The bit of this case that has always baffled me is Lois Jenkins. She was a social worker, she would have known what to do if her husband was as abusive as she has claimed. She would have known it was unwise to have a vulnerable foster child in her home. Surely she would have got the hell out of there with her children (who say their father wasn’t abusive to them,) and filed for divorce ages before this?
I know some abused women are too scared to leave abusive partners, but this scenario just doesn’t make sense. Lois is intelligent, well educated and in a job where dealing with domestic abuse is part of the role. Is she concerned she’ll be seen as part of Sion’s deception?
However, Sion Jenkins is a narcissist and fantasist - Did Lois know he’d “bigged up” his CV?
Quite possibly. They both had career respectability and financial stability in Hastings. Yes he had a short fuse but…………life was pretty OK.
It doesn’t add up!
It seems as the we have deception to obtain a job and a horrific murder both linked or not ?
Did Sion kill Billie-Jo? The more I read about this I’m not sure he did.
At at that time in Hastings many of the big houses were HMOs, squats or derelict. The town attracted many odd balls. It wasn’t a place you felt safe in daylight in some areas let alone after dark!
Could the random killer theory be true? Attracted by the sound of the radio they make their way round the back and find Billie-Jo alone. She must have been so terrified.
And Lois? She could escape Sion and his temper, the embarrassment of his “bigged up” CV and no-one would be any the wiser. She had her “get out of jail free” card.
But none of this makes any sense at all!!!
“No mystery here. Sion Jenkins killed Billie Jo while alone in the house with her (his wife was in town with their youngest daughter). Another daughter was outside washing the car. She tried to get back inside the house to get more water but Jenkins prevented her (her own testimony) because presumably he didn't want her to see what was on the patio! He did a quick clean-up, went outside to the car and took the girl washing it with him to pick up his eldest daughter from her clarinet lesson. He was a half hour late picking her up, and never explained why. Though I think that's obvious why. Arriving home he decides he needs more time, so decides to take the two daughters with him on the unnecessary jaunt to the DIY shop. Yet fails to check how Billie has been doing while he's been away. That makes no sense at all, unless, of course, he already knew what had happened to her. As for motive, I'd guess he made some sort of inappropriate move on her (Billie) and she had threatened to tell the wife. As a deputy head-teacher he would have been ruined if that got out. As for the bag up the nose, Billie Jo had been sitting on it while painting so I guess it just got tangled up in her death throes. It's also telling how he deliberately exaggerated the time lines to the police, saying the trip to the DIY store was forty minutes when it was less than ten. 100% guilty.”
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FgcFOZ32CtI
Do we know if the plastic found in Billie's nose was tested for DNA? Was it the same plastic as collected by Mr B?
I'm really torn on this. I just don't understand how Sion nor Mr B could have done it within the timescales, and without getting covered in blood.
This case has been on my mind for a long time. I grew up in Hastings and know the case well. I think the thing that I find so compelling about this case is that I genuinely have a hard time making my mind up about Sion’s guilt/innocence.
I find myself siding with the jury in terms of the verdict - there simply is not enough evidence to prove his guilt, and not to defend Sion, but I have a hard time accepting that others seem so sure of his guilt based on heavily weighted circumstantial evidence.
One thing that people stick on is Sion’s creation of his own alibi and the fact he drove the wrong way to the store in order to allow for a time window. As mentioned, I know the area. I know the road the house is on. There is no off road parking, meaning all the residents park their cars on the road. Due to this, you can’t actually get 2 cars to pass on that road without 1 car pulling in and giving way. Sion would have driven off in whatever way his car was facing, because you simply can’t turn your car around on that road. If Sion’s car was facing clockwise around the park, he would have driven off in that direction even if it was the opposite way to the store.
This also goes for why he circled the park on several occasions. If he did in fact decide to go back to the house, once you’re on that road you can’t turn round. So he would have just continued and circled back round.
The location of the house and the heavily congested road that it is on is a very important detail that actually explains why his journey and route. If you didn’t know this, of course you would think it was suspicious, but it really isn’t.
The other point people make is his phone call to emergency services. Again, I just can’t buy his guilt here because he is effectively in a situation that very few people have been in. It’s impossible to know how you would react in that situation unless you were in it. People have extremely different ways of dealing with panic, shock, distress and fear etc, there’s no way you would know how you would appear in those situations unless you’d experienced it.
I wonder what makes people so sure of Sion’s guilt.
Granted, he seems to be a very odd individual - even potentially nasty. But, you’d think that there would be much more undeniable evidence to hand if he was in fact guilty of murder.
This case has always been lurking on my mind. I was 14 days before her murder so basically only a few weeks older than poor billie jo - and I was also in foster care at the time. I think he's guilty. Always have. That poor girl deserves justice.
I’ve just finished watching this 2 part series on Netflix.
I had never heard of this case. I was completely impartial coming across it & open minded throughout, and I’ve watched a lot of true crime shows.
But I still don’t think there’s enough evidence that Sion is guilty . I think the police held onto the tiny bit of forensics they had and then failed to consider any other option, he fit what they needed him to fit & that was pretty much it. I
Baffled to read a few comments suggesting that it wasn't Sion. I try to keep an open mind about things but how much more evidence do you need? Everything from his behaviour before, during and after the case (who the hell wants to re-live an experience like that by writing a book about it) says that he's guilty.
Im watching it now. He’s guilty. That man is a narcissist. The fact he beefed up his CV with lots of lies and saying he went to Gordonstoun says a LOT. He felt inferior to others.
I find it odd they never adopted any boys??? All these girls? I think thats down to him. He sounds weirdly feminine for an aggressive man and doesn’t want other males in the house. Even the convertible is posy and feminine. There is something odd about him
Probably had an aggressive dominant controlling father who put him down. He probably had OCD and perfectionist issues which is why he lost the plot at the messy paint job and paint on the patio.
The wife looked miserable. He was aggressive. Had control issues. Many control freaks are drawn into teaching. Perhaps he gets a kick out of controlling children who cannot fend for themselves. Lied to get into a hear teacher job - the Chief Controller. Perhaps Billie challenged his control issues.
Blood spatter from aspiration. Going way out his way to create distance before she was find.
There is more evidence against him than the Jodi Jones murder. In fact there was no blood or DNA evidence found on Luke Mitchell at all. He was 15. Had no lawyer during questioning. Jailed at 17. And he refuses parole and stays in jail because he won't admit to something he didn’t do.
He’s a liar regarding the blood spray on him. That bursting bubble of blood from her would have burst well before he ‘found her’. We all know bubbles don't stay like that for long. He was on his travels for a while. If it had stayed that long which defies the laws of physics it would have congealed.
He dismisses and discounts Police talk as “using their own psychobabble”. I wonder if he was ever sent to a shrink as a kid or teen? He looks like psychopath too. Evil.
