Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[admin]

Today marks the launch of our series on cases featured in Sandra Lean's book  'No Smoke'.

We will proceed with discussions logically through each case so that those who haven't read it will still be able to take part effectively though I thoroughly recommend the book which is both eye-opening and easy to follow.

Many members have stated previously that they have purchased the book already, I would urge these to follow each topic carefully so as not to discuss points from it which may not have been raised already. Having said that discussion is as always open and encouraged, you never know we may as a result come up with things which previously have not been considered. Should that circumstance arise, agents acting on behalf of the individual concerned will of course be contacted.

As part of this series, the previously started topic on Simon Hall's case has been relocated to this thread. Any links you may have posted to it will not be affected.

As this feature progresses a summary topic will begin which will discuss areas highlighted by Sandra which are common in most Miscarriage of justice cases. This will allow views on how to address these issues to be expressed and if possible, campaigns to effect any necessary changes be considered.

[Sandra Lean]

I'd like to clarify a few points about the book, just so that everyone knows the background to the book's publication.

In 2003, I started looking at Luke's case - prior to that, I had no involvement with (and indeed, no idea about) wrongful convictions of factually innocent people in the UK. I thought the system worked, and that if a jury returned a guilty verdict, then they must be right, since they'd heard all of the evidence. Boy, was I in for a rude awakening.

By 2005, I'd looked at dozens of cases, and realised something was terribly wrong. I began writing up details of what I'd found, and contacting people whose stories were already in the public domain. My best friend Carole, reading through what I'd written (bless her, she just thought I was mad!), suggested I write a book, and there began the difficult task of deciding which individual stories the book should cover. I picked out "similarities" - which would eventually become the "Twelve Points" - and that's how it all began.

I contacted the families of those I wanted to highlight, and gave them an undertaking that everything I wrote would be passed to them for correction and approval before publication, and that I would never publish anything without their express approval.

Knowing absolutely nothing about publishing (!) I got onto the internet and found a company which offered a Print on Demand service. This is not, as many people think, "vanity" publishing. Print on demand means that you pay for your book to be created in electronic format, and made available for sale via places like Amazon. There is no promotion, etc - if the book makes the grade, people will buy it; if not, they won't. Quite simple really. Vanity publishing, on the other hand, requires the author to pay vast sums of money, and to buy a large quantity of "real" books, which they then have to sell in order to make their money back.

The book was launched in May 2007, and, quite simply, went nuts. So many people contacted me, having seen the book and read it, to say their case was exactly the same as the ones in the book.

Then the print on demand company failed to pay me any royalties, and also failed to make the book available in bookstores in a "real" format, and there ensued a legal battle which would last more than 2 years. However, as a result of this, another publisher noticed my book, and offered a "traditional" publishing package - I paid nothing at all for the book to be produced, I didn't have to buy any copies etc etc (just as with any of the "big" publishing houses) and, better still, once the costs of producing the book were covered by sales, I was entitled to proper royalty payments.

That version of the book was launched in August 2008, and is still selling strongly to date (and still bringing with it new contacts from people in the same desperate circumstances).

[John Lamberton]

Hi Sandra,

Could you tell me and other amateurs what way you would approach publication now given your experiences?

[Sandra Lean]

I have learned a great deal about publishing since 2007! To use mainstream publishers (the big companies) new writers need an agent, and it is very, very difficult and time consuming to get these companies to "take a chance" on new writers, especially if the subject matter is not particularly popular (as was the case in early 2007, although that has changed since, and there does seem to be a rise in interest in the subject of injustice generally.)

There are a couple of other options. You can pay to have your book published and try to promote it yourself. The problem with this is that you will almost certainly be responsible for editing, checking the legalities, etc, yourself, and will be obliged to buy a minimum number of copies. It's an expensive route, and not particularly effective.

Print on demand publishing has become hugely popular, but, again, it has its pitfalls. Prices range from a few hundred pounds to literally thousands of pounds. Your book will be available online, but not, as a general rule, in bookstores. (Bookstores demand huge discounts - up to 65% of the cover price. By the time the printers have been paid, and the publishers have taken their cut, there is precious little left for the author. It is claimed that this is "made up" by volume of sales, but it is a big risk to take, especially as bookstores also require that your books be "returnable" - in other words, if they can't sell them, they get to return them, and you have to pay the production costs of any books which haven't sold.)

Finding reputable print on demand companies is really a matter of speaking with people who have already had their books published, and checking with them what their experience was like.

I can't fault my current publishers, Checkpoint Press, as they offer services which many POD companies do not. They only accept manuscripts on merit (many POD companies will publish anything that is sent to them, regardless of quality, content, etc), they will proof read and make suggestions, and they offer two services - print on demand, where you pay for the production costs of having your book brought up to publication standard and lodged with a POD printer, and thereafter, you get around 80% of all profits from sales, and a "traditional" contract - you pay nothing up front, the publisher "takes back" their costs from initial sales, and thereafter, you and the publisher split royalties 50/50. There are no problems with "returns" as books are only physically produced as they are ordered, whether that be in single orders, or bulk batches.

