Skip to playerSkip to main contentSkip to footer
dmdmdtvs
  • 2 days ago
The Jury Room S01E06
Transcript
00:00In the series you're about to see, we review real murder cases in which the convicted killer
00:10refuses to accept the guilty verdict. Days, weeks, even months of courtroom deliberations
00:15may have been held, but generally cases whittle down into a handful of key disputed points
00:21of evidence. Our specifically selected jury will review the original trial evidence alongside
00:28revelatory new evidence or analysis. Will you and the jury find the convicted killer guilty
00:35or perhaps not guilty?
00:38I'm Will Hanrahan. Welcome to the Jury Room. Today we're hearing the case of Omar Benguit.
00:47Here's how it all began.
00:49Alone at night, Yongok Shin is uncertain of the masked man behind her. Yongok's family
01:00in Korea knew the 26-year-old would benefit from the student experience, but worried they
01:05could do nothing if anything went wrong. That night it did. Okie was attacked and stabbed
01:10three times. She was to die fighting for the English words to describe her killer. Omar Benguit
01:16was arrested and convicted of Yongok's murder, but did he do it? The Jury Room will debate
01:21the case of Omar Benguit, drug-crazed killer or innocent suffering a miscarriage of justice.
01:34It took three trials before Omar Benguit was convicted of the murder of Yongok Shin. Two failed
01:49appeals later, he says he would rather die in prison than admit his guilt. In the Jury Room,
01:5412 specifically selected citizens will be asked to revisit the case and consider evidence
01:58not heard by the jury in any of the trials. In the Jury Room, will Omar Benguit be found
02:04guilty or not guilty?
02:09Omar Benguit became a regular at Winchester Crown Court because of the reliability of the
02:13main prosecution witness. For legal reasons, we cannot identify her. We will simply call
02:19her Beverly. Here's why. At the first trial, there were two accused, Benguit and another
02:25man. They faced murder, assisting murder and serious charges against the witness herself.
02:32The second man was cleared of the serious charges against the witness. The main evidence against
02:37him had come from her, Beverly, and was successfully argued as unreliable. At the second trial, charges
02:44of assisting in murder against that second man were dropped. Beverly had said he had been with
02:49them in the car, but in fact, he was in a different car getting a speeding ticket at the time of
02:54the attack on Okie Shin. Again, the evidence of the main witness had been incorrect. Only then did
03:00a third trial go ahead against Benguit alone, and the case rested heavily on the evidence of the main witness.
03:05You will hear an analysis of the police and prosecution evidence from former senior detective Colin Sutton in the case of Omar Benguit.
03:17Yung Gok Shin, or Okie as she was known, was thousands of miles from her family, learning English, sampling a different culture. At the time, she was one of thousands of students encouraged to come to England to learn the language. It was 2002, and the 26-year-old was building her life. One evening she was out with friends enjoying student times. What could go wrong?
03:45She was attacked from behind, without warning, just a blitz attack. She was stabbed in the back three times deep, six inches deep stab wounds, and she bled to death. She was still able to speak to the emergency services when they got there and to people nearby, but her English wasn't particularly good, and she was, you know, all she could really say was broken. It was a masked man.
04:12It was a masked man.
04:14With no apparent witnesses, no murder weapons or motive, the investigation was hitting a brick wall until police came across an eyewitness.
04:22Omar Benguit's name came into the frame for the police because he was named by an acquaintance of his. She had given him a lift the evening, the early hours of the morning before the offence took place. They were acquainted because of their mutual interest in drug-taking, essentially.
04:42In the early hours of Oki's murder, she drove Benguit and two other men around Bournemouth looking for a crack house. During the journey, they saw an Asian girl and told her to pull over. They wanted the Asian girl to join them. A short time later, the men returned sweaty and agitated with one screaming at Benguit, what have you done?
05:00She noticed that he had blood on his shirt and at some point later on took the shirt off and it ended up in a carrier bag with another item. And subsequently she gave evidence that that carrier bag was, was, was ditched.
05:18There was some corroboration. She took, she took Benguit to a crack house, to a house where, where drugs were available and they could take drugs. And others from, who were there at present at the, at the crack house, corroborate her story about the blood-stained t-shirt and being in a, an agitated state.
05:40So it wasn't solely that we were relying on, on her evidence. There was some other circumstantial evidence which supported it. And you know, circumstantial evidence is still evidence.
05:52The prosecution case against Omar Benguit was simple. He was fueled by a sexual desire for Asian women and drugs. He saw an opportunity on the 12th of July coming across Oki alone and he stabbed her.
06:05Witnesses saw blood on his clothes. Benguit could not explain to the police where he was on that night and tried to create a false alibi.
06:14It's very suspicious that he tried to organize an, an alibi with his brother. He, he got his brother effectively, or asked his brother to, to tell lies on his behalf, to give him an alibi to put him somewhere else at the time of this offence.
06:28Uh, you know, is that the behavior of an innocent man? Why would you go to those, to those lengths?
06:35And then there was the reliability of the main prosecution witness, twice proved to be so inconsistent in court that retrials were ordered.
06:43A crime committed in hell doesn't have angels for witnesses. Uh, you know, sometimes if you're dealing with an event or with a crime which has happened within one of these subcultures and people with these lifestyle choices, then the only witnesses you are going to find are going to be people who are members of that subculture.