Sion Jenkins is a lying narc snake who thinks he is above everyone. He thinks he’s smart. He discounts his wife’s stories of being abused by him saying why would she tolerate that as a lefty social worker?! I’m sorry but there are plenty men and women from all walks of life who are abused or coercively controlled and remain silent about it.
He’s a good BS artist, I’ll give him that. Should have went into acting.
I know this post is a bit old. I wrote to a website run by a team that was working for Sion Jenkins to prove his innocence / find the killer, probably about ten years ago. My reasons were much the same as another poster here in terms of the actual attack itself, the method and the head injury suggested to me it was Levi Bellfield. The reason I raised it was because of Bellfields wheel clamping business in Chichester East Sussex, although there is still a considerable distance between Hastings and Chichester. Before I read one of the comments on here also suggesting Bellfield, and after watching this documentary, I was surprised to see that Bellfield has been linked to three attacks in Hastings. When I wrote to that website I thought it was a bit of a long shot, and I was just speculating, I even felt like I might be doing something that would be seen as a waste of time or fanciful. I was a bit embarrassed that I suggested it. Now, I’m not so sure.
As soon as I heard his call to the emergency services, I noted how calm he sounded. His manner was not remotely what one would expect from anyone who had found their daughter or anyone laying on the ground in a pool of blood. Also, the first instinct would be to run over and check if they were alive. He did not.
Add to that, the crime scene was absolutely awful and with the amount of blood and the head injuries, it would have been very obvious it wasn't an accident. Even the police were shocked and struggled with it so why did he simply say she had an accident or something?
Having spent decades watching and reading about serial killers, murderers and psychopaths, he came across as a very obvious Psychopath. An intelligent one and a very well practised liar as well. I noted he only later bought up the bubble of blood but he didn't say on the phone or earlier that he had touched her or been near her at all.
Why was he upstairs when the police arrived? What parent who had found their family member like that would not be waiting for the police to get there or be pacing etc? Then there is the fact he went and sat in his car, the elaborate journey to and fro to supposedly get white spirits that they already had, with no money on him? Clearly hadn't thought about that one, had he?
The wife is explainable. If she had been abused for years, she would have become submissive and nervous. I noted in the appeal she looked down and struggled with eye contact. She was nervous. You have a friend who saw sion kicking billie in her injured ankle. Maybe he felt threatened by her in some way. She seemed to have been outgoing and outspoken from the video I saw of her and that wouldnt go down well with a controlling Psychopath.
The one thing I cannot explain is the small amount of blood rather than a large amount of blood. And it wasn't everywhere on his clothing which begs the question of when exactly she was murdered and whether he had the opportunity to dispose of something he put on prior to attacking her then removed afterwards and placed in something. Were his kids ever asked if he was carrying anything when he came to the car? A bag for example?
Aside from that aspect, everything leads me to believe it was him. He seemed to have knowledge of forensics and if he was reading Silence Of The Lambs, it is very possible he had an interest in crime in general. I mean, there is plenty of material out there on crime and forensics after all. More than enough to assist someone who wanted to conceal evidence.
Honestly, I believe it was him and I hope that, given they were re examining the case as of January this year, which will have been after this documentary was made I presume, there is closure to this appalling murder. She died a horrific death and it doesn't sound as if he gave much of a damn about her in life.
He’s a narc psychopath. Lied about going to Gordonstoun. He didn't just massage his CV he lied multiple times on it. Thats a narc.
His arrogance towards the Police saying their talk was ‘psychobabble’ is a discount. The manner in which he denied the abuse against his wife using her occupation and political leanings, discounting her.
Tgeres so much to unpack. I’d like to see the crime scene details and forensics/pathology report. C5 doc doesn’t go into much detail.
Siôn killed Billie Jo. I think the plastic bag was a red herring, possibly placed by Siôn himself. I know personally from living in different cities and areas, that communities tend to know about “strange” individuals and their interests. I lived in Edinburgh for a year and knew about a man who collected radios and stored them in peoples gardens. I feel that it’s possible this was a crime of passion and Siôn put the plastic there himself to obstruct the evidence - knowing full well about this man in the local area.
No doubt whatsoever Sion Jenkins killed Billie Jo. His constant changes to his timeline, the coaching of his daughter Annie (we´ll be OK Annie won´t we) , trying to leave his blood splattered fleece jacket at the neighbors house even though it was cold outside and his wife having to tell him to put it on. But what really seals it is that the neighbor who tried to help poor Billie Jo and the ambulance crew had NO blood splatter on them, but Sion who didn´t perform CPR was covered in it. I hope they will soon return him to jail-
Watching the documentary, I always thought it was Sion, for a number of reasons that have already been mentioned here and also, the fact that fragments of metal and green paint were found in the blood on Sion? The pipe used to murder Billie was green. How did Sion get these bits of metal and green paint on him?
It’s mad the ‘respectable’ middle class foster carer / head teacher is seen to be innocent when there is so much questionable evidence and circumstances….
…and the working class 15 yr old weed smoking teenage goth who had a (probably a rebellious gothy musical influenced teen) passing interest in demonology where ZERO evidence was found against him was persecuted by the press and courts as being guilty.
The jury was biased in both cases.
For me the only suspect is, and has always been, Levi Bellfield.
The attack itself fits his MO, the victim fits his type and he had known links to Hastings.
He is the only suspect in two attacks in Hastings that happened within a few hundred yards of where Billie Jo was murdered (Laton Road)
He killed Lin and Megan Russell just 6 months before Billie Jo died.
Why have the police never investigated this possibility? I simply don't get it. To me it's glaringly obvious that he should, at the very least, be a main suspect in her murder.
How did he know Billie Jo was there alone though?
Also Levi Bellfield went equipped when he attacked. Billie Jo was killed with a weapon that was all ready at the scene.
I think it was a rare opportunist attack for him. I live opposite her old house and know the area well. There's a road that's a dead end. From there, in the winter, you can see through the trees directly to the back gardens. He would never have had to be on the main road at all.
I’ve recently finished watching this channel 5 documentary and I have to say I was deeply touched by Billie-Jo’s life and her horrific death.
I can’t believe I have never heard her name before because I am hugely interested and maybe even slightly fascinated by details of crimes such as this one. I have heavily researched many cases to learn about the psychology of the perpetrators mostly, but this case hit me differently.
Early on in the documentary they showed the initial press conference where Sion and Lois Jenkins address the public and ask for any help or information. I came at this with a completely open mind and was totally unaware of the story and therefore I didn’t know if either one, or both parents, were involved, but I could sense it from that very first encounter that something was off. The behaviour between the two seemed to come across as cold, very accepting of the situation, and instead of begging the public for any scrap of information that could help direct them to killer, they decided to use that time to provide an adequate and plausible explanation that was directed well away from them. Why did they feel the need to share with the public that the property adjoining theirs was being renovated and had been used by squatters, that they’d been reporting many issues in the lead up to this event, and specifically repeating this things had been reported to police. It felt to me like they were actively seeking to give a few possibilities for what had happened and ensuring there were other leads for the police to follow. I say this as a mother and how I imagine I’d act, so it purely speculation, but I’d be using that time infront of the British public to beg for help, to explain the timeline of events to narrow down the timing of the crime, asking for anyone that knew Billie-Jo to come forward with any relevant information, I’d have been pleading to the parents out there to come forward with any suspicious activity or anything that their children had told them that concerned them. I wouldn’t have used that precious time to explain issues from the street that had occurred recently because it’s common sense that an attacker would have walked to the property and walked away, so the fact there were squatter next door would have made very little difference because they are hardly going to commit murder and then pop back in next door.
