these ends, all six, and combined them.
0:40:41 > 0:40:45They got what they referred to as a complex mixed DNA profile.
0:40:45 > 0:40:48It's likely that the Russell family members are present,
0:40:48 > 0:40:52ie, the victims, but that there is some DNA components present
0:40:52 > 0:40:54that they can't attribute to the victims.
0:40:56 > 0:40:58They got indication of a Y chromosome,
0:40:58 > 0:41:00ie, there was male DNA present.
0:41:01 > 0:41:04But none of the DNA components observed
0:41:04 > 0:41:06were in the profile of Michael Stone.
0:41:08 > 0:41:12- Michael Stone, if he did it... - Did not leave his DNA on it.
0:41:12 > 0:41:15He manages never, ever to shed on different surfaces
0:41:15 > 0:41:18through different activities at different times.
0:41:18 > 0:41:21We know the perpetrator has torn it up and used it to tie
0:41:21 > 0:41:23- people up.- Significantly, yeah.
0:41:23 > 0:41:25That is very significant.
0:41:25 > 0:41:29Every area where they've got a positive, it's not him.
0:41:33 > 0:41:37The questions that continue to surround Michael Stone's conviction
0:41:37 > 0:41:39have led to speculation
0:41:39 > 0:41:41about who else could have committed the murders.
0:41:43 > 0:41:45And one name keeps cropping up.
0:41:48 > 0:41:50Levi Bellfield.
0:41:50 > 0:41:53It's nine years since 13-year-old Milly Dowler
0:41:53 > 0:41:55vanished on her way home from school.
0:41:55 > 0:41:58Today, a nightclub doorman, Levi Bellfield,
0:41:58 > 0:42:00was found guilty of her abduction and murder.
0:42:01 > 0:42:06Bellfield is currently serving multiple life sentences for three murders,
0:42:06 > 0:42:09including that of 13-year-old Milly Dowler.
0:42:11 > 0:42:13- NEWSREADER:- He was described by the judge
0:42:13 > 0:42:14as a cruel and pitiless killer.
0:42:17 > 0:42:19He used a hammer as a weapon,
0:42:19 > 0:42:23and there were recent claims that he'd admitted other crimes.
0:42:25 > 0:42:28- NEWSREADER:- Police suspect he could be involved in
0:42:28 > 0:42:30as many as 20 other serious crimes.
0:42:31 > 0:42:35One of the crimes he was linked to was the Chillenden murders.
0:42:39 > 0:42:43That possible link is one that Stone's solicitor, Paul Bacon,
0:42:43 > 0:42:45wants to see investigated.
0:42:47 > 0:42:50But it's prompted a response from Bellfield himself.
0:42:55 > 0:42:57This is a letter from Levi Bellfield. He writes,
0:42:57 > 0:42:59"Dear Mr Baker, I feel compelled to write to you
0:42:59 > 0:43:02"in reference to your client, Mr Stone. If he is innocent,
0:43:02 > 0:43:05"then I truly sympathise with his current situation.
0:43:05 > 0:43:08"However, to use me to gain publicity to favour Mr Stone is
0:43:08 > 0:43:14"clearly unacceptable, especially as I am ALSO maintaining MY innocence.
0:43:15 > 0:43:20"I had no connections to Kent area until 2002.
0:43:20 > 0:43:24"I will provide your forensics experts with DNA,
0:43:24 > 0:43:28"but please stop publicly linking me to your case.
0:43:28 > 0:43:30"This is not helping my own fight.
0:43:30 > 0:43:35"I have enough without your case further nonsing me off in the media.
0:43:35 > 0:43:36"Yours sincerely, Levi Bellfield."
0:43:38 > 0:43:41I wrote back to him and said, "Thank you very much, that's very kind.
0:43:41 > 0:43:46"Could we arrange to have your DNA taken and also fingerprints would also be very useful.
0:43:46 > 0:43:50"Give me details of your solicitor, and I'll make the arrangements through them."
0:43:50 > 0:43:51But he never responded again.
0:43:56 > 0:43:59'Whoever did a crime like that would do it again.