07:05Just because somebody chooses to be involved in drugs or prostitution or any of the other kind of things that, that people, um, might find unusual, that doesn't of itself mean that their evidence is going to be tainted or unreliable.
07:22It is clear that the jury will have had this woman's background and, and all the, the difficulties explored and set out in front of them because it's a matter for them as to whether or not they believe her as a witness of truth.
07:37And I'm sure the case was put forcefully for the defense as to why they may wish to consider her unreliable and they considered it and they came out in favour of believing her, believing that she was a witness of truth.
07:51And if what she says is true, then Ben quits a murderer and he's guilty and that's what happened.
07:58Our jury has selected a four person. It's Nicole Dixon. Nicole, uh, what, why was she chosen?
08:10She's concise, um, clear, and she actually listens as well.
08:15And, okay, well, I think that that's as good a reason as any that I've heard for the selection of a four person.
08:20Let's make sure now that we all understand exactly what was said in the prosecution case.
08:24Uh, for me, one of the most, uh, telling quotes that I heard, uh, during Colin Sutton's, uh, report, if you will, of the prosecution case that is a crime committed in hell doesn't have angels for witnesses.
08:35In this case, witnesses are important, aren't they? Or a star witness is important. Tell us about that.
08:40We know that there, there was three, um, trials and it took three, three trials to actually come to a verdict, mainly because she was inconsistent with her evidence.
08:53Perhaps he's jumping, jumping ahead a little bit, though, because are we sure about the evidence?
08:57Um, we know there's a dispute over the reliability of that evidence, but what else in the evidence did we hear?
09:03There was something about a false alibi, I think?
09:05Oh, the brother, yeah.
09:07Um, he tried to get his brother to lie, um, about an alibi, um, and also, um, I noted down that, um, people in the crack house, they were going to corroborated with her story, seeing blood on his T-shirt, so, um...
09:23They were driving in the car, where she stopped the car because he saw an Asian girl, two men got out, one being him.
09:30They then come back in the car, he's covered in blood, and his friend said, what have you done?
09:35Um, as to the drug house and everything, people corroborated that there was blood on the T-shirt.
09:40I mean, I think if you're on drugs, and I'm not an expert by any means, I'm sure everyone couldn't have been completely wasted, and then there must be some, uh, there must be some truth if you're driving a car and someone gets in with blood in, perhaps, that that is what actually happened.
09:53Whether in court you could be turned over, I don't know, or confused, or I don't know, but, you know, that's all I've got to say.
09:59I found it strange as well that they, um, they actually said, suggested to actually get her in the car.
10:05I thought that was quite a weird thing to say to begin with. Why would you ask for this young girl to get in the car?
10:11Might have wanted a good time. Yeah.
10:13We know he had a love of, um, oriental ladies, um, and a sexual drive towards oriental ladies, so...
10:21Well, we know that the police and prosecution say that.
10:23And also, a lot of young guys could just say that in jest.
10:27You know, just say, um, you know, I'd love to get her in the car, I want to speak to her as well.
10:31Also, he's going to be, he's going to appear to be a bit sweaty, and not all together with it, because, you know, he's, he needs his next fix.
10:38Belle, you were trying to say something.
10:40I was, I was just, I'm going to repeat the prosecution point, that just because people are living a lifestyle that you don't approve of,
10:47and they're all in this drug den getting wasted, it doesn't mean to say that they didn't see what they saw,
10:52which is, I'm just reinforcing what Trevor said.
10:55I agree with that, because it's one thing to have, um, just the one person saying it, but you've got other people, um, saying they saw something.
11:04It's, you know, you can't ignore that, in my eyes, you just can't ignore that kind of thing.
11:08I agree.
11:09So, are we all clear that we know the police and prosecution evidence put before that original jury?
11:13Mm-hm.
11:14OK.
11:15If three or more members of our jury think Benguit not to be a murderer, then he will be found not guilty by the jury room.
11:22After the break, we will be considering the case for the defence of Omar Benguit.
11:31Welcome back to the jury room. We've heard of the police and prosecution evidence. Time now for the defence case in the company of barrister Matthew Stanbury.
11:50The prosecution was based on the evidence of a witness who was inconsistent.
12:02No verdict was reached about Omar Benguit and the murder. She claimed there were three men in the car when she was driving around Bournemouth on the night of the murder. That was not true.
12:13One of those individuals wasn't there. He wasn't in her car. He'd been given a speeding ticket and that proved that he was at that location and not where she said he was.
12:26At a second trial, both Omar Benguit and his alleged accomplice faced charges related to the attack on Yonggok Shin.
12:33But the alleged accomplice could show that he was on another side of the town that night. What happened next is highly unusual. A third trial was ordered.
12:42Usually, the prosecution won't be granted dispensation for a third trial to take place. It usually only happens in the most serious cases. And of course, this was a very serious case.
12:55But the defence would say, well, yes, it was a very, very serious case. But it was also a case based on seriously shaky evidence, based on the testimony of a seriously unreliable witness.
13:07The evidence, it was undoubtedly the case that the jury would have had it well in mind that the witnesses were people that they needed to be very careful about and that they were unreliable witnesses.
13:20The case has just fallen apart at the seams.
13:24And there was no forensic evidence.
