Skip to content
Justice for KevanJustice for Kevan

Evidence

The evidence shows why Kevan belongs home, not in prison.

Kevan is innocent. The evidence shows how weak identification, second-hand claims and joint enterprise became a life sentence, then how prison conditions made the fight to prove the truth harder from inside.

Case evidencePrison recordHelp Kevan

The evidence at a glance

Weak conviction evidence supports the central truth: Kevan belongs home. The prison record exposes the barriers he has faced while proving the truth from inside.

Identification

The link to the scene failed.

Kevan says he was not at the Cowell home, and weak identification did not safely place him there.

Hearsay

Untested claims carried weight.

Second-hand and disputed material helped build a picture of guilt that the defence could not properly confront.

Joint enterprise

The law helped fill gaps.

Shared responsibility let disputed facts and association carry weight the direct evidence could not.

Prison record

The fight was obstructed.

Isolation, transfer disruption, complaint barriers and damaged records made the innocence fight harder from inside.

Case evidence

The prosecution case was treated as stronger than it was.

Kevan says he was not at the scene. The identification did not safely place him there, second-hand material carried claims the defence could not properly test, and joint enterprise allowed association and inference to stand in for direct proof. The result was a case built to look complete when the core links remained weak.

Identification

Why the link to the scene fails

Kevan has always said he was not inside the Cowell home. The prosecution needed reliable evidence placing him there, but the case material challenges the witness identification, the parade safeguards and the disclosure picture. Once that link was unsafe, every later inference began from the wrong starting point.

  • Link to the scene contested
  • ID parade safeguards challenged
  • Disclosure questions remain central
Hearsay

How second-hand claims gained force

Hearsay can include claims repeated through someone else, statements made outside court, or accounts from people the defence cannot properly question. In Kevan’s case, disputed material and Cyprus-linked claims helped fill gaps while the original source could not be tested in the ordinary way.

  • Claims too distant to test properly
  • Cyprus material remains important
  • Reliability matters more than volume
Joint enterprise

How the law bridged weak proof

Joint enterprise matters because it gave the prosecution a legal path to argue guilt through alleged shared purpose, intention and association, even while the direct evidence tying Kevan to the scene remained weak.

  • Association treated as legally weighty
  • Direct proof remained weak
  • Jogee later clarified the law
Identification

Kevan says he was not at the crime scene.

Scene linkWitness identificationID paradeDisclosure

The identification material sits at the start of the injustice. The prosecution needed a safe link to the scene, but the published material shows that link was weak, contested and treated as stronger than it was.

  • Kevan has always said he was not at the Cowell home.
  • The prosecution first needed reliable evidence placing him there.
  • The case material challenges the witness descriptions, the ID parade process, disclosure and the handling of identification safeguards.
  • Once weak identification was treated as proof, later claims were read through a false starting point.
Identification problemThe archive discusses witness identification, ID parades, disclosure, Turnbull safeguards, eyewitness reliability and a United States v Wade reference.
Why it mattersIf the first link to the scene is weak, later claims can be used to make an innocent man look guilty. Identification comes first because it is how the prosecution tried to move from allegation to presence.

Weak identification helped give the prosecution case a false foundation.

Identification archiveEvidence issueTimeline
Hearsay

Second-hand claims carried too much weight.

Second-hand claimsCyprus materialAbsent sourcesSource testing

Kevan’s case includes concern about claims connected to Cyprus, disputed witness material and accounts the defence could not properly test in court.

  • The danger was practical: claims the prosecution used carried weight while the defence could not properly test the original source.
  • Hearsay can mean gossip, repeated accounts, alleged admissions, reports of what someone else said, or claims from absent sources.
  • Those claims can fill gaps in a prosecution story while leaving the defence unable to confront the original claim.
  • In Kevan’s case, disputed witness material helped create a picture of guilt that the direct evidence did not prove.
Identification problemThe Criminal Justice Act 2003 sets rules for admitting hearsay. The central concern is reliability: whether the claims used in Kevan’s case were too distant, disputed or hard to confront.
Why it mattersCross-examination is one of the central protections against wrongful accusation. When the person behind a claim does not have to face questions, the jury can hear something damaging without seeing how it survives scrutiny.