0:43:59 > 0:44:03'The fact that we know that Levi Bellfield has done several more,
0:44:03 > 0:44:07'the only chance is linking the forensics to Levi Bellfield.
0:44:09 > 0:44:11'I've decided to put all my eggs in one basket.
0:44:11 > 0:44:14'If it ain't him, we're fucked, basically.'
0:44:18 > 0:44:23The panel now examine whether they can rule Levi Bellfield in or out.
0:44:25 > 0:44:27- That's the e-fit.- I mean,
0:44:27 > 0:44:31it's no worse than the match between Michael Stone and him.
0:44:31 > 0:44:32- No, no.- I mean, he's somebody, who,
0:44:32 > 0:44:35when you ask the question - shall we look at his DNA if we can? -
0:44:35 > 0:44:37- you'd say yes.- Yes.- Yes.
0:44:42 > 0:44:47And then they track down the detective who led the investigation into Bellfield's hammer killings.
0:44:48 > 0:44:51- 'Hello, Colin Sutton.'- Hello, Colin.
0:44:51 > 0:44:56We're calling you about your involvement with Levi Bellfield.
0:44:56 > 0:44:59That he might have been involved in the Chillenden murders.
0:44:59 > 0:45:02Do you want to just tell us whether you've done
0:45:02 > 0:45:04or looked into anything on this angle?
0:45:04 > 0:45:08'In 2008, after Levi Bellfield was convicted of the two murders
0:45:08 > 0:45:10'and the attempted murder,
0:45:10 > 0:45:13'we looked at other possible offences, and this was one of them.
0:45:13 > 0:45:17'In terms of commonalities, the victims were female,
0:45:17 > 0:45:21'that there was some kind of blunt-force trauma.'
0:45:21 > 0:45:25Are you aware that he had any links to Kent at all?
0:45:25 > 0:45:30'Yes, he did. His family had a caravan on the Isle of Sheppey
0:45:30 > 0:45:33'that they would go to for holidays.
0:45:33 > 0:45:35'But at that time,
0:45:35 > 0:45:41'we had a statement from a former girlfriend which gave him
0:45:41 > 0:45:44- 'a pretty solid alibi.' - It's quite rare, isn't it,
0:45:44 > 0:45:48for a man to use a hammer on a woman or a child,
0:45:48 > 0:45:51in your experience as a detective in murders?
0:45:51 > 0:45:52'Yes, not just in my experience,
0:45:52 > 0:45:55'but there was some research done at the time,
0:45:55 > 0:45:57'and in the Greater London area,
0:45:57 > 0:46:00'the only unsolved attack of that nature,
0:46:00 > 0:46:04'there was only one of all of them that we couldn't actually
0:46:04 > 0:46:06'realistically say was probably Levi Bellfield.
0:46:06 > 0:46:09'Obviously, he wasn't convicted of them all.
0:46:09 > 0:46:11'But, I mean, that's how rare they are.'
0:46:11 > 0:46:13So, can we just sum that up, then?
0:46:13 > 0:46:14Although you can't prove all of them,
0:46:14 > 0:46:18the conclusion was that all of them had been done by Levi Bellfield,
0:46:18 > 0:46:21- bar one.- In the Greater London area. - In the Greater London area.
0:46:21 > 0:46:23'In the Greater London area, yeah.
0:46:23 > 0:46:28'And that was going from, kind of, I think, 1990 to 2004,
0:46:28 > 0:46:31'so a period of about 14, 15 years.'
0:46:31 > 0:46:33Wow. That's...
0:46:33 > 0:46:34I'm quite shocked by that.
0:46:38 > 0:46:42Jane goes on to investigate any other possible connections
0:46:42 > 0:46:43to the key evidence.
0:46:44 > 0:46:46Particularly the killer's beige car,
0:46:46 > 0:46:48thought to be a Ford.
0:46:50 > 0:46:55There's no beige car ever found that the police can physically link to
0:46:55 > 0:46:56Michael Stone.
0:46:56 > 0:47:03We've still got an outstanding beige car from that murder investigation.
0:47:06 > 0:47:10One person who might be able to help with that is Bellfield's girlfriend
0:47:10 > 0:47:12from the time of the Chillenden murders.