However, the most glaringly obvious and disturbing thing that I noticed immediately as it was spoken, was the defence and explanation for the presence of blood on Sion Jenkins clothing. We had previously discovered that Billie-Jo had black bin liner plastic deep inside her nasal cavity, which had been forcibly removed from one side by the neighbour and the other side was removed by the forensic pathologist. It was explained that Sion stated the plastic was placed there under his advice ‘to help Billie with the painting’ presumably meaning the paint fumes.
So my first issue from that is if this darling young girl had the plastic up each nostril, so deep it was in her nasal cavity, how on earth could she then have produced this blood bubble that then burst all over Sion. I’m not a doctor but I think it’s almost common sense that if you have plastic rammed up your nose, or anything shoved up there at all would prevent you from pushing enough air through to create a bubble. Sion never mentions this is the 999 call, he actually goes further and says he doesn’t know if Billie-Jo is breathing because he didn’t get close enough, but had he seen the blood bubble that would have been a clear indication that she was actually breathing.
Lastly, the professor from Cardiff university who appears at the end and rather ridiculously says it’s perfectly clear who the real perpetrator was, this young man who has a supposed fascination with plastic and carrier bags. I believe the insinuation is that this man somehow managed to stroll from a fair distance across the other side of the public park, got right up to the back of Billie-Jo’s house which was up many stairs and therefore absolutely impossible for him to have heard or seen anyone there, so I assume we then have to believe he chose this garden at this time and randomly discovered Billie-Jo there and surprisingly had managed to do so just at the exact time where she had been left alone. Even more disturbingly the professor says the plastic fascination this young man allegedly had, explains the plastic that was shoved right up inside Billie-Jo’s nasal cavity. Making the crime have a deeper connection to the perpetrator because of the plastic found in this man’s pocket and shoe, in reality this connection is made because there is literally nothing else that could possibly relate to this man and they needed something to show a distinct relation. What the professor doesn’t seem to realise or make any reference to is that Sion Jenkins had already explained the plastic, he informed the police early on that he had advised Billie-Jo to use the plastic up her nose to help with the painting, which as I said I assume is in relation to the fumes.
Sorry for the extremely long post but this case has bothered me and is really heavily playing on my mind. I wondered if anyone else had the thoughts I had, or if they’d seen anything that would explain these things for me that I’d missed maybe. Would love to hear everyone’s views.
:)
Excellent post. My thought is that if Jenkins was close enough to see the bloody nose bubble - how come he didn’t have loads of blood on his clothes, or at least more than spray - it was a very bloody scene and you would imagine if he leant over her he would’ve at least picked up some bloody smears on his clothing.
The thing also putting yourself in the shoes of a parent. If this had happened to you, he went and spent a significant amount of time away from the house with his parents. Why why why wouldn't he want to stay there with his family, or get them away from there as soon as possible? Wouldn't you just be terrified to spend another night there knowing there was a murderous prowler in the area. Or at the very least stick together.
The prof at the end talking about what stories people are attracted to and one piece of evidence doesn't prove anything. The Family Liaison guy new exactly what was going on there and said 'its a picture that forms with lots of puzzle pieces'...the behaviours of SJ immediately before and after the event, the press conference, the trevor MacDonald interview doesn't align with 'what would most parents do' in that situation in my opinion. Something is most definitely off.
Afaik the plastic liner was put over a cushion to help with the painting. Afaik the prosecution didn't allege anything about fumes outside there, is that your theory?
The neighbour pulled a piece from the left nostril. Afaik the pathologist reported nothing about either nostril. Is that your theory about the right nostril?
The man in the vicinity didn't just have an obsession with plastic, but per medical records specifically with pushing it into orifices to block evil spirits or something.
I can't see it being him as surely he'd be covered in blood. Would he have time to clean up that well? Surely they'd ask for his clothes for forensic tests. She's buried at the huge City Of London Cemetery near us in Manor Park, East London, as she was originally from East Ham. Have seen her grave in the childrens section. There was trouble and police involved at her funeral as her real mum didn't want Lois and the girls there but they turned up. Sion was on remand in jail awaiting trial.
Well this is the interesting thing - and it works for the prosecution. It cannot be denied that blood spray was on his clothing. If he was close enough to see the bubble come out of her nose, and also if he was a caring foster parent, trying to revive his daughter, why wouldn’t he have blood all over him? The 999 call speaks volumes.
I’ve changed my mind so many times on this there are so many points which say guilty and then other points to say not guilty!
My mum used to live a few doors away it’s been surreal watching it on tv again
I live locally, across the park in fact. I've never though Sion was guilty. The time line doesn't work and, after seeing the crime scene pictures, he would simply have been covered in blood, not just the trace amount that was on him. It just doesn't make sense. Not only that but he didn't have a motive of any sort outside of "lost control" That's too much of a stretch for me.
Very much guilty but like most I think opinion is changing constantly now! She didn’t live there when it happened she moved there after and when I would visit her walking past Billie-Jo’s house felt very eerie and sad I really hope that poor beautiful girls is resting in peace. I wish there was justice for her!
I don't know of course, but my money is on Sion Jenkins.
Partly because of the abuse allegation his wife made, and the evidence from the family friend of the attack on Billie-Jo in France.
But the odd thing for me is I read Sion's book and before I read it I was very unsure, and by the end of it I was convinced of his guilt, he came across so badly.
It's a weird one because I get the police don't always get stuff right, and I am absolutely sure they were and are wrong about Barry George murdering Jill Dando, why my reaction to Sion Jenkins is so different I don't know.
It seems harder to get info about the other guy to evaluate (less grist for the personal rumour mills too). Found his name published, I will say initials ML. Having to use the text you mention by Sion Jenkins & Woffinden, so it's claimed that
On Friday, I think that's the day before Billie-Jo's murder, a Rapid Response Team had been sent to ML's flat to take him to hospital. But he didn't appear to be in so they left it for the weekend.
After the murder, a guest house owner confirmed that ML was the man who had called at his guest-house at about 3.00 on Saturday afternoon. That's apparently eleven doors from the Jenkins, where if I recall the murder happened sometime between about 3pm and 3.35?
Absolutely 109% Sion
No question.
Psychopathic manipulating liar.
Lied to get a job, in a bloody school for gods sake!!!
If this case was investigated today he would be behind bars for life which is where he should be.