Second-hand claims helped make a weak case look stronger than it was.

CJA 2003 hearsayHearsay judgmentsHearsay legal issue
Joint enterprise

Joint enterprise helped turn gaps into guilt.

Secondary liabilityR v JogeeAssociation and inference

Kevan is innocent and does not accept presence or guilt. Joint enterprise matters here because it gave the prosecution a way to argue guilt through alleged shared purpose and association while the factual case remained fragile.

  • Joint enterprise gave the prosecution a way to argue responsibility beyond a direct act.
  • That is especially dangerous where the factual link to the scene is already weak and contested.
  • Kevan’s conviction shows how disputed association and inference can be made to carry the weight of a murder case.
Identification problemR v Jogee corrected the treatment of foresight and intent in secondary liability. Kevan’s case shows the human danger when broad liability is placed beside weak identification and disputed claims.
Why it mattersJoint enterprise can make alleged association, inference and weak proof look like a complete murder case. In Kevan’s case, it helped attach guilt where the evidence did not prove it.

The law helped bridge gaps the prosecution evidence could not carry on its own.

UKSC JogeeJoint enterprise legal issueLegal issues
Appeal record

Correcting injustice from prison has been painfully difficult.

Appeal accessVideo linkRecords from custody

Kevan and Miran Thakrar continued the fight after conviction through a system that controlled court attendance, papers and communication.

  • After conviction, the fight moved into a system where the person challenging the conviction had less control over papers, attendance and communication.
  • The archive records concern that Kevan and Miran were denied the full court access they sought.
  • A wrongful conviction can survive when the person fighting it cannot easily gather records or be properly heard.
Identification problemThe appeal archive records concern that Kevan and Miran did not get a physical day in court and were expected to participate by video link.
Why it mattersAn unsafe conviction can survive when the person challenging it cannot easily gather records, meet lawyers, follow hearings or keep public attention on the case.

The appeal record is evidence of how difficult it is to correct a grave mistake from inside prison.

Appeal archiveCriminal Appeal Act 1995Timeline

Record types

Different records reveal different parts of the truth.

Court records, Kevan’s own words, archive posts and press reports each have a distinct role. Read together, they rebuild the picture around the conviction and the prison fight.

Court and legal records

What was decided or argued

Judgments, appeal material and legal explainers help show the formal record and the legal tests around hearsay, joint enterprise, appeals and prison law.

Read legal issues
Kevan’s words

What the fight has cost

Letters and commentary from Kevan keep the evidence human. They show what prison isolation, complaint systems and public support mean to the person still fighting.

Read Kevan’s letter
Campaign archive

What supporters kept public

Older posts keep dates, claims, prison updates, public action and hard-to-find material available for review.

Browse archive
Press reporting

What the public was told

Reporting can recover dates and scrutiny. Care matters when coverage includes contested allegations or hostile framing.

Press background
Institutional records

What institutions recorded

Legislation, prison rules, human-rights material, OHCHR correspondence and public judgments help ground the wider legal and prison context.

Legal records
New information

What may still be missing

Documents, dates, names, memories, correspondence and corrections can still help clarify what has been published.

Send information

Prison evidence

The prison record is part of the evidence.

Kevan’s prison treatment affects the justice fight because it affects health, papers, communication, complaints, legal access and the ability to stay visible. The prison record exposes what he has had to fight through while proving his innocence.

Legal work

Papers and contact were part of the fight

Legal work from prison depends on documents, calls, visits, confidentiality and regular contact. Transfers, property loss and restrictions broke that chain around Kevan and made evidence harder to gather, protect and use.

  • Papers and property
  • Lawyer contact
  • Court access
CSC and segregation

Isolation made justice harder to reach

CSC and segregation affected health, stamina, correspondence, visibility and the basic ability to keep a complex innocence fight alive. Prison control became a barrier to justice because it controlled the tools Kevan needed to challenge the conviction.

  • Health and stamina
  • Correspondence
  • Public visibility
Frankland

A not guilty verdict matters

Kevan was acquitted after the Frankland charges. Reporting and archive material described a self-defence case rooted in what Kevan had suffered at HMP Frankland: racism, physical violence, sexual violence, PTSD evidence and fear for his life.