13:27There was no physical evidence to link Omar Benguit to this case, as there often is.
13:33There is, these days, almost always some forensic evidence in cases of this sort.
13:38But in this case, unusually, there wasn't any forensic evidence.
13:41There was no knife recovered. There was no DNA to link him to this attack.
13:47The attacker had worn a mask and there was no mask recovered.
13:51So although there was circumstantial evidence upon which the prosecution could rely, it was, on any view, not the strongest case to put before a jury.
14:05So that's the case for the defence. What have we heard?
14:09I didn't realise she changed her stories that many times.
14:12So that does cast a lot of doubt across my mind. I'm already changing, you know, because of that.
14:18It's interesting as well that other witnesses withdrew their stories as well.
14:25There's no sense that they were threatened or anything, is there, that, you know, in this subculture that somebody's, you know, that's a reason for people to withdraw evidence sometimes.
14:36I found it strange from her, the things she said to begin with, it sounded like he put his T-shirt or shirt or whatever it was he was wearing in the bag and then they went on to the crack house.
14:46But then at the crack house people are saying, yeah, there was blood on his shirt.
14:49Did she then imagine that she saw someone getting her car covered in blood, who she knew, when there actually had been a stabbing, which she probably wasn't aware of at the time?
14:57And do you know what strikes me? She's fit enough to drive a car.
15:01Well, I mean, what I was saying before, I don't think because you use drugs, and I'm not an expert, would make you completely incapacitated in every single way,
15:09including, you know, a drug house where everyone's unconscious. I don't think it really happens like that.
15:14But I can't answer that. I think this lady is such a terrible witness and so inconsistent.
15:20I mean, was a supposition there, but was the prosecution, did they lay into her?
15:26And totally, if she's not all that with it, not because she takes drugs, you can tie someone up in, not because they're professional people.
15:33You can't disregard the fact that there's so many people that saw him come in to this house and they're all incapacitated.
15:39Well, they're not necessarily, they're in a drug house.
15:43We don't know to what extent, but they are all reliable.
15:46I don't think you can assume that they're all unconscious. I think there's got to be someone there who's...
15:51Just for some clarity, often the most high a person is the most honest they can be, and sometimes to a fault where they will get themselves in trouble.
16:02So I feel like if they... I wouldn't put much incapacity, any issue on the incapacity of people because, especially if they're in a crack house, they're likely to have done it for quite a while.
16:16So it's probably to get them back to normal, per se. And when they're high, you get...
16:24Tracy, you're a housing support worker in Ipswich. How do you know what you just said?
16:29Well, I work with a wide range of people and I've worked with quite a lot of people that have dealt with addiction.
16:36So I see it all the time. I find that it's more difficult to work with someone if they're needing a fix than after they've got it,
16:46because they actually just... they're like an open door when they're happy, they're...
16:53We can call it high, but sometimes it's just to get them...
16:57To a normal level.
16:58...lucid, yeah.
16:59So, um...
17:00Your girlfriend was trying to say something. Thanks, Tracy.
17:02Yeah, no, I definitely, like, I agree with, like, especially with the inconsistencies of the statement.
17:07The only thing that runs through my mind is the motive to why she would accuse somebody of doing that.
17:13Like, I don't know, like, why would you accuse somebody of stabbing someone like that?
17:17It could be revenge.
17:18Yeah, exactly. But, yeah, it's...
17:20Yeah, so that's the only... the only question in my mind.
17:23Why would you go out and accuse someone?
17:25Is it instructive that she... she, uh, had been arrested for shoplifting when she gave her evidence originally?
17:31We know she's into the drugs. We know she's... you say she's a shoplifter.
17:35Um...
17:37That doesn't... that doesn't say anything.
17:39Also, do we know who is providing these drugs?
17:42Because a lot... a lot of the times it's found that, um...
17:44From the pimps.
17:45The dealers to crack houses often take crack to self.
17:48Maybe she's getting rid of competition. We just don't know.
17:50I feel like we've got to stick to the facts, and I... I'm reluctant to kind of write off her testimony,
17:57because it's... it's just too coincidental to...
18:02Yes, she was, um, arrested for shoplifting, but, you know, why would you then open up about somebody...
18:08Yeah, but she was also found twice to... in her court of law to be found lying.
18:12It doesn't make her a bad person, you know.
18:15I dealt with a... a... a girl. She was a victim of a robbery.
18:18She was very heavily into drugs, as were the people who robbed her, because it was a drug debt.
18:23Um, but they... they were found guilty at... at Crown Court of... of robbing her.
18:28But the defence tried to undermine the... the... the injured party, the victim,
18:34so much on... on the fact that she had such a terrible history.
18:38Which is what they're doing here, isn't it?
18:39Yeah.
18:40I mean, they've got a very great case, because it's such a terrible witness that, um...
18:43Try to discredit her.
18:44Well, I mean, it's very easy, isn't it?
18:46That's the main thing they're doing, yeah.
18:48If he did do it, then why was there no forensic evidence found?
18:51Why was there no...
18:52Nothing, no weapon, no fingerprints, nothing.
18:54They didn't find forensic evidence.
18:55They didn't find anything, did they?
18:57Can I ask you, because we've heard that evidence before, haven't we,
18:59in other cases in the jury room that no forensic or physical evidence has found,
19:02but what... what do we expect a murderer to do?