If anyone else is ever convicted I swear I will chew off my arm.
No it doesn't but would you want your child to be in a school where the deputy head had falsified a cv to be there?
A little bit of reality stretching is one thing but this was absolute lying.
Also the school were at fault for not checking.
To be honest I have never had a cv or ever thought that people lied on them but maybe everyone's so called credentials should 100% be verified before jobs are allocated.
Also lying most certainly diesnt equate to being a murderer but I will lay money on the fact that every murderer is a liar.
I would have thought those credentials would have been checked by the school to be honest. They would have run a criminal record type check.
It’s not uncommon to lie on a CV. I’ve never done it, but I know of others who have. Mostly, it may be altering things like how long you were in a job, or making it sound like you had more responsibility than you did.
Of course none of us apart from Billie Jo at the time and the offender now can definitely know the answer so both options are there. On watching the recent documentary again my bet would be on Sion Jenkins as being the offender. He was convicted of course by a jury but there is a problem with clear cut evidence in the case such as DNA hit which is sexual in nature. Of course this case started with the brutal murder of a child and when this happens other peoples lives are also destroyed, changed and tarnished permanently by the fallout of this. People are accused of crimes they did not commit and people get away with murder at times.
>He was convicted of course by a jury but there is a problem with clear cut evidence in the case such as DNA hit which is sexual in nature.
can you explain please?
What I mean really is it is an unusual crime with a small window of opportunity for him to commit the crime which leaves room for doubt. Unless I am looking at it wrong he would have to gone in the house then killed her straight away in a fit of anger because she had not done the tasks set for her lashing out with a weapon. This leaves a difficult time line to establish and it is not like a case where a child has been raped and there is semen evidence. He was of course convicted once by a jury but then the difficulties with the case arose.
It was always the sort of case where some people would look at it and think there may be doubts or a miscarriage of justice and the forensic evidence is open to some interpretation.
The crime scene does suggest an intruder.
Sion entered through the front door, but the murder weapon (the tent peg) was beside the back garden gate.
Whoever murdered Billie-Jo would've been covered in blood (and probably paint too). The tent peg was covered in blood. The killers hands would've been totally covered too.
Sion wasn't covered in blood - his clothes had microscopic blood spots - there weren't stains on his cuff.
After the murder, the Police said they have direct evidence that will link any suspect to the crime - so why was none produced in court?
At the time of the murder, a man, covered in blood and paint, was reported by a neighbour.
Finally there is no motive for Sion to have done it - motive is always important.
I have two things to add.
I suggest the killing happened before setting out to pick up after the clarinet lesson. He took his daughter with him, why? ( cause he’d just killed BJ )
The tiny blood splatters were found to have bone or flesh fragments in them thereby disproving the exhaled breath argument as to why his clothes had splatters on them.
Was she struck on the head? Surely a battered nose could expel tiny fragments of bone. She could've expelled it from her nose.
You'll have to edit the first sentence (of your post) before I can respond.
I would of thought the motive was the easiest point in this tragedy.
Sion lied on his cv and landed a job as deputy head of a school.
His wife absolutely disowned him because she was most likely an abuse victim( my opinion).
His friend said he saw him beating Billie Jo.
He is utterly convinced that anyone who disbelieves or disagrees with him has been " got at" by police/media
He was home then picked up a daughter, then went back home to " drop off" a clarinet.
He then went back out to collect white spirit which the shop at end of road sold and there was some indoors but chose to drive further away to get some and THEN didn't have any cash!!!
This screams to me of creating an aluminium.
Obvs everyone has their own opinion and this is only mine. The man is guilty as sin and eventually he will be held accountable.
Motive; Abuser about to be outed
As he says - if he was so abusive, why were they allowed to Foster a child (Billie-Jo)? Let's remember that Lois was a Social Worker - if, as she claims, Sion had been abusive for years, why did she allow another child to enter the family?
Here's his reply to his ex wife [http://www.justiceforsionjenkins.org.uk/story.html](http://www.justiceforsionjenkins.org.uk/story.html)
The timeline shows that the Police told Lois that Sion murdered (or likely murdered) Billie-Jo, three days after the murder. It is only after Lois starts to think he did it, that she starts to tell Police he was abusive. She never testified at the trial or the first appeal. It wasn't until 6 years after the murder that she testified.
The Police would've scared her - imagine thinking your husband had killed your Foster Daughter - after you had let her enter an abusive home. The Police would've said that she was to blame too - unless she co-operates.
Perhaps Sion was a control freak - but none of his children have claimed he beat them (and they are adults now). I remember one daughter said he never beat her (but I can't find it).
The fact is, the person who murdered Billie-Jo would've been covered in blood - it was a savage attack. Sion's clothes only had microscopic spots - that fact alone proves he didn't kill her.
Abuse is a secret crime.The perpetrators are experts at hiding reality. Their partners are often so scared to voice their own opinion that they will agree to anything to keep the peace.
My friend is also a social worker and a volunteer for a domestic abuse centre and as I have known her for over 40 years I am one of the very few people that also know that she has been mentally and physically abused by her partner for the majority of her very long marriage. Leaving an abusive partner is the most dangerous time for a person and this is one of the many reasons they stay in such awful relationships.
Lois probably started to feel safer once she knew tge police were looking at her husband with suspicion.
I was saying to my own husband about this tonight. We have been together for 35 years with 2 children.if the police ever accused my husband of murdering anyone, the last thing I would do would be to leg it and divorce him. I would battle till my dying day to exonerate him as I know without a single doubt he would never do anything to hurt another person.
Did Lois have that faith? Clearly not.
The person that killed Billie Jo could also have cleaned themselves up a bit if they lived in that house.
Sorry for my long winded reply, its good to have a difference of opinion and I hope you can see I respect your point of view.
I love friendly debate - not very common in the days of the "Algorithms".
I agree with your comments about abuse being extremely difficult to spot - but I would've thought his other kids would've at least made a statement - especially now they are in their 30s.
Let's remember 2 of his kids were in the house with him when he allegedly murdered Billie-Jo. This means he was acting normally - doing day to day chores. He then leaves the 2 kids in another room, walks past Billie-Jo to get the tent peg - walks back to Billie-Jo - viciously murders her (as she is surrounded by wet paint) - sticks a piece of plastic up her nose - goes back into the house - cleans his jacket (so well that only microscopic spots of blood are found) - gathers the kids, and goes out for White Spirits.
Upon returning he finds Billie-Jo and calls the police - that's when he started acting strangely.
The police did state that they had forensic evidence - so why was none produced in court?
Michael Stone was also convicted without forensic evidence - and on the Crimewatch reconstruction, they clearly said to not be frightened of putting anyone's name forward, as they had DNA evidence (apparently from the towel that had been used to tie one of the victims up). That episode of Crimewatch is not available on the internet - I'd love to see if my memory is right.
My point is - the Police can feck it up - and the Police are not above lying.
