UK UK - Billie-Jo Jenkins, 13, Hastings, Sussex, 15 Feb 1997

New Posts

no i see abslutly nothing fishy about it at all it proves he drove past where he was suposed to be going and then had to drive back agian i have done it myself many times.

his story about about speaking to the killer may or may not be true thers no proof it isnt.

posbly he thinks its true but it isnt.

things like that do happen.
 
jonmarbles said:
no i see abslutly nothing fishy about it at all it proves he drove past where he was suposed to be going and then had to drive back agian i have done it myself many times.

his story about about speaking to the killer may or may not be true thers no proof it isnt.

posbly he thinks its true but it isnt.

things like that do happen.
Click to expand...

He drove around the park twice for no reason. In his defence, Jenkins argues if he wanted to "create a window of opportunity" he would've wasted time in the DIY store instead of coming home. Not unless Jenkins had second thoughts and returned to the scene of the crime to control what happened. For example, he went and sat in the car after he discovered Billie-Jo because he needed an explanation in case any blood traces were found in the vehicle.

Jenkins wouldn't know the truth if it hit him over the head (just like he did to Billie-Jo). After his release he was supposed to do a media tour around the country but after that disastrous interview with Trevor McDonald he cancelled it because it made him look even guiltier.
 
if this allged bone fragment evdence was as good as they cliam the can allwys put him on trial agian funny the dont seem to want to.

jus like they dont want to retest the tent peg.
 
jonmarbles said:
if this allged bone fragment evdence was as good as they cliam the can allwys put him on trial agian funny the dont seem to want to.

jus like they dont want to retest the tent peg.
Click to expand...

Strange you would vehemently defend someone who was acquitted and not declared innocent.

You probably thought OJ never did it either.
 
well my point still stands why was he not charged if this alleged frensic evdence means anything.

he canbe charged agian if theres evdence to convict him why do they not.

my guess they know they havent.
 
this is another one of those cases which really frustrates me, and makes me feel sad this little girl will never get the justice she deserves whilst her murderer walks free and lives a normal life.

I remember this case really clearly growing up, it was a horrendous brutal killing of a defensless young girl that over 20 years later I still think about.

It is my opinion that Sion Jenkins is responsible for the murder and that he was abusing / in a relationship with her and killed her to silence her.

there is of course some doubt and plausible deniability with Sion's involvement, but his documented on the record behaviour on the day lead me to believe that he was the culprit, and the reason for the lack of reinvestigation into the case would suggest that the police know much more about Jenkins than could be told in court and disclosed publicly, but that said, it does surpass me a strong case against him could not be built.
 
Police are conducting a forensic review of material linked to one of the UK's most high-profile unsolved murders.

Billie-Jo Jenkins, 13, was battered to death at her foster home in Hastings, East Sussex, in February 1997.

Her foster father Sion Jenkins was formally acquitted of her murder in 2006.

Sussex Police say the review is part of a "regular assessment process" to establish if scientific advances can provide new evidence in cold cases.

Billie-Jo Jenkins: Forensic review 25 years after unsolved murder
 
ekardh said:
That's an understatement.

It's nailed on that SJ murdered Billie-Jo. During the case, it came out that SJ was a violent, controlling father/husband who had a short fuse. Billie-Jo was painting the doors that morning as punishment, so there was friction between them. SJ takes his other daughter on an unplanned trip to the DIY store and drives around the neighbourhood twice before realising he's "forgot" his wallet. The trip takes around 15-20 mins, leaving a narrow window of opportunity for Billie-Jo's murder. When they return home, SJ makes the peculiar move of leaving Billie-Jo's body to sit in his car for emergency services to arrive. It's been suggested that SJ did this in case any traces of Billie-Jo's blood were found in the car. At the retrial, the prosecution tried to bring late evidence that showed SJ's clothes contained Billie-Jo's bone fragments but it was refused by the judge. In the interests of justice this evidence should've been admitted and may have secured SJ's conviction.

If that wasn't damning enough, SJ wrote that while the paramedics were tending to Billie-Jo, he spoke to a plain-clothes officer who consoled him. As there was no plain-clothes officer on duty, SJ believes this man was actually Billie-Jo's killer. That's right, Billie-Jo's killer didn't escape while the coast was clear. Instead, he waited in the house and then made himself known to the victim's father. That's the problem with a compulsive liar like Sion Jenkins - they don't know when to shut up.

It's appalling that Billie-Jo's future was stolen, while SJ lives as a free man and has suckered another woman into marrying him.
Click to expand...
I completely agree. All of the evidence points to SJ. He was convicted by a jury on that evidence. I am confident that if put to another jury today that JS would be convicted again. He murdered Billie-Jo. It was a rage killing which is more likely a close family member than a stranger. It can only be SJ, IMO.
 
Just seen this on my tv guide, looks potentially interesting, although I doubt it'll have anything new. But to someone like me, who's heard the headlines enough over the years but not actually looked into the case in any detail, it'll be interesting. Hopefully it'll be reasonably balanced, as I see from this thread that there are some strong opinions, and I'd like to see all sides before judging!

Who Killed Billie-Jo? on Channel 5, Thu 10 Feb 9:00pm - TVGuide.co.uk
Channel 5
9:00pm-11:05pm Thu 10 Feb
Who Killed Billie-Jo?

Examining the unsolved case of 13-year-old Billie-Jo Jenkins, who was murdered on the patio of her seaside home in 1997. This documentary reveals how and why Sion Jenkins, Billie-Jo's foster father, was initially convicted of the murder, only to be acquitted following a high-profile appeal and two major retrials at the Old Bailey.
 
Kasmeer said:
Just seen this on my tv guide, looks potentially interesting, although I doubt it'll have anything new. But to someone like me, who's heard the headlines enough over the years but not actually looked into the case in any detail, it'll be interesting. Hopefully it'll be reasonably balanced, as I see from this thread that there are some strong opinions, and I'd like to see all sides before judging!

Who Killed Billie-Jo? on Channel 5, Thu 10 Feb 9:00pm - TVGuide.co.uk
Channel 5
9:00pm-11:05pm Thu 10 Feb
Who Killed Billie-Jo?

Examining the unsolved case of 13-year-old Billie-Jo Jenkins, who was murdered on the patio of her seaside home in 1997. This documentary reveals how and why Sion Jenkins, Billie-Jo's foster father, was initially convicted of the murder, only to be acquitted following a high-profile appeal and two major retrials at the Old Bailey.
Click to expand...
Perhaps some WSs are giving their strong opinions because they have looked at the details. Overturning the original conviction after the second retrial ended with a hung jury resulted in a miscarriage of justice, IMO.
 
Last edited:
Is it possible that Sion Jenkins could still be prosecuted of Billie-Jo's murder? I know that as of 2003 there are exceptions to UK double-jepoardy laws in light of new evidence.
 
CSIAngus said:
Perhaps some WSs are giving their strong opinions because they have looked at the details. Overturning the original conviction after the second retrial ended with a hung jury resulted in a miscarriage of justice, IMO.
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to imply that those with opinions had not looked at the details! My intended point was that the strength of opinion intrigues me, so I want to see all points of evidence (both for and against) as some documentaries decide to give a biased innocence defence case when people here are convinced of guilt and I'm left wondering what evidence I wasn't told about. I am the ignorant one who wants to learn!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 153 more.
Total: 4,260 (members: 154, guests: 4,106)

Online statistics

Members online
154
Guests online
4,106
Total visitors
4,260
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,500
Messages
17,969,996
Members
228,788
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top