  • Acquitted in court
  • Self-defence context
  • Reported claims kept in context
CSC and segregation

Isolation has damaged the fight for justice.

CSCSegregationHealth and visibility

Kevan’s years in CSC and segregation conditions are part of the evidence record because isolation affected health, communication, legal work, papers and visibility.

  • Isolation affects more than daily life. It affects stamina, mental health, correspondence, legal access and public visibility.
  • Dates, locations, review papers and impact evidence show what prison control did in practice.
  • Kevan has continued to fight despite conditions that restricted contact, damaged health and made legal work slower and harder.
Identification problemThe archive includes CSC updates, segregation action posts, OHCHR-related material, court records and public reporting on prison conditions.
Why it mattersThe legal labels matter, but so does the lived reality: time locked away, contact restricted, health damaged and the outside record harder to build.

Isolation has been part of the injustice and has made the fight to prove innocence harder.

CSC and segregation legal issueTimelineLegal issues
Property and transfer

Lost property can mean lost legal ground.

Transfer recordsLegal papersProperty claim

Transfer damage sounds minor only if the person has not had to fight a murder conviction from prison.

  • A prison transfer can become an evidence issue when legal papers, notes or personal records are damaged or lost.
  • The archive judgment gives this problem a formal record rather than leaving it as a private complaint.
  • For someone fighting a life sentence, missing papers can mean missing detail years later.
Identification problemThe Thakrar v Secretary of State for Justice archive records a legal claim connected to property lost or damaged during prison transfer.
Why it mattersLegal papers, records and personal material can be central to an innocence fight. Losing them can make reconstruction harder years later.

Transfer and property records help show how prison administration can affect justice.

Judgment archivePrison recordContact
Frankland record

The not guilty verdict matters to the public image built around Kevan.

Not guilty verdictPrison allegationsPublic perception

Kevan was acquitted over the HMP Frankland charges. The verdict cuts through the hostile prison narrative: a jury heard his self-defence case and did not accept the prosecution case against him.

  • A not guilty verdict matters because allegations can keep shaping public perception even after a court rejects the case.
  • The FRFI archive places the verdict beside reported evidence about prison violence, racism, mental health, fear and Kevan’s self-defence position.
  • The acquittal helps challenge the hostile image built around Kevan while keeping prison-treatment claims tied to their source.
Identification problemThe Frankland acquittal shows that prison allegations against Kevan did not survive the criminal trial.
Why it mattersThe acquittal cuts against the idea that prison allegations can be repeated as proof of guilt, character or danger.

The Frankland record puts the hostile image built around Kevan beside the jury’s acquittal and the abuse context described in reporting.

FRFI archiveTimelinePress background
Complaints and oversight

Kevan kept recording what happened from inside.

ComplaintsOmbudsmanAccountability

Kevan has used complaints, correspondence, litigation and public writing to challenge prison treatment.

  • Complaint records can preserve facts that would otherwise remain inside prison systems.
  • Kevan’s public writing shows persistence, not passivity. He has kept naming what happened and asking for scrutiny.
  • Outside attention matters because prison records rarely become clear without pressure and careful reading.
Identification problemThe public archive includes Ombudsman material, prison-rules correspondence, property litigation and Kevan’s 2024 writing on the Prison and Probation Ombudsman.
Why it mattersComplaint systems only matter if they uncover facts and preserve accountability. Public attention helps stop records from disappearing into institutional files.

The complaint record makes clear that Kevan has never stopped fighting.

PPO commentaryOmbudsman archiveLegal issues

Strengthen the record

A document, memory or name can still matter.

If you hold trial or appeal material, press cuttings, old campaign pages, correspondence, prison documents, Cyprus material, identification evidence, names of people who may know more, or corrections to anything published here, it may help make the picture clearer.

Send informationFollow the timelineHelp Kevan
Details that helpDates, names, document titles, links, locations and source details can make information more valuable.
Sensitive materialPrivate, legal or medical material is safest when its nature is described before copies are sent.
Accurate sharingKevan is innocent. The strongest public support links people back to the evidence record.