19:05Well, is that get rid of it?
19:06Yeah, really.
19:07They're gonna confiscate, get rid of it, they're gonna hide the evidence, aren't they?
19:10You're happy that you know the defence case?
19:12Yes, I think, definitely, we know everything.
19:15OK, thank you very much for that for now.
19:17Convicted prisoners must apply to a body called the Criminal Cases Review Commission,
19:21and they must offer new evidence which has emerged since the trial.
19:24That's then considered by three judges,
19:26who have the power to quash the conviction or order a retrial.
19:30Join us in part three when we hear the new evidence heard at an appeal
19:34which Omar Benguit supporters believe prove that he is an innocent man.
19:39Welcome back to the jury room. We're considering the conviction of Omar Benguit.
19:58Unusually, Benguit has been allowed two appeals.
20:01The first was granted because Benguit's defence team argued there should never have been a third trial.
20:06It was an abuse of process.
20:07They also said that the evidence of two witnesses for the prosecution
20:11should not have been put before the jury because of their unreliability.
20:15Well, that appeal failed.
20:17A second appeal was granted in 2014 on two other grounds,
20:22one of which was the sensational new evidence which named a different man as the possible killer.
20:28The other concerned the post-trial accounts from the main witness of what had happened that night.
20:34The main prosecution witness was still causing difficulties for the prosecution.
20:43After the conviction, she decided to put herself about in the media.
20:48She sold her story to a magazine for £500 and she appeared on the Jeremy Kyle Show.
20:55But not only that, but when she gave her account to the magazine and to the Jeremy Kyle Show,
21:00it was once again completely different from the account that she'd given previously.
21:05She'd added even more gloss to it to the effect that she was now saying that she'd in fact seen Omar Benguit
21:11stab Oki Shin in the street in Bournemouth that night,
21:15which was not something that she'd said at any of the three trials or in her statements to the police.
21:21It was demonstrably untrue.
21:23When asked about that, she said that she had come to remember it over time.
21:28But the defence say that this was hugely significant and damaging evidence
21:34because it showed that she was not only unbelievable at the trial,
21:39but she was frankly someone who was not worthy of belief as to her account whatsoever
21:44because she simply couldn't tell the same story twice.
21:51The defence team also introduced this new evidence related to Danilo Restivo,
21:56an Italian native living in Bournemouth who they said had killed Yong Gok Shin.
22:00Danilo Restivo was a man known to the police. He was a killer who had struck twice against women.
22:12He had killed in a place called Potenza in Italy and barely known his victim,
22:17pounced on her outside a church, killed her and left her body on the church rooftop.
22:22A so-called blitz attack. Suspected by the police of the offence, he absconded and he moved to Bournemouth in England.
22:28He struck again, killing a mother of two who he barely knew.
22:32Police suspected him and were collecting evidence including videoing him
22:36as he prowled in bushes observing young women.
22:39At the trial there was no mention of Danilo Restivo
22:43and there appears to have been a public interest immunity application
22:47made by the prosecution at the time.
22:49To have a, in effect, a serial killer, a killer of multiple women who is living in the area at the time,
22:56that is something that is highly relevant.
23:00Restivo had killed in Bournemouth. He was a sexual pervert who preyed on women.
23:04He'd been seen prowling the town.
23:06Oki Shin was killed on the 12th of July, 2002.
23:11And it was understood that both of Restivo's other victims had also been killed on the 12th of the month.
23:17And the defence at the appeal said, well, look, this is potentially significant.
23:22Here's a man living in the area. Restivo was known to be living in Bournemouth at the time.
23:26The attacker of Miss Xi was wearing a mask. Restivo was known on occasion to wear a balaclava.
23:35They said, well, there's a similarity there.
23:38The defence, at the very least, would have wanted to put that before the jury
23:42to say, look, here's the possibility of somebody else in the area
23:46who could have committed this murder.
23:50The case against Benguit had always been weak.
23:52The reliability of the witnesses had been questioned further
23:55and another potential suspect brought to light.
23:58This was never the most overwhelming case.
24:00The defendant, Mr Benguit, was convicted at the third trial by majority verdict.
24:05Nobody was ever going to pretend that this was the most overwhelming case against him.
24:09And the defence say that case has become even weaker.
24:12The key witness has been undermined still further.
24:16Another witness has retracted his testimony, his account.
24:20And you have that additional factor of a known serial killer,
24:24living in the area at the time, which ought to have been known about also by the jury.
24:29And the defence say that had the jury known these things,
24:32it's at least possible that the jury wouldn't have convicted this man.
24:37So the argument is that Omar Benguit is in prison for an offence committed by Danila Restivo,
24:46and that Beverley, by changing her story on TV and in a magazine,
24:50further undermined her evidence.
24:52Well, this is the response from former senior detective Colin Sutton.
24:56I think the opportunity, sadly, that is sometimes afforded to witnesses,
25:09and the potential lure of a little bit maybe of fame or infamy,
25:15but more likely a little bit of money,
25:18can sometimes cause them to take decisions that they shouldn't.
25:27But I think it's probably reasonable to make the distinction
25:30between giving evidence in a court because you think it's the right thing to do,
25:34where there's no financial incentive or any other kind of motivation to do it
25:41other than doing the right thing,
25:43and the difference of an opportunity to make an easy few hundred quid
25:48just by telling a journalist or the media what would make a good story for them
25:53and what they'd quite like to hear.
