Too many victims like Simon Hall

We, the British people wish to bring to the attention of our Government an injustice so wrong that it is beholden upon us to make it known and to petition those who serve us to right as a matter of urgency.Many thousands of innocent men, women and children have been, are being and will continue to be wrongfully convicted and wrongfully incarcerated for crimes they did not commit and in worryingly increasing numbers for fictitious crimes that never occurred and have no basis in fact or actuality, as a direct consequence of the swath of bad laws passed onto the Statute book by previous administrations for their own political ends rather than in the interests of the citizens of this nation.The laws, directives and policies allow those with malicious intent to make false allegations against innocent men, allow the police, the CPS and the crown to abuse power, procedure and process to achieve sanction detections and convictions at any cost to achieve government set targets.As of today there are more than 14,000 innocents incarcerated in our prisons, as a result of false allegations of a sexual nature, abuse of the joint enterprise law, the abolition of the corroboration of evidence law (Magna Carta Article 38), the Judges warning in regard to lack of corroboration of oral evidence, the abolition of the hearsay law, allowing a wrongful prosecution to go forward on the simple uncorroborated, unsubstantiated word of an accuser.This number is higher than any other country in the whole of Europe.
(These figures are probably far higher, as many victims have no where to turn or anyone to highlight their plight to.)
Abuses of power, procedure and process are as follows:
1. Arrest without cogent evidence in order to obtain DNA without consent.
2. Abysmal, biased, prejudicial police investigations where all reasonable lines of enquiryare not followed.
3. The ignoring, by-passing or losing of evidence that points to the innocence of the suspect.
4. The non-compliance with PACE 1984, Criminal Procedure Regulations, Criminal Investigation and Procedure Act, Criminal Justice Act to name but a few by The police, CPS and Crown.
5. The deliberate suppression by the police of exculpatory evidence which if disclosed properly and according to the Attorney Generals Guidelines, the Guinness Advice and the law would undermine the case for prosecution and reduce the unacceptable wrongful prosecution of innocent people which is an affront to Justice.
6. The deliberate non-disclosure of exculpatory material by the police to the CPS or if disclosed in the Early Advice or Full Case File by the police.
7. The CPS policy of non-disclosure and or suppression, (in some areas, total non-disclosure) of material relevant to the defence case which would undermine the case for the prosecution and assist the case for the defence in order to secure a conviction at any cost.
8. The deliberate non-compliance on the part of the CPS to adhere to their statutory and on going duty to review and disclose material as per the Prosecutors manual by prevarication, obfuscation, keeping the existence of exculpatory evidence from thedefence in order to deny the defence the right to mount his best defence post defencecase statement and request for full disclosure under Sec. 8 of the relevant act, knowing Full well that the hidden evidence cannot be used by the appellant at appeal as the evidence was available at the time of trial.
9. The reliance by the Crown on incomplete and dubious forensic evidence to secure a conviction in the face of evidence proving the innocence of a defendant, by blinding lay citizens who make up juries with science and technical jargon.
10. The non-independence of the CPS from the police.
11. The superseding by Directives and Policy, of Common and Statute law to facilitate wrongful prosecutions in order to hit Government set conviction rates.
12. The unacceptable time scale for ordinary citizens wrongfully convicted and incarcerated to obtain leave to appeal providing they can obtain funding and find new evidence with which to prove their innocence.
13. The violation and non-compliance by the state of Article 6(2) of the HRA 1998: All are presumed innocent until proven otherwise according to the law.
14. The unacceptable delay, prevarication and obfuscation by the powers that be to refer a case to the Criminal Case Review Commission and their lack of expeditiousness and due diligence to refer a case for appeal.