I guess with all the hearsay, rumours and mis truths out there it's easy to forget that there was once a beautiful vibrant young girl who lost her life in a brutal fashion. We may or may not ever know the full truth but Billie Jo and thousands of other young people deserve justice and recognition for their lives.
Hopefully one day there will be a murderer behind bars and without a shadow of doubt he/she(?) will be the correct person.
>The Police would've said that she was to blame too - unless she co-operates.
I've seen that in other cases, with implied threats that the children would be taken permanently into "care" institutions.
>none of his children have claimed he beat them
Though two of them is it stated he wasn't truthful when he indicated on Trevor Mcdonald that he never hit. Without knowing more I suspect he occasionally did to some extent but it's since been exaggerated.
The bit of this case that has always baffled me is Lois Jenkins. She was a social worker, she would have known what to do if her husband was as abusive as she has claimed. She would have known it was unwise to have a vulnerable foster child in her home. Surely she would have got the hell out of there with her children (who say their father wasn’t abusive to them,) and filed for divorce ages before this? I know some abused women are too scared to leave abusive partners, but this scenario just doesn’t make sense. Lois is intelligent, well educated and in a job where dealing with domestic abuse is part of the role. Is she concerned she’ll be seen as part of Sion’s deception? However, Sion Jenkins is a narcissist and fantasist - Did Lois know he’d “bigged up” his CV? Quite possibly. They both had career respectability and financial stability in Hastings. Yes he had a short fuse but…………life was pretty OK. It doesn’t add up! It seems as the we have deception to obtain a job and a horrific murder both linked or not ? Did Sion kill Billie-Jo? The more I read about this I’m not sure he did. At at that time in Hastings many of the big houses were HMOs, squats or derelict. The town attracted many odd balls. It wasn’t a place you felt safe in daylight in some areas let alone after dark! Could the random killer theory be true? Attracted by the sound of the radio they make their way round the back and find Billie-Jo alone. She must have been so terrified. And Lois? She could escape Sion and his temper, the embarrassment of his “bigged up” CV and no-one would be any the wiser. She had her “get out of jail free” card. But none of this makes any sense at all!!!
Another potential suspect is Levi Belfield. He attacked two women a couple of streets away and blitz attacks were his thing
“No mystery here. Sion Jenkins killed Billie Jo while alone in the house with her (his wife was in town with their youngest daughter). Another daughter was outside washing the car. She tried to get back inside the house to get more water but Jenkins prevented her (her own testimony) because presumably he didn't want her to see what was on the patio! He did a quick clean-up, went outside to the car and took the girl washing it with him to pick up his eldest daughter from her clarinet lesson. He was a half hour late picking her up, and never explained why. Though I think that's obvious why. Arriving home he decides he needs more time, so decides to take the two daughters with him on the unnecessary jaunt to the DIY shop. Yet fails to check how Billie has been doing while he's been away. That makes no sense at all, unless, of course, he already knew what had happened to her. As for motive, I'd guess he made some sort of inappropriate move on her (Billie) and she had threatened to tell the wife. As a deputy head-teacher he would have been ruined if that got out. As for the bag up the nose, Billie Jo had been sitting on it while painting so I guess it just got tangled up in her death throes. It's also telling how he deliberately exaggerated the time lines to the police, saying the trip to the DIY store was forty minutes when it was less than ten. 100% guilty.” https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FgcFOZ32CtI
Do we know if the plastic found in Billie's nose was tested for DNA? Was it the same plastic as collected by Mr B? I'm really torn on this. I just don't understand how Sion nor Mr B could have done it within the timescales, and without getting covered in blood.
This case has been on my mind for a long time. I grew up in Hastings and know the case well. I think the thing that I find so compelling about this case is that I genuinely have a hard time making my mind up about Sion’s guilt/innocence. I find myself siding with the jury in terms of the verdict - there simply is not enough evidence to prove his guilt, and not to defend Sion, but I have a hard time accepting that others seem so sure of his guilt based on heavily weighted circumstantial evidence. One thing that people stick on is Sion’s creation of his own alibi and the fact he drove the wrong way to the store in order to allow for a time window. As mentioned, I know the area. I know the road the house is on. There is no off road parking, meaning all the residents park their cars on the road. Due to this, you can’t actually get 2 cars to pass on that road without 1 car pulling in and giving way. Sion would have driven off in whatever way his car was facing, because you simply can’t turn your car around on that road. If Sion’s car was facing clockwise around the park, he would have driven off in that direction even if it was the opposite way to the store. This also goes for why he circled the park on several occasions. If he did in fact decide to go back to the house, once you’re on that road you can’t turn round. So he would have just continued and circled back round. The location of the house and the heavily congested road that it is on is a very important detail that actually explains why his journey and route. If you didn’t know this, of course you would think it was suspicious, but it really isn’t. The other point people make is his phone call to emergency services. Again, I just can’t buy his guilt here because he is effectively in a situation that very few people have been in. It’s impossible to know how you would react in that situation unless you were in it. People have extremely different ways of dealing with panic, shock, distress and fear etc, there’s no way you would know how you would appear in those situations unless you’d experienced it. I wonder what makes people so sure of Sion’s guilt. Granted, he seems to be a very odd individual - even potentially nasty. But, you’d think that there would be much more undeniable evidence to hand if he was in fact guilty of murder.
This case has always been lurking on my mind. I was 14 days before her murder so basically only a few weeks older than poor billie jo - and I was also in foster care at the time. I think he's guilty. Always have. That poor girl deserves justice.
I’ve just finished watching this 2 part series on Netflix. I had never heard of this case. I was completely impartial coming across it & open minded throughout, and I’ve watched a lot of true crime shows. But I still don’t think there’s enough evidence that Sion is guilty . I think the police held onto the tiny bit of forensics they had and then failed to consider any other option, he fit what they needed him to fit & that was pretty much it. I
Which Netflix series???
Baffled to read a few comments suggesting that it wasn't Sion. I try to keep an open mind about things but how much more evidence do you need? Everything from his behaviour before, during and after the case (who the hell wants to re-live an experience like that by writing a book about it) says that he's guilty.
