Investigative reporter Louise Shorter on CBS Reality’s Wrongly Accused
Investigative reporter Louise Shorter, who has spent much of her career investigating and aiding those who have been unjustly accused, will host the new series. Premiering on Tuesday 21st March at 10pm on CBS Reality (Freesat channel 135), Louise will speak with the wrongly accused from five cases over 10 episodes, as well as those who were affected such as their family members and those close to the case. She’ll also meet with a group of experts to delve into how and why these accusations were made, and how things were put right after the real killers were found.
Among the well-known criminal cases covered, Louise will explore the case of Barri White who was accused of murdering his girlfriend, Rachel Manning in December 2000. We’ll also hear from Colin Stagg who was wrongly imprisoned for the murder of Rachell Nickell in 1992 before the true killer was found.
But let’s hear from Louise herself about the show:
Thanks for joining us, Louise! First of all, can you tell us a bit more about Wrongly Accused?
Wrongly Accused tells the stories of five totally innocent people who were accused of murder. In each case scientists and detectives tell us about the tipping point in the police investigation that got it so wrong. The innocent men and their families tell us how their lives were permanently scarred before justice was eventually done when the real killer was identified. This is the first time television has told the complete story of injustice and justice through personal testimony that you’ll never forget.
Get more of a sneak peek by watching the Wrongly Accused trailer:
Was there a case that particularly stood out to you over the series?
It’s hard to choose one because they have all affected me deeply and I think everybody who watches will remember these stories for years to come. It was a joy to meet Barri White again on camera because I investigated his case for so long while he was in prison it took over my life but I’d not seen him since he got out. The gentle giant Stefan Kiszko will always stand out because he epitomizes the horror of a wrongful conviction which destroyed him physically and mentally leaving his tiny, fierce mum to fight for freedom for her son. Their bond was remarkable and the fact they both died so soon after he got out made it bittersweet.
Over your time working on Wrongly Accused, did you notice any patterns start to emerge in these cases?
Yes, without a doubt, this series tells us a lot about failings in the criminal justice system which remain relevant today. In some cases, evidence being misunderstood is central. The legal system wants certainty, but medicine and science often can’t provide that. Cases go wrong when experts pretend they can. Another pattern is when police investigations become fixated on one suspect, blinkered to clues that point to the real killer. Finally, the media’s reckless desire to provoke and titillate the public against a suspect had a malign influence on the course of justice in every single wrongful conviction we looked at.
What was it that usually prompted the truth to come out in the majority of cases? Is it usually an eyewitness, or new DNA findings?
If there’s one thread, I’d say it’s usually one determined individual who will not give up till justice is done. What that individual finds changes from case to case though forensic science and medicine often play a decisive role.
What impact does being wrongly accused have on people?
It destroys them very often, and even if they do get their conviction quashed, they have trouble leaving behind the injustice that was done because it fundamentally shakes their trust in authority. But there’s also lightness and joy in the stories that we follow when failings are admitted, and the innocent reclaim their lives. A very wise Chief Constable once told me we police by consent in this country and not force and that only happens when the public has confidence in policing and the courts. So, it's important, he said, that when something has gone wrong, it’s admitted as soon as possible. The good thing about almost all our stories is that eventually justice was done. To free an innocent person is a credit to the courts. To reinvestigate and identify the real killer is a credit to the police officers who did so.
In your opinion, what can be done to both stop miscarriages of justice taking place, and how can the wrong accused be best supported after they’re proven innocent?
More work should be done to ensure that the safeguards and protections we have in this country for fair trials are followed. In recent years, high profile trials have collapsed and I’ve no doubt innocent people are in prison right now because resources are so stretched a fair trial was impossible. And people who get their convictions quashed must be given compensation by the state. It is virtually impossible to get compensation now because of a change in the law. That’s wrong. Compensation is a financial necessity but also a public acknowledgement, an apology, for the horrors endured.
What drew you to the field of investigative journalism?
As a teenager I loved a BBC investigative series called Rough Justice which looked at claims of innocence by people in prison for horrendous crimes. I was enthralled and amazed that journalists could re-investigate and find evidence that the police and courts had missed. I could see the impact of these investigations on those personally affected but also the greater good the series achieved in holding a spotlight to the criminal justice system to ensure only the guilty go to prison. I wanted to become a part of that and joined Rough Justice a decade later.
You also founded Inside Justice – how do you choose which crimes to investigate?
I’m always drawn to stories where the stakes are high – so I usually concentrate on long sentences, mostly murder – and it needs two elements for me to want to take a deep dive. Firstly, that there’s a reason to believe the person in prison really could be innocent as claimed (most people in jail say they’re innocent, and most of them aren’t!) and secondly, that there are lines of enquiry that could be actively pursued.
What are the signs that someone is innocent of a crime they’ve been accused of?
I don’t have a crystal ball and I’m not sure it’s wise to rely on gut feelings or signs of innocence, so I’ll answer that another way… I immediately drop a case if I find out somebody has lied to me or held information back and if the detail of their story waivers, I get very sceptical about whether I’m being played. Those who are truly innocent are clear and consistent and want to shout their innocence from the rooftops and they accept all work that could show objectively whether they did it or not. Lawyers have a good nose for these things so if a barrister or solicitor comes to me with concerns about a case, I’ll always try to find time to help.
Thank you, Louise! To watch Wrongly Accused, tune into CBS Reality (Freesat channel 135) on Tuesdays at 10pm starting 21st March. For more true crime and crime dramas, check out our top picks to watch now.
Isabelle Grimshaw