25:56The things that the witness got up to with the media,
25:59you kind of can explain away.
26:02You can say, you know, she sold an opportunity to make a few quid and she took it.
26:08There were other pieces of evidence which joined in with what the witness did
26:14and made it a more compelling case.
26:21So, the evidence at the latest appeal was dismissed by the judges.
26:27They dismissed what they'd heard, they upheld the guilty verdict.
26:31On the point of credibility, they said that nothing had changed.
26:35She was unreliable before the original jury.
26:38The fact that she acted in an unreliable fashion thereafter meant nothing.
26:42That's what I'm hearing. What are you hearing?
26:44I can't believe that the appeal wasn't upheld, actually.
26:48I mean, she's changed her story again.
26:51She's now saying that she actually saw the stabbing.
26:54So she's being even more inconsistent than she was originally.
26:58We know that there is a known offender in the area that has killed two people before.
27:07On the 12th?
27:08On the 12th of the month, always on the 12th of the month.
27:11To me, it just seems incredible that this appeal has not happened.
27:15I mean, I'm in shock, to be honest with you.
27:17I am.
27:18I cannot, I cannot believe.
27:20There's only so much...
27:22Sorry.
27:23Sorry, no, no.
27:24I was going originally on the fact that, alright, she takes drugs.
27:26That's what doesn't make her completely useless or unable to make a decision or remember anything.
27:32However, obviously, with the glare of the spotlights and money being offered to her and this, that and the other,
27:37it does appear that she's got a little bit carried away.
27:39She doesn't have to be a necessarily intelligent or intelligent person.
27:43But I'm afraid, I'm quite amazed, I'm sort of changing very much my opinion of the whole thing, really.
27:49I've been a journalist for 47 years.
27:51I've worked for lots of newspapers.
27:53It is the case that people can be overwhelmed by the pressure from a journalist, their attention.
28:00And they can be led to, you know, sort of feeding.
28:05Because the story is going to be improved by more drama.
28:10So she can be led to say, oh, I actually saw it, you know?
28:15Yeah, but on the same...
28:16Yeah, no, I agree with that as well.
28:17On the same note though, if she's going to say that, then how can she be seen as a reliable witness in court?
28:23And how can you say, it doesn't matter that she's a drug addict, she can still be a reliable witness,
28:27when you can say on the same hand, she's a drug addict, so she's going to need money, she's going to say what they think.
28:31I think the whole evidence is...
28:32Do you think it's right to, because she's gone to a, let's face it, a well-known TV show that is known for its drama,
28:39and known for its outlandish stories, and we know what the media, newspaper media is like, I mean...
28:46But she can be easily convinced, if she can be convinced that easily there.
28:49No, but why would she put what she did there onto what she said in court when she was...
28:55Let's not forget, she was on oath, she was under oath.
28:59Yeah.
29:00So why would...
29:01I don't think that would matter too much to her.
29:02But if you took her back into court, she might revert to her original story, that's the case.
29:06It might just be that she wanted the money, the publicity.
29:10But...
29:11Could you also get an overzealous journalist that is trying to make their...
29:14Yeah, that's what I meant by feeding it.
29:16Yeah, yeah, their place in the world and exaggerating what she's already said and enhancing it themselves.
29:22And she'll also be under the influence of drugs quite a lot of the time, I would have thought.
29:27And it's drug money.
29:28Even on Jeremy Kahn.
29:29Is that how you'll see it, Janet?
29:30Because when I heard that evidence, I thought £500 is a lot of money, but it's not life-changing.
29:34Yeah, but you can't...
29:35For drugs.
29:36You can't say on one hand, it's because it's a lot of money to get drugs,
29:40and on the other hand, say, because she's on drugs, you can't use her as unreliable.
29:43The thing is, as well, so I agree that you could convince her around,
29:47because I personally believe that you would.
29:48Can we say...
29:49Sorry.
29:50When you agree to do these shows or these stories, you know exactly what you're getting yourself into.
29:56You know exactly the way it could be conceived.
29:59But do you know the level of how much pressure you're going to get?
30:04There's a risk.
30:05Not the level, but there's a risk.
30:06Can I ask a question?
30:07Are you...
30:08Because it's complicated, isn't there, with three trials.
30:10And are you confident, because we're coming to our verdict section in a second,
30:14are you confident you know all the arguments?
30:17One of the questions I was going to ask is, the Italian guy, was he ever questioned about it?
30:25I mean, I doubt he would have been, because there's already conviction.
30:29So, unless some new evidence, some fantastic evidence, surely you would be asking this guy to come in to be questioned about the murder.
30:39Well, if he was questioned, he didn't admit it.
30:42What do the judges at appeal say?
30:45There was a different modus operandi.
30:47It's for you to judge whether you accept that.
30:49But that was the evidence that was actually put both at the appeal and here today.
30:55OK, I think we know now what the defence is saying.
31:00I think we know what the prosecution is saying.
31:02In part four, it is the turn of the jury.
31:04You will be asked to return your verdict.
31:07Join us in a few minutes.
31:09Welcome back to the jury room.
31:25Here's a summary of the prosecution and defence case of Omar Bangrit.