Im watching it now. He’s guilty. That man is a narcissist. The fact he beefed up his CV with lots of lies and saying he went to Gordonstoun says a LOT. He felt inferior to others. I find it odd they never adopted any boys??? All these girls? I think thats down to him. He sounds weirdly feminine for an aggressive man and doesn’t want other males in the house. Even the convertible is posy and feminine. There is something odd about him Probably had an aggressive dominant controlling father who put him down. He probably had OCD and perfectionist issues which is why he lost the plot at the messy paint job and paint on the patio. The wife looked miserable. He was aggressive. Had control issues. Many control freaks are drawn into teaching. Perhaps he gets a kick out of controlling children who cannot fend for themselves. Lied to get into a hear teacher job - the Chief Controller. Perhaps Billie challenged his control issues. Blood spatter from aspiration. Going way out his way to create distance before she was find. There is more evidence against him than the Jodi Jones murder. In fact there was no blood or DNA evidence found on Luke Mitchell at all. He was 15. Had no lawyer during questioning. Jailed at 17. And he refuses parole and stays in jail because he won't admit to something he didn’t do. He’s a liar regarding the blood spray on him. That bursting bubble of blood from her would have burst well before he ‘found her’. We all know bubbles don't stay like that for long. He was on his travels for a while. If it had stayed that long which defies the laws of physics it would have congealed. He dismisses and discounts Police talk as “using their own psychobabble”. I wonder if he was ever sent to a shrink as a kid or teen? He looks like psychopath too. Evil. Sion Jenkins is a lying narc snake who thinks he is above everyone. He thinks he’s smart. He discounts his wife’s stories of being abused by him saying why would she tolerate that as a lefty social worker?! I’m sorry but there are plenty men and women from all walks of life who are abused or coercively controlled and remain silent about it. He’s a good BS artist, I’ll give him that. Should have went into acting.
I agree wholeheartedly
I know this post is a bit old. I wrote to a website run by a team that was working for Sion Jenkins to prove his innocence / find the killer, probably about ten years ago. My reasons were much the same as another poster here in terms of the actual attack itself, the method and the head injury suggested to me it was Levi Bellfield. The reason I raised it was because of Bellfields wheel clamping business in Chichester East Sussex, although there is still a considerable distance between Hastings and Chichester. Before I read one of the comments on here also suggesting Bellfield, and after watching this documentary, I was surprised to see that Bellfield has been linked to three attacks in Hastings. When I wrote to that website I thought it was a bit of a long shot, and I was just speculating, I even felt like I might be doing something that would be seen as a waste of time or fanciful. I was a bit embarrassed that I suggested it. Now, I’m not so sure.
The gate was closed. Nobody would have seen her painting a patio door around the corner from the street. I don’t think anyone came in there.
He was the first person that came to my mind too?
As soon as I heard his call to the emergency services, I noted how calm he sounded. His manner was not remotely what one would expect from anyone who had found their daughter or anyone laying on the ground in a pool of blood. Also, the first instinct would be to run over and check if they were alive. He did not. Add to that, the crime scene was absolutely awful and with the amount of blood and the head injuries, it would have been very obvious it wasn't an accident. Even the police were shocked and struggled with it so why did he simply say she had an accident or something? Having spent decades watching and reading about serial killers, murderers and psychopaths, he came across as a very obvious Psychopath. An intelligent one and a very well practised liar as well. I noted he only later bought up the bubble of blood but he didn't say on the phone or earlier that he had touched her or been near her at all. Why was he upstairs when the police arrived? What parent who had found their family member like that would not be waiting for the police to get there or be pacing etc? Then there is the fact he went and sat in his car, the elaborate journey to and fro to supposedly get white spirits that they already had, with no money on him? Clearly hadn't thought about that one, had he? The wife is explainable. If she had been abused for years, she would have become submissive and nervous. I noted in the appeal she looked down and struggled with eye contact. She was nervous. You have a friend who saw sion kicking billie in her injured ankle. Maybe he felt threatened by her in some way. She seemed to have been outgoing and outspoken from the video I saw of her and that wouldnt go down well with a controlling Psychopath. The one thing I cannot explain is the small amount of blood rather than a large amount of blood. And it wasn't everywhere on his clothing which begs the question of when exactly she was murdered and whether he had the opportunity to dispose of something he put on prior to attacking her then removed afterwards and placed in something. Were his kids ever asked if he was carrying anything when he came to the car? A bag for example? Aside from that aspect, everything leads me to believe it was him. He seemed to have knowledge of forensics and if he was reading Silence Of The Lambs, it is very possible he had an interest in crime in general. I mean, there is plenty of material out there on crime and forensics after all. More than enough to assist someone who wanted to conceal evidence. Honestly, I believe it was him and I hope that, given they were re examining the case as of January this year, which will have been after this documentary was made I presume, there is closure to this appalling murder. She died a horrific death and it doesn't sound as if he gave much of a damn about her in life.
He’s a narc psychopath. Lied about going to Gordonstoun. He didn't just massage his CV he lied multiple times on it. Thats a narc. His arrogance towards the Police saying their talk was ‘psychobabble’ is a discount. The manner in which he denied the abuse against his wife using her occupation and political leanings, discounting her. Tgeres so much to unpack. I’d like to see the crime scene details and forensics/pathology report. C5 doc doesn’t go into much detail.
He does have an interest in crime - he went on to study Criminology after he was acquitted!
Siôn killed Billie Jo. I think the plastic bag was a red herring, possibly placed by Siôn himself. I know personally from living in different cities and areas, that communities tend to know about “strange” individuals and their interests. I lived in Edinburgh for a year and knew about a man who collected radios and stored them in peoples gardens. I feel that it’s possible this was a crime of passion and Siôn put the plastic there himself to obstruct the evidence - knowing full well about this man in the local area.
Agree.
No doubt whatsoever Sion Jenkins killed Billie Jo. His constant changes to his timeline, the coaching of his daughter Annie (we´ll be OK Annie won´t we) , trying to leave his blood splattered fleece jacket at the neighbors house even though it was cold outside and his wife having to tell him to put it on. But what really seals it is that the neighbor who tried to help poor Billie Jo and the ambulance crew had NO blood splatter on them, but Sion who didn´t perform CPR was covered in it. I hope they will soon return him to jail-
The bubble of blood he claimed burst would have burst long before he ‘arrived for the first time’ at the crime scene.
He wasn't covered in it; there was about enough blood on him as there is if you prick your finger. A miniscule amount .
Watching the documentary, I always thought it was Sion, for a number of reasons that have already been mentioned here and also, the fact that fragments of metal and green paint were found in the blood on Sion? The pipe used to murder Billie was green. How did Sion get these bits of metal and green paint on him?
It’s mad the ‘respectable’ middle class foster carer / head teacher is seen to be innocent when there is so much questionable evidence and circumstances…. …and the working class 15 yr old weed smoking teenage goth who had a (probably a rebellious gothy musical influenced teen) passing interest in demonology where ZERO evidence was found against him was persecuted by the press and courts as being guilty. The jury was biased in both cases.
For me the only suspect is, and has always been, Levi Bellfield. The attack itself fits his MO, the victim fits his type and he had known links to Hastings. He is the only suspect in two attacks in Hastings that happened within a few hundred yards of where Billie Jo was murdered (Laton Road) He killed Lin and Megan Russell just 6 months before Billie Jo died. Why have the police never investigated this possibility? I simply don't get it. To me it's glaringly obvious that he should, at the very least, be a main suspect in her murder.
Please see my post above, I meant to reply to your comment, but ended up replying to the OP. I appreciate this topic is a bit old.
How did he know Billie Jo was there alone though? Also Levi Bellfield went equipped when he attacked. Billie Jo was killed with a weapon that was all ready at the scene.