0:47:17 > 0:47:20When I look at that picture, I think he's already killed two girls.
0:47:22 > 0:47:23Maybe the third.
0:47:23 > 0:47:25- INTERVIEWER:- Do you think there are more?
0:47:25 > 0:47:27Yeah. Yeah, I do believe there's more.
0:47:30 > 0:47:33So how many crimes do you think he might be responsible for?
0:47:34 > 0:47:37Um... A lot.
0:47:37 > 0:47:38Hundreds.
0:47:41 > 0:47:43What car was he driving at the time?
0:47:45 > 0:47:49I had my beige Sapphire Ford.
0:47:49 > 0:47:51Do you remember the...
0:47:51 > 0:47:53It was an E reg.
0:47:53 > 0:47:55What happened to that car?
0:47:56 > 0:47:58Levi used it one night,
0:47:58 > 0:48:02and he rang me to say that the car had been stolen from the car park.
0:48:03 > 0:48:05Was it ever found?
0:48:05 > 0:48:09Apparently so, burnt out, in another part of Feltham,
0:48:09 > 0:48:11but I don't fully know.
0:48:14 > 0:48:18I've always said, yes, he's done this, yes, he's done that.
0:48:18 > 0:48:21But I can, hand on my heart, say, at that time,
0:48:21 > 0:48:26he did not do the crime that they are saying he did,
0:48:26 > 0:48:29he didn't kill the mother and daughter and the dog.
0:48:29 > 0:48:33The 9th of July 1996 is quite imprinted on me.
0:48:35 > 0:48:38It was the first year I'd had my first child...
0:48:41 > 0:48:44..but also, the 9th of July is my birthday.
0:48:44 > 0:48:48So, I know from the moment we woke up in the morning,
0:48:48 > 0:48:51to when we went to bed that night, he never left my side.
0:48:52 > 0:48:55Levi and myself went for dinner that night,
0:48:55 > 0:49:00and from there we went onto Rocky's nightclub, where he used to work.
0:49:00 > 0:49:02And then we went home to bed.
0:49:02 > 0:49:04Do you remember what day it was?
0:49:07 > 0:49:09I want to say it was a Friday or Saturday.
0:49:10 > 0:49:13But I'm not sure.
0:49:13 > 0:49:14But it was definitely on my birthday,
0:49:14 > 0:49:16and it was definitely the 9th of July.
0:49:21 > 0:49:26So his partner says that they went out to the restaurant and the club,
0:49:26 > 0:49:32on the weekend. Well, the 9th of July 1996 was a Tuesday.
0:49:33 > 0:49:37The alibi is not quite as strong as it first appears.
0:49:40 > 0:49:42The team turns to the science,
0:49:42 > 0:49:45to see if it can help rule Bellfield out.
0:49:48 > 0:49:52Although he's refused to give a DNA sample,
0:49:52 > 0:49:53a number of his family members
0:49:53 > 0:49:57have come forward to help the review by supplying THEIR DNA.
0:49:59 > 0:50:01It's been analysed by Dr Georgina Meakin.
0:50:03 > 0:50:08Members of Bellfield's family have provided DNA samples.
0:50:08 > 0:50:12And from those I've been able to derive the profile
0:50:12 > 0:50:15that is from Levi Bellfield,
0:50:15 > 0:50:20and have been able to compare that to the profiles to the unknown DNA,
0:50:20 > 0:50:24from the strip of blue towel that was examined, and of that,
0:50:24 > 0:50:27there are three components that match components
0:50:27 > 0:50:29in Levi Bellfield's profile.
0:50:29 > 0:50:33That means he can't be excluded as having contributed to that mixture.
0:50:33 > 0:50:35- But not Michael Stone. - But not Michael Stone.
0:50:38 > 0:50:41'When you determine the evidential weight
0:50:41 > 0:50:43'of that potential contribution,'
0:50:43 > 0:50:46it's a random match probability of just 1 in 30.
0:50:46 > 0:50:49And this means that if you've got 30 people in a room,
0:50:49 > 0:50:52one of them would be a potential contributor.
0:50:52 > 0:50:54You can see that evidentially speaking,
0:50:54 > 0:50:56it's not very strong evidence.