31:30On the 12th of July in 2002, an innocent woman was killed in a brutal and senseless attack.
31:39Drug addict Omar Bangrit had been trawling the streets, looking for Asian girls.
31:43He was seen by witnesses carrying a knife similar to the murder weapon.
31:47One witness saw him return to her car, agitated, sweating and with blood on his clothes.
31:52Bangrit could offer no explanation for his movements on that night.
31:56But his defence team point to serious and damaging inconsistencies in the main witness.
32:01They claim this makes the main evidence against him unreliable.
32:04Campaigners point to the possibility that another man, Danilo Restivo, is the killer.
32:13It is time for you to tell us your verdict and debate this case.
32:17And I'm going to start with Kim because she's anxious to get in.
32:19Kim, what point were you trying to make?
32:22Well, again, no-one was arrested at the scene of the crime because, obviously,
32:27the girl was in such a state that she could not make it known.
32:32All she could say was that he was masked.
32:35Now, this guy Omar, he prefers Oriental and Asian women.
32:41Sexually, he's not a killer.
32:45He didn't go out to attempt to kill.
32:48He may have had a look out for a woman that he wanted to have sexual relationships.
32:54But I think this is just all by and out of proportion.
32:56And I don't know why they haven't looked more closely at Prestivo.
32:59No.
33:00Two other victims on the 12th of the month, just like our victim.
33:03He's known for attacking young women.
33:05He's incredible.
33:06He's in the vicinity.
33:08He's masked on occasions.
33:10I think it's imperative they look at him.
33:11Yeah.
33:12I can feel anything like this one in the bushes, like lurking.
33:15I think they've disregard him.
33:16Yeah.
33:17It's just all on a small coincidence and a really unalouable witness.
33:20Yeah.
33:21I can't believe that you haven't gone down another route of at least trying to,
33:23you know, that's how you exonerate one person by bringing in other possible...
33:27Absolutely, because you think, I mean, going back to the victim,
33:30and we've always got to think of the victim, this 26-year-old,
33:34with all her life before her, bleeding out, bleeding to death.
33:38Yeah.
33:39And if it was this Italian, is he still walking around?
33:42Danilo Restivo has been convicted of double murder.
33:46Right.
33:47A murder in Potenza, Italy, of Elisa Claps,
33:49and the murder in Bournemouth, England, of Heather Barnett.
33:51Is he doing time now?
33:52He's in prison.
33:53He's serving a life sentence for murder.
33:55I still have a problem with the fact that he tried to create a false alibi.
33:59Even if you know what...
34:01You know, if you're going to turn around and say,
34:03yes, I was at Crack House that night,
34:05even if you know you're going to get into trouble for that,
34:07that's so much better than a murder charge.
34:09Like...
34:10Yeah.
34:11And the scale of things.
34:12When you're panicking, you're probably not thinking of things like that.
34:14Yeah, but you could probably say later in an interview,
34:16when they say, oh, you've been charged with murder,
34:19you could say, well, actually, I was...
34:21That's the only one thing I can put against him, though.
34:24But the thing is, he likes Asian women,
34:27he saw an Asian woman on the street,
34:30she might have refused him and said, no, no,
34:33or she might have got scared,
34:36and then he stabbed her.
34:37She was stabbed three times.
34:39She stabbed him back three times.
34:40There was no discussion between them, was there?
34:42Wasn't he...
34:43Wasn't she just from the back?
34:45I mean, that doesn't...
34:46That doesn't have been true with...
34:48He hasn't even attempted to...
34:49Or maybe he hasn't, maybe she's won, because we don't know.
34:52My understanding was that they were looking for a crack house.
34:57Yeah.
34:58And he got out of the car,
35:01him and apparently two others, according to her story,
35:04got out of the car and then they came back,
35:06that's all she knew.
35:07Yeah.
35:08So we don't...
35:09So he...
35:10I don't think he was necessarily prowling for women.
35:13He might have just said, ooh.
35:14Yeah.
35:15Right?
35:16She's just...
35:17If that lady was dead on the floor,
35:19and he had a clean shirt on,
35:22when he saw the woman dead on the floor,
35:25at that point could he have got blood on his shirt?
35:28No, they didn't see...
35:29I think he would have.
35:30Possibly, yeah.
35:31Wouldn't there have been forensic evidence
35:32of him touching the body, then?
35:33Mm-hm.
35:34If he...
35:35Well, no.
35:36Janet, just to clarify that,
35:39she didn't see the body on the floor.
35:41No.
35:42No, she didn't.
35:43They've...
35:44They've got out of the car.
35:45Yeah.
35:46He's...
35:47The three men have allegedly got back into the car.
35:50One of them's saying...
35:51What have you done?
35:52What have you done?
35:53She's noticed she's got blood on his shirt.
35:55He then takes that shirt off,
35:57puts it in a bag,
35:59and...
36:00She's also...
36:01But they withdrew, didn't they?
36:02Yeah.
36:03They withdrew.
36:04She originally said that she didn't see it,
36:05but then she...
36:06Then she made a claim...
36:07But then she...
36:08Yes, yes, she's always...
36:09Also, like I said, she has, yeah.
36:10Yeah, she said...
36:11Until after the conviction,
36:12she said that she hadn't saw it.