15. The erosion and destruction of the accusers rights and protections in law in order to hit government conviction targets.There are tens of thousands of innocent citizens who have fallen victim to the above injustices through no fault of their own:
Sean Hodgson
Barry George
Stefan Kisko
Sion Jenkins
Birmingham Six
Guildford Four
Cardiff Three
Susan May
Eddie Gilfoyle
To name just a few:
And the latest example to hit the headlines, that being the case of Mr Simon John Hall who was convicted of murder on dubious forensic fibre evidence and on which the Director of Public Prosecutions Kier Starmer commented that, "Hall's case is really peculiar because there is no particular reason to believe he is guilty of this offence, destroy the fibre evidence and the case falls apart."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAXt-evHwcs
However, in the case of Ian Tomlinson, the precident set with regards conflicts over forensic experts appear to contradict those in Mr Hall's case.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVRfdySMEGo
This despite the following:
a. DNA found at the crime scene did not match Mr Halls DNA.
b. Fingerprints found at the crime scene did not match the fingerprints of Mr Hall.
c. Footprints found at the crime scene did not match the foot prints of Mr Hall.
d. Entry to the crime scene was obtained through a small window which had been smashed.No glass whatsoever was found on Mr Halls clothing, in his parents property, his property or his vehicles.
e. The original forensic results report of fibres gathered from the deceased and the crimescene, when compared to Mr Halls clothing, his parents property, his property and his vehicles clearly states: NOT A MATCH. Another staff member from the same laboratory later wrote on the report not to be eliminated?
f. Third party witness statements put the time of the victims death at least three and a half hours earlier than asserted by the police and the results of the victims stomach contents are intriguing and give weight to the suggestion that the victim was deceased well before the 45 minute time frame the police say the victim was murdered.
g. At the time this terrible crime was committed Mr Hall was over seven miles away in the company of friends.
h. After Mr Hall had been convicted on this one piece of questionable evidence in the Face of all the evidence proving his innocence, his legal team commissioned an independent forensic expert who using an up to date technique known as First Derivative showed that the fibres from the crime scene when compared to the fibres gathered from Mr Hall, the relevant properties and vehicles were not of the same thickness and there were subtle differences in colour and amount of delustrant.Three forensic scientists are arguing about techniques used, which is better etc.
If experts cannot agree, how can anyone be convicted on that compromised evidence alone? (Please refer to precodent set re: The Tomlinson case) 
i. A knife retrieved from the scene which did not belong to the victim but had been taken from a property in a robbery earlier in the night and would have subsequently used as grounds for Mr Halls appeal was "compromised" and thus rendered inadmissible as new evidence for the appeal.
j. There are serious concerns about the handling of the investigation and the conduct of those involved in regard to the gathering of evidence from the crime scene,contamination of the crime scene and the concurrence and chronology of the gathering of evidence, or lack thereof, which the trial jury were not aware of.
k. Third party witness statements were either not taken until the involvement of the CCRC and some were taken, not used by the prosecution for obvious reasons and not disclosed to the defence, again for obvious reasons.
l. A confession to the crime was made by a man as yet un-named but known to the police Three days after the incident. This man was not questioned under caution or investigated.
All the above failures to investigate all reasonable lines of enquiry, to give proper disclosure of all material pertinent to the case to the defence in the interests of natural Justice and the flagrant abuse of law, regulations, power, procedure and process is all too common within the public authorities charged to administer the law and who purport to be beyond reproach.
As a direct consequence tens of thousands of innocent citizens of this country become victims of gross miscarriages of justice year on year, languishing in our prisons at vast expense to the taxpayer all for the sake of the incumbent administration appearing to be tough on crime.
We call for our Government to intervene as a matter of urgency to arrest this injustice being played out in our courts day in and day out.
The citizens of this nation cannot be held to ransom nor the law, as it is at present being brought into complete disrepute.
The manner in which the ordinary individual is being treated by the agencies of the law is grievously undermining the trust, respect and confidence we must have in those authorities for the justice system to be viable and effective.
The humblest citizen of all the land when clad in the armour of a righteous cause is stronger than all the hosts of error, mendacity and dissembling.
We the British people are in earnest.
We will not equivocate.
We will not excuse.
We will not retreat a single inch.
We will be heard.