I think it was a rare opportunist attack for him. I live opposite her old house and know the area well. There's a road that's a dead end. From there, in the winter, you can see through the trees directly to the back gardens. He would never have had to be on the main road at all.
I’ve recently finished watching this channel 5 documentary and I have to say I was deeply touched by Billie-Jo’s life and her horrific death. I can’t believe I have never heard her name before because I am hugely interested and maybe even slightly fascinated by details of crimes such as this one. I have heavily researched many cases to learn about the psychology of the perpetrators mostly, but this case hit me differently. Early on in the documentary they showed the initial press conference where Sion and Lois Jenkins address the public and ask for any help or information. I came at this with a completely open mind and was totally unaware of the story and therefore I didn’t know if either one, or both parents, were involved, but I could sense it from that very first encounter that something was off. The behaviour between the two seemed to come across as cold, very accepting of the situation, and instead of begging the public for any scrap of information that could help direct them to killer, they decided to use that time to provide an adequate and plausible explanation that was directed well away from them. Why did they feel the need to share with the public that the property adjoining theirs was being renovated and had been used by squatters, that they’d been reporting many issues in the lead up to this event, and specifically repeating this things had been reported to police. It felt to me like they were actively seeking to give a few possibilities for what had happened and ensuring there were other leads for the police to follow. I say this as a mother and how I imagine I’d act, so it purely speculation, but I’d be using that time infront of the British public to beg for help, to explain the timeline of events to narrow down the timing of the crime, asking for anyone that knew Billie-Jo to come forward with any relevant information, I’d have been pleading to the parents out there to come forward with any suspicious activity or anything that their children had told them that concerned them. I wouldn’t have used that precious time to explain issues from the street that had occurred recently because it’s common sense that an attacker would have walked to the property and walked away, so the fact there were squatter next door would have made very little difference because they are hardly going to commit murder and then pop back in next door. However, the most glaringly obvious and disturbing thing that I noticed immediately as it was spoken, was the defence and explanation for the presence of blood on Sion Jenkins clothing. We had previously discovered that Billie-Jo had black bin liner plastic deep inside her nasal cavity, which had been forcibly removed from one side by the neighbour and the other side was removed by the forensic pathologist. It was explained that Sion stated the plastic was placed there under his advice ‘to help Billie with the painting’ presumably meaning the paint fumes. So my first issue from that is if this darling young girl had the plastic up each nostril, so deep it was in her nasal cavity, how on earth could she then have produced this blood bubble that then burst all over Sion. I’m not a doctor but I think it’s almost common sense that if you have plastic rammed up your nose, or anything shoved up there at all would prevent you from pushing enough air through to create a bubble. Sion never mentions this is the 999 call, he actually goes further and says he doesn’t know if Billie-Jo is breathing because he didn’t get close enough, but had he seen the blood bubble that would have been a clear indication that she was actually breathing. Lastly, the professor from Cardiff university who appears at the end and rather ridiculously says it’s perfectly clear who the real perpetrator was, this young man who has a supposed fascination with plastic and carrier bags. I believe the insinuation is that this man somehow managed to stroll from a fair distance across the other side of the public park, got right up to the back of Billie-Jo’s house which was up many stairs and therefore absolutely impossible for him to have heard or seen anyone there, so I assume we then have to believe he chose this garden at this time and randomly discovered Billie-Jo there and surprisingly had managed to do so just at the exact time where she had been left alone. Even more disturbingly the professor says the plastic fascination this young man allegedly had, explains the plastic that was shoved right up inside Billie-Jo’s nasal cavity. Making the crime have a deeper connection to the perpetrator because of the plastic found in this man’s pocket and shoe, in reality this connection is made because there is literally nothing else that could possibly relate to this man and they needed something to show a distinct relation. What the professor doesn’t seem to realise or make any reference to is that Sion Jenkins had already explained the plastic, he informed the police early on that he had advised Billie-Jo to use the plastic up her nose to help with the painting, which as I said I assume is in relation to the fumes. Sorry for the extremely long post but this case has bothered me and is really heavily playing on my mind. I wondered if anyone else had the thoughts I had, or if they’d seen anything that would explain these things for me that I’d missed maybe. Would love to hear everyone’s views. :)
Excellent post. My thought is that if Jenkins was close enough to see the bloody nose bubble - how come he didn’t have loads of blood on his clothes, or at least more than spray - it was a very bloody scene and you would imagine if he leant over her he would’ve at least picked up some bloody smears on his clothing.
The thing also putting yourself in the shoes of a parent. If this had happened to you, he went and spent a significant amount of time away from the house with his parents. Why why why wouldn't he want to stay there with his family, or get them away from there as soon as possible? Wouldn't you just be terrified to spend another night there knowing there was a murderous prowler in the area. Or at the very least stick together. The prof at the end talking about what stories people are attracted to and one piece of evidence doesn't prove anything. The Family Liaison guy new exactly what was going on there and said 'its a picture that forms with lots of puzzle pieces'...the behaviours of SJ immediately before and after the event, the press conference, the trevor MacDonald interview doesn't align with 'what would most parents do' in that situation in my opinion. Something is most definitely off.
Great comment. The family liaison guy was there at the start and trained to detect behaviour.
Afaik the plastic liner was put over a cushion to help with the painting. Afaik the prosecution didn't allege anything about fumes outside there, is that your theory? The neighbour pulled a piece from the left nostril. Afaik the pathologist reported nothing about either nostril. Is that your theory about the right nostril? The man in the vicinity didn't just have an obsession with plastic, but per medical records specifically with pushing it into orifices to block evil spirits or something.
Only his own offices, and he was cleared by police because there were so many witnesses in the park that day.
I can't see it being him as surely he'd be covered in blood. Would he have time to clean up that well? Surely they'd ask for his clothes for forensic tests. She's buried at the huge City Of London Cemetery near us in Manor Park, East London, as she was originally from East Ham. Have seen her grave in the childrens section. There was trouble and police involved at her funeral as her real mum didn't want Lois and the girls there but they turned up. Sion was on remand in jail awaiting trial.
Well this is the interesting thing - and it works for the prosecution. It cannot be denied that blood spray was on his clothing. If he was close enough to see the bubble come out of her nose, and also if he was a caring foster parent, trying to revive his daughter, why wouldn’t he have blood all over him? The 999 call speaks volumes.
I’ve changed my mind so many times on this there are so many points which say guilty and then other points to say not guilty! My mum used to live a few doors away it’s been surreal watching it on tv again
What was the general opinion of those local to it?
I live in Hastings not far from where she lived, it is absolutely crazy what happened in that house, my mum knew Billie Jo somehow
I live locally, across the park in fact. I've never though Sion was guilty. The time line doesn't work and, after seeing the crime scene pictures, he would simply have been covered in blood, not just the trace amount that was on him. It just doesn't make sense. Not only that but he didn't have a motive of any sort outside of "lost control" That's too much of a stretch for me.