36:13And I don't think we can disregard it,
36:14just for the fact that
36:15she needed a few kids to buy drugs.
36:16But she...
36:17She said something...
36:18She said a completely different statement.
36:19Yeah.
36:20On the evidence you've heard,
36:21what do you think Omar Benguit's motive was?
36:23Was it sexual?
36:24If he did it...
36:25Was it money?
36:26What is motive?
36:27I think it was probably sexual.
36:28It started off,
36:29and things went,
36:30you know,
36:31wrong straight away.
36:32She was walking down the street.
36:33He had no form previous to them.
36:34Can I say something?
36:35Yeah, but...
36:36He had no previous form for any violence.
36:37If he was guilty,
36:38I think his motive...
36:39If he was,
36:40I think his motive probably was.
36:41Probably was great.
36:42At the time.
36:43If he was under influence of drugs at the time...
36:45And it's always the first time.
36:47Yeah.
36:48Don't know what goes through the mind.
36:49Yeah.
36:50There's never always...
36:51We have to remember,
36:52they were looking for a crack house,
36:53so they needed a fix.
36:55So,
36:56senses are heightened,
36:57and they're,
36:58you know,
36:59they're on edge,
37:00and it's...
37:01Sweaty.
37:02He might not have had a motive.
37:03It might have been a spur of the moment thing.
37:05Trevor,
37:06retired fireman.
37:07You've worked with people an awful lot of the time.
37:08No, I think if you were desperate for a fix,
37:10the last thing you'd probably think of
37:12is going to either talk
37:13or run after a woman
37:14and stab her in the back without talking to her.
37:16That's why you want to bring him there.
37:17I also very briefly think,
37:18the whole thing's clouded by the use of drugs,
37:20people's perception of what people are like on drugs,
37:23and the witness being so...
37:25unreliable.
37:26Yeah.
37:27Yeah.
37:28It would appear, sorry, unreliable,
37:29but...
37:30It couldn't have been a spur of the moment,
37:31because of...
37:32It could be,
37:33it never happened.
37:34This is what starts to...
37:35Yeah.
37:36She just lied about that.
37:37There isn't a great deal,
37:38if someone wouldn't get him into your car covered in blood.
37:40It's not a law of witness.
37:41Yeah.
37:42They say he had a mask in her life for another reason.
37:45It is a possibility that he sees this attractive girl,
37:51gets out the car, says he's going to chat her up,
37:54then she runs.
37:55Yeah.
37:56And then, if he's desperate for a fix
37:58and he's in that kind of mood,
38:00that is what excites him.
38:02And then it just happens.
38:03You don't use a black mask in a night just from that, do you?
38:06Anything.
38:07But not to go and talk to a girl, do you?
38:08Yeah.
38:09But I also think as well,
38:10because she was a foreign student
38:12from one of the oriental countries,
38:14that we've got to keep ties with, close ties.
38:16They would have wanted to get this fixed,
38:18as soon as possible, find someone,
38:20get the meme banged up.
38:21Yeah.
38:22Just for relations.
38:23Yeah.
38:24Between him and them,
38:25I don't think he's guilty.
38:26Kim, let's drill into that point.
38:28Yang Gok-shin was a Korean student learning English.
38:30Yeah.
38:31Students bringing from overseas
38:33a lot of money into the education system.
38:35Are you suggesting that,
38:37in haste to convince the South Korean authorities
38:39that the English justice system was sound,
38:41they rush to judgement?
38:42Yeah.
38:43Exactly.
38:44That's exactly what I'm saying.
38:45But then, could we argue that,
38:46if she was stabbed in the back,
38:48and she said he was wearing a mask,
38:50she could have been trying to find the words,
38:52but I couldn't see his face?
38:54Mm.
38:55Because she couldn't speak English.
38:56If her English wasn't...
38:57Was she alone, though?
38:58Because I thought...
38:59No, she'd left her friends.
39:00She'd left her friends at that point,
39:01so there were no other women.
39:03But, yeah, I do personally agree that, like,
39:05this decision that has been made,
39:06for me, can only be made on the one inconsistency
39:09that he said that he had that alibi,
39:11but there's so many more inconsistencies
39:13on the other side of accusing him with that witness,
39:16because, for me, she just...
39:18There's no way you can rely on someone like that.
39:21Like, with the amount of inconsistency
39:23that she's put forward.
39:24Yeah.
39:25And even now, from what she's sold her story
39:26and done all this...
39:27Yeah.
39:28I think, for me,
39:29the fact that he asked his brother
39:30to lie for him as well.
39:31Yeah.
39:32Because that could...
39:33So, Colin Sutton...
39:34I'll ask you, Kipri.
39:35Colin Sutton said that he found that very suspicious,
39:39that Omar Benkret could have offered an alibi,
39:42he didn't.
39:43Then, on remand,
39:44he tries to get his brother
39:45to give him an alibi.
39:46Mm.
39:47Does that...
39:48What impact does that have on you?
39:50It does bring an inconsistency in my mind,
39:53but, like, as we were just saying,
39:55it could just be a spur of the moment,
39:56he was just trying to put himself somewhere else,
39:58he was slightly worried.
40:00Um, it doesn't make him a murderer,
40:02like, it doesn't say that he did it for me,
40:05but it does raise a question in my mind
40:08to why would he say that?
40:09Like, just tell the truth if you weren't...
