Mr Warner CCRC case - my decision

Mr Warner's original appeal provides some basis to doubt that he murdered Mr Pool and murdered and raped Mrs Pool, for example there was no blood found on Warner's clothes or other belongings and there was no blood in the sink or drain of his caravan. There was also no forensic evidence to suggest that Warner had actually been upstairs at the Pool's home. Also, a serial rapist 'The Vampire' was roaming free at the time of the murders and rape and he could have been in the Easthampton area at the time. However, Warner's appeal was dismissed because the evidence against him was 'formidable'.

One suspect that had been considered at the time was Mr Rodgers (The Vampire), although he was arrested in February 1990 for a series of rapes, there is no evidence to suggest that he murdered Mr Pool and murdered and raped Mrs Pool, except for six unidentified fingerprints. These fingerprints were not attributed to anyone.

The lawyers of Warner sent a letter to Easthampton Police regarding certain items of evidence (saliva from Mrs Pool's breast, 2 duvets, a swab from the inside of a kitchen drawer, a blood swab from outside the house and a swab from the handle of the knife), but almost all of this evidence had been destroyed. However, fibres from Warner's jumper and fibres from items found upstairs hadn't been destroyed, but these were indistinguishable from each other when forensically examined.

Another piece of evidence that is useful to the investigation is the DNA recovered from Mrs Pool and after DNA profiling tests, a scientist determined that there was an incomplete profile of Warner, but according to a forensic scientist, the chance of finding someone unrelated to Warner that committed the crime is 1 in 680 and I believe this should be considered as key evidence to the case.

Another couple of key points should be raised, Warner had lied in his statement, throwing in to question his innocence. It was unclear where Warner's actually was at the time of the murder, his caravan mate Mr Knox said that Warner was back at 2.45am, this ties in with the time of the murders and contradicts Warner's claim that he was back at 1am.

One piece of evidence that wasn't found was a murder weapon, but the nearest evidence in the house to suggest that Warner committed the crime is the fingerprints found in the kitchen

My final conclusion is that the conviction of Warner is safe. This is because of the evidence against him. A DNA profile of Warner was found on Mrs Pool, although the profile was incomplete, there is a low chance of the crime being committed by anyone else. Another key piece of evidence is that Warner took a shirt believed to have been kept upstairs in the Pool's home, this contradicts Warner who said that he didn't go upstairs. Finally Warner's behaviour is suspicious, especially that he washed his jeans the day after the crime was committed, this suggests that he wanted to cover up the crime.