As I said, POD contracts, whether paid or traditional, tend not to land up in the big bookstores (or at least, not initially - sometimes the "big boys" see a book doing well and will offer a contract on the basis of an already proven record, to minimise the risk for them), but my book is still selling steadily online three years after it was first published, and in spite of almost a year of it not being available because of the behaviour of the original publishers.

If anyone has any specific questions about publication, then I'm happy to share what knowledge I have.

[John Lamberton]

I might just take you up on that Sandra.

[Sandra Lean]

I will apologise in advance for the following post, but I feel the time has come where some comment must be made.

For almost a year, I have tried to ignore various claims, slurs, lies, etc about myself, Billy, this website, etc, but ignoring these people is not making them go away - indeed, it seems to encourage them to ever more ridiculous lengths.
 
So, for the record. Whatever low-life started the group "sandrasaliar" is nothing to do with me, Billy, or this site. When I find the person who started this group, and made the comments therein, I will sue. That is a promise. Not for financial gain, but on point of principle.
 
I have not tried to impersonate any other poster, I do not have "multiple" email addresses (I have a couple for business reasons, like many people) and I have never posted on the GI site. I have no idea who is behind the antics the GI site talks about, nor does Billy. I would re-iterate, it is nothing to do with this site.
 
We have nothing to hide, as should be obvious by both the posts we have both made, and the information freely available on this site. I have no idea what drives these people to say and do the things they do, but can only state once more, for the record, there is no substance in any of the allegations made against either myself, Billy or this site.
 
Thanks to everyone who has supported us throughout almost 12 months of these attacks.
 
Sandra

[nugnug]

i have seen this many when cant dispute what is being the try to smear the person saying it.

[OldPal]

Sandra you have my every sympathy.

As someone who has only recently arrived here it pains me to see the vitriol hurled at this forum from elsewhere.

Reading some of the posts on a certain other forum you would think that people here were responsible for all that is wrong in the world.

Having attempted to engage in intelligent discussion with GI and having been summarily rebuffed and then banned outright I have formed a very low opinion of them.

On the positive side the slurs and bias are so transparently warped that anyone in their right mind will pay scant attention to them.

Thank you for writing your excellent book, it certainly opened my eyes to aspects of the justice system in this country!

[Sandra Lean]

Thanks nugnug and Oldpal - it's good to know there are people who see this for what it is.

[sturisoma]

I too have been to the site, and all I could see was one particular poster carrying on a vendetta which started on the shirley mckie forum

(and started because of people objecting to his treatment of another poster - nothing to do with Luke to start with, but eventually becoming a vendetta against all of Luke's supporters it seems).

my advice would be, in order to preserve the integrity of Luke's campaign (and this forum) we should ignore the other site 100%. If we see anything which is slander we can lodge a complaint with the police and/or ISP. We should have a policy of not posting in that forum, or of communicating with the detractors in any way at all.

we only feed their fires...


one thing I will say - all the stuff they've put up about IP addresses - this is rubbish. I can tell you that if a user is using a broadband connection, then the IP address of their PC often changes (most broadbands use dynamic addressing), it does not always remain static, and sometimes IP addresses can be 'bounced' around and don't, in reality, reflect the domain of the original user.

finally, as well as becomming experts in criminal justice and appeals, it seems we must also become experts in data laws and slander etc - ah well, such is life, a journey of learning new things!

[shirley]

As Sandra stated in no uncertain terms recently, not only the victim is a target of abuse but those who support him also come in for ridicule and abuse.  Justice through adversity..what's new?

[sturisoma]

I did some more thorough research on IP addresses (it is part of my job after all) and none of the IP addresses he has posted mean a thing! hundreds of internet users can have very similar IP addresses and not even live in the same area. All an IP lookup can show is the domain of the ISP - which is in no way related to the users (except that they all have the same ISP obviously - but users don't get to choose this). The only way names and addresses of users can be obtained is if a court order is sent to the ISP - usually the police do this.

so I don't know why the IP addresses are shown, or what significance they are meant to hold!

[nugnug]

come to think of it nor do i that will ip when they regestred it will have gone to somebody else now.

[shirley]

That IP apparently was used once last week and has never been used on a forum or SNS of any sort previously. It appears that their vindictive and malicious attempts to smear a supporter has backfired on them big time.

We can off-course hazard a guess as to who was responsible for the sandrasaliar fiasco.  Suggestions on a post card (its safer than an IP) to GI.

[admin]

I didn't comment on this issue before since I was aware of what Sandra was posting before it was and think that she covered it well enough already. I very much welcome and agree with the comments members have left regarding it.

While awareness is important, I would very much second what sturisoma advises -

my advice would be, in order to preserve the integrity of Luke's campaign (and this forum) we should ignore the other site 100%. If we see anything which is slander we can lodge a complaint with the police and/or ISP.