0:50:58 > 0:51:01Georgina now moves on to the blood-covered lace,
0:51:01 > 0:51:03used in the attacks,
0:51:03 > 0:51:05and dropped at the scene by the offender.
0:51:06 > 0:51:10She believes that an alternative forensic technique
0:51:10 > 0:51:13could now reveal if the DNA of Stone, Bellfield,
0:51:13 > 0:51:16or any other male was left on the exhibit.
0:51:18 > 0:51:22If we were to retest it using a Y-STR profiling,
0:51:22 > 0:51:26this is profiling that is aimed only at the Y chromosome,
0:51:26 > 0:51:30ie, only examines male DNA, so that way we can...
0:51:30 > 0:51:34straight away excluding all victim DNA that no longer clouds the issue.
0:51:34 > 0:51:35We can just be straight away -
0:51:35 > 0:51:38"What's the male DNA profile? It's this."
0:51:38 > 0:51:40Only, the lace is missing.
0:51:40 > 0:51:43- I beg your pardon. - The lace is missing. It's gone.
0:51:46 > 0:51:49So both the laboratory that did the examination on the lace,
0:51:49 > 0:51:52and Kent Police have done an exhaustive search
0:51:52 > 0:51:55of their exhibit store, and they have not found the lace.
0:51:55 > 0:51:58The whole lace? Like, the lace, the bag and the exhibit label is gone?
0:51:58 > 0:52:03No, they have the empty bag with the exhibit label in it, but no lace.
0:52:05 > 0:52:09The Forensic Science Service are adamant that they returned an intact
0:52:09 > 0:52:13length of lace to Kent Police on the 23rd of September 1998.
0:52:17 > 0:52:21The Forensic Science Service say they sent an intact length of lace
0:52:21 > 0:52:23in a bag to Kent Police.
0:52:26 > 0:52:29But when Stone's legal team requested further tests,
0:52:29 > 0:52:33what was sent back to the laboratory was an empty bag.
0:52:37 > 0:52:38"With respect to the lace,
0:52:38 > 0:52:41"we were expecting the remains of an almost complete lace.
0:52:41 > 0:52:42"There is an empty exhibit bag
0:52:42 > 0:52:45"bearing what appears to be the original CJA label for the lace,
0:52:45 > 0:52:47"but no lace per se."
0:52:48 > 0:52:51"In the absence of an intact length of lace,
0:52:51 > 0:52:54"it was not possible for the commission to arrange for further tests."
0:52:55 > 0:52:58Later, Kent Police said the lace hadn't been lost -
0:52:58 > 0:53:02instead, exhaustive testing had left only strands.
0:53:03 > 0:53:08Kent say the lab, it doesn't exist any more, and the lab says,
0:53:08 > 0:53:09we gave it to a Kent Police officer.
0:53:09 > 0:53:11And now the bag's empty.
0:53:11 > 0:53:13You've got the worst crime in Kent,
0:53:13 > 0:53:16and the principal exhibit goes missing.
0:53:16 > 0:53:19And there are two different accounts of what happened.
0:53:19 > 0:53:23This one lace could contain the key to who killed this family.
0:53:27 > 0:53:32Michael Stone is now 20 years into a minimum 25-year sentence.
0:53:34 > 0:53:38He could be eligible for parole in 2023.
0:53:41 > 0:53:42He's still my boy, isn't he?
0:53:44 > 0:53:48I used to go up and see him all the time,
0:53:48 > 0:53:51but then he said it was too emotional for me to do it.
0:53:51 > 0:53:53So I haven't seen him for...
0:53:54 > 0:53:56..since he was in court that day.
0:53:57 > 0:54:00- You haven't seen him since the convictions?- No, I haven't.
0:54:10 > 0:54:13You get choked up in here, don't you?
0:54:16 > 0:54:20But if you dwell on it, then you're going to go down, you know?
0:54:21 > 0:54:22I can't afford to do that.
0:54:24 > 0:54:26I still have to live life.
0:54:37 > 0:54:39The crime was horrible.
0:54:40 > 0:54:42A mum and her two daughters.
0:54:45 > 0:54:48Violence against a woman, violence against two young children...