40:11Because he's actually realising that there is a real possibility
40:14that he's going to go down for a crime that he didn't commit.
40:17Mm.
40:18He's asking his brother to lie for him, you know.
40:20Just say, if you're innocent, just say,
40:22I wasn't... I didn't do it, or I wasn't here, I was here,
40:25but he had no...
40:26He's asking his brother to lie for him.
40:28Mm-hm.
40:29You know, his brother didn't come forward and say,
40:31he was here, he asked, please lie for me, please lie for me,
40:33you know, say I was here.
40:35That just screams guilty to me.
40:37Brian, you've been anxious to get some clarification.
40:40What's that about?
40:41It's just the idea that people don't carry knives,
40:46hoods, balaclavas in their cars.
40:49Habitual criminals always carry this sort of thing around.
40:52I've arrested nine, ten-year-old kids
40:55with knives down in their socks, balaclavas in their pockets,
40:58and they're not even habitual criminals.
41:01But they don't want to be seen when they're committing damage
41:03and things like that.
41:05But in cars, when we stop cars,
41:07there's sledgehammers in boots
41:09that nobody can understand why they've got a sledgehammer.
41:12None of them work, but they're carrying knives, guns,
41:16all kinds of things on a regular basis.
41:19Final comments, please.
41:21She's just too inconsistent,
41:23and even after the conviction,
41:25she completely changes the story
41:27and she's suddenly actually seen...
41:29I wonder if that is why there were three trials, then.
41:32Well, that is why there was three trials,
41:33because her evidence was inconsistent all the time,
41:36and even after conviction, it's still inconsistent.
41:39In fact, it's changed completely,
41:40because she's now actually seen the stabbing.
41:42I know she was on drugs, probably,
41:46and under the influence of drugs,
41:48and you don't know what that does to your memory and your brain, but...
41:51No, we don't do.
41:52I lean on the side of what happens after the conviction.
41:55It shouldn't be...
41:57It should be separated from what happened in that court,
42:01because they're completely different circumstances.
42:03Even in the court wasn't Stonewall,
42:05because there was more and more of those cases,
42:07because they restricted...
42:09The evidence was...
42:10The witness was unreliable.
42:11But that was on cases about her.
42:13Yeah.
42:14Not the murder from my recollection.
42:17Are you discounting all the Jeremy Kyle stuff and everything?
42:20Yeah, because it happened after the conviction,
42:23and we know what the media's like,
42:25we know what television's like.
42:27I'm not shocked that she said something completely different.
42:30She also plays a massive part in him being convicted of murder.
42:33She is the main, you know, the main witness
42:36of seeing him come back and seeing him at the time, at the place.
42:40I just don't know if you can look at her as very reliable.
42:42Adrian, do you think it matters that there were three trials?
42:45Yeah, definitely.
42:46In what way?
42:47You know, it's strange that there were three.
42:49You know, usually there's two or three, like the detective said.
42:52You know, the jury said, you know, it's weird that there was three.
42:55Is it relevant to you as you consider your verdict?
42:58Erm, I'm just like...
43:00This case is, it's so muggled up.
43:02There's so much different stories,
43:04and it doesn't sit with me very well.
43:07The fact that the brother...
43:08I have to go back on this again.
43:10The fact that he got his brother to lie.
43:11You've got to remember how someone was murdered.
43:13You know, she was murdered innocent.
43:15OK, so it's time for your verdict.
43:17So Nicole, stand by. You're the foreperson.
43:20Let's start over here with Cara Kerry.
43:24Kerry, Kerry is your profession.
43:25Kerry.
43:26Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
43:30Oh...
43:31Erm...
43:32Just guilty or not guilty?
43:34Not guilty.
43:36Tracy, support worker working in housing in Suffolk.
43:39Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
43:42Guilty.
43:43Let's hop over to Bryn, 30 years a policeman.
43:46Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
43:49Guilty.
43:50Gurpreet, next to you.
43:52Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
44:03Guilty.
44:04Let's hop to this side of the jury now.
44:05And let's come to Janet.
44:06Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
44:07Guilty.
44:08Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
44:12Guilty.
44:13Ben works for TFL, next to you.
44:14Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
44:15Guilty.
44:16Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
44:19Guilty.
44:20Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
44:25Guilty.
44:27Has any teammates messed up please?
44:28It's not my problem.
44:29Guilty.
44:31Here comes to Janet at the drawing of Omar Benguit.
44:32Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
44:34Guilty.
44:36Ben works for TFL, next to you.
44:39Do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty?
44:42guilty guilty Kim also a former carer you've weighed up the evidence do you
44:57find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty not guilty
45:05Bell Mooney do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty not guilty and so
45:11our full person Nicole finally your verdict do you find Omar Benguit guilty or not guilty not guilty
45:17Nicole can you please stand and return the verdict from the jury room do you find Omar Benguit guilty
45:26or not guilty not guilty ladies and gentlemen thank you very very much this has been a for
45:37television trial based on the facts and the evidence established in the case against Omar
45:41Benguit the jurors are members of the public Omar Benguit is currently serving life but protests
45:48his innocence what is your verdict we'll see you next time in the jury room
45:52you
45:55you
45:59you
46:01you
46:05you
46:09you
46:11you
46:13you
46:14you
46:16you
46:30you
46:32you