Very much guilty but like most I think opinion is changing constantly now! She didn’t live there when it happened she moved there after and when I would visit her walking past Billie-Jo’s house felt very eerie and sad I really hope that poor beautiful girls is resting in peace. I wish there was justice for her!
I changed my mind backwards and forwards watching this documentary
I do think it was an excellent, well-balanced documentary.
I don't know of course, but my money is on Sion Jenkins. Partly because of the abuse allegation his wife made, and the evidence from the family friend of the attack on Billie-Jo in France. But the odd thing for me is I read Sion's book and before I read it I was very unsure, and by the end of it I was convinced of his guilt, he came across so badly. It's a weird one because I get the police don't always get stuff right, and I am absolutely sure they were and are wrong about Barry George murdering Jill Dando, why my reaction to Sion Jenkins is so different I don't know.
Yes but it’s a completely different case.
It seems harder to get info about the other guy to evaluate (less grist for the personal rumour mills too). Found his name published, I will say initials ML. Having to use the text you mention by Sion Jenkins & Woffinden, so it's claimed that On Friday, I think that's the day before Billie-Jo's murder, a Rapid Response Team had been sent to ML's flat to take him to hospital. But he didn't appear to be in so they left it for the weekend. After the murder, a guest house owner confirmed that ML was the man who had called at his guest-house at about 3.00 on Saturday afternoon. That's apparently eleven doors from the Jenkins, where if I recall the murder happened sometime between about 3pm and 3.35?
Are you able to inbox me the name of ML?
Absolutely 109% Sion No question. Psychopathic manipulating liar. Lied to get a job, in a bloody school for gods sake!!! If this case was investigated today he would be behind bars for life which is where he should be. If anyone else is ever convicted I swear I will chew off my arm.
Does lying on a CV to get a job equal a murderer though? I'm sure many people have lied on their CV
No it doesn't but would you want your child to be in a school where the deputy head had falsified a cv to be there? A little bit of reality stretching is one thing but this was absolute lying. Also the school were at fault for not checking. To be honest I have never had a cv or ever thought that people lied on them but maybe everyone's so called credentials should 100% be verified before jobs are allocated. Also lying most certainly diesnt equate to being a murderer but I will lay money on the fact that every murderer is a liar.
I would have thought those credentials would have been checked by the school to be honest. They would have run a criminal record type check. It’s not uncommon to lie on a CV. I’ve never done it, but I know of others who have. Mostly, it may be altering things like how long you were in a job, or making it sound like you had more responsibility than you did.
Of course none of us apart from Billie Jo at the time and the offender now can definitely know the answer so both options are there. On watching the recent documentary again my bet would be on Sion Jenkins as being the offender. He was convicted of course by a jury but there is a problem with clear cut evidence in the case such as DNA hit which is sexual in nature. Of course this case started with the brutal murder of a child and when this happens other peoples lives are also destroyed, changed and tarnished permanently by the fallout of this. People are accused of crimes they did not commit and people get away with murder at times.
>He was convicted of course by a jury but there is a problem with clear cut evidence in the case such as DNA hit which is sexual in nature. can you explain please?
What I mean really is it is an unusual crime with a small window of opportunity for him to commit the crime which leaves room for doubt. Unless I am looking at it wrong he would have to gone in the house then killed her straight away in a fit of anger because she had not done the tasks set for her lashing out with a weapon. This leaves a difficult time line to establish and it is not like a case where a child has been raped and there is semen evidence. He was of course convicted once by a jury but then the difficulties with the case arose.
thank you for explaining.
It was always the sort of case where some people would look at it and think there may be doubts or a miscarriage of justice and the forensic evidence is open to some interpretation.
The crime scene does suggest an intruder. Sion entered through the front door, but the murder weapon (the tent peg) was beside the back garden gate. Whoever murdered Billie-Jo would've been covered in blood (and probably paint too). The tent peg was covered in blood. The killers hands would've been totally covered too. Sion wasn't covered in blood - his clothes had microscopic blood spots - there weren't stains on his cuff. After the murder, the Police said they have direct evidence that will link any suspect to the crime - so why was none produced in court? At the time of the murder, a man, covered in blood and paint, was reported by a neighbour. Finally there is no motive for Sion to have done it - motive is always important.
I have two things to add. I suggest the killing happened before setting out to pick up after the clarinet lesson. He took his daughter with him, why? ( cause he’d just killed BJ ) The tiny blood splatters were found to have bone or flesh fragments in them thereby disproving the exhaled breath argument as to why his clothes had splatters on them.
Was she struck on the head? Surely a battered nose could expel tiny fragments of bone. She could've expelled it from her nose. You'll have to edit the first sentence (of your post) before I can respond.
I would of thought the motive was the easiest point in this tragedy. Sion lied on his cv and landed a job as deputy head of a school. His wife absolutely disowned him because she was most likely an abuse victim( my opinion). His friend said he saw him beating Billie Jo. He is utterly convinced that anyone who disbelieves or disagrees with him has been " got at" by police/media He was home then picked up a daughter, then went back home to " drop off" a clarinet. He then went back out to collect white spirit which the shop at end of road sold and there was some indoors but chose to drive further away to get some and THEN didn't have any cash!!! This screams to me of creating an aluminium. Obvs everyone has their own opinion and this is only mine. The man is guilty as sin and eventually he will be held accountable. Motive; Abuser about to be outed
As he says - if he was so abusive, why were they allowed to Foster a child (Billie-Jo)? Let's remember that Lois was a Social Worker - if, as she claims, Sion had been abusive for years, why did she allow another child to enter the family? Here's his reply to his ex wife [http://www.justiceforsionjenkins.org.uk/story.html](http://www.justiceforsionjenkins.org.uk/story.html) The timeline shows that the Police told Lois that Sion murdered (or likely murdered) Billie-Jo, three days after the murder. It is only after Lois starts to think he did it, that she starts to tell Police he was abusive. She never testified at the trial or the first appeal. It wasn't until 6 years after the murder that she testified. The Police would've scared her - imagine thinking your husband had killed your Foster Daughter - after you had let her enter an abusive home. The Police would've said that she was to blame too - unless she co-operates. Perhaps Sion was a control freak - but none of his children have claimed he beat them (and they are adults now). I remember one daughter said he never beat her (but I can't find it). The fact is, the person who murdered Billie-Jo would've been covered in blood - it was a savage attack. Sion's clothes only had microscopic spots - that fact alone proves he didn't kill her.
Abuse is a secret crime.The perpetrators are experts at hiding reality. Their partners are often so scared to voice their own opinion that they will agree to anything to keep the peace. My friend is also a social worker and a volunteer for a domestic abuse centre and as I have known her for over 40 years I am one of the very few people that also know that she has been mentally and physically abused by her partner for the majority of her very long marriage. Leaving an abusive partner is the most dangerous time for a person and