0:54:51 > 0:54:54..and the devastation felt by the Russell family
0:54:54 > 0:54:56must have been immense.
0:55:00 > 0:55:04- REPORTER:- Michael Stone, a man with a violent personality disorder,
0:55:04 > 0:55:06now a convicted killer.
0:55:06 > 0:55:10Stone shouted out, "It wasn't me, Your Honour! I didn't do it."
0:55:13 > 0:55:17Right, folks, well, we're reaching the end of our four days' considering...
0:55:17 > 0:55:21The panel begins its summing up of the case review.
0:55:21 > 0:55:26We've been incredibly privileged to have this amount of access
0:55:26 > 0:55:28to this case.
0:55:28 > 0:55:33Having all the evidence, having access to police reports,
0:55:33 > 0:55:38scientific reports, scientific expertise, police expertise.
0:55:38 > 0:55:43Because, of course, in the trial, as a jury, you won't get that much.
0:55:43 > 0:55:47But that's why this process has been invaluable to me.
0:55:47 > 0:55:49How do we feel about the evidence?
0:55:49 > 0:55:51How do we feel about the case?
0:55:51 > 0:55:53When I first started looking at the scientific evidence,
0:55:53 > 0:55:56I guess I was shocked at the lack of it to Michael Stone.
0:55:56 > 0:55:59And I thought that was because this was the mid-'90s, you know?
0:55:59 > 0:56:01DNA technology was in its infancy.
0:56:01 > 0:56:03But as we've gone through this case,
0:56:03 > 0:56:06reviewing through the forensic science evidence that there is,
0:56:06 > 0:56:11we end up not just with DNA evidence that DOESN'T point to Michael Stone,
0:56:11 > 0:56:13but in some ways, points elsewhere.
0:56:15 > 0:56:17There's no ID against Stone.
0:56:17 > 0:56:20There is no forensic against Stone,
0:56:20 > 0:56:22I'm not saying he's not a dangerous man,
0:56:22 > 0:56:25and I'm not saying the best place for him ISN'T locked up,
0:56:25 > 0:56:28but I'm just saying, to me,
0:56:28 > 0:56:31I don't think there's enough evidence beyond reasonable doubt
0:56:31 > 0:56:33to convict him.
0:56:34 > 0:56:42This case was summed up to the jury on the basis that you had to accept
0:56:42 > 0:56:44Daley's evidence.
0:56:44 > 0:56:46Only then could you convict.
0:56:46 > 0:56:50And for me, I don't accept Daley's evidence.
0:56:50 > 0:56:54Is Stone innocent or guilty?
0:56:54 > 0:56:57I can't talk in terms of innocence,
0:56:57 > 0:57:00but I can talk in terms of,
0:57:00 > 0:57:05if I was asked - am I sure? My answer would be no.
0:57:05 > 0:57:10You know, your heart goes out to any victims of crime where, suddenly,
0:57:10 > 0:57:11a conviction against the person
0:57:11 > 0:57:14who is said to have killed their loved one unravels.
0:57:14 > 0:57:16But the truth is, also,
0:57:16 > 0:57:19they really want the right person to be in prison.
0:57:19 > 0:57:25Ultimately, if you find a conviction is unsatisfactory 30 years on,
0:57:25 > 0:57:2940 years on, you've got a right in law, and a moral right,
0:57:29 > 0:57:31to put it before the authorities.
0:57:37 > 0:57:43Michael Stone has had two trials, and he's had several failed appeals.
0:57:43 > 0:57:47But then, I think it is worth, if there are proper grounds,
0:57:47 > 0:57:51to go back, and relook at a case and a verdict.
0:57:51 > 0:57:55That has to be right, if the ultimate aim is justice.
0:57:56 > 0:57:58And on that note, we'll stop now. Thank you.
0:58:01 > 0:58:03'I don't think we'll ever have
0:58:03 > 0:58:07'a completely satisfactory conclusion to this.
0:58:07 > 0:58:13'Unless that golden nugget comes forward of information
0:58:13 > 0:58:15'or evidence'
0:58:15 > 0:58:17to either support it being Michael Stone,
0:58:17 > 0:58:19or to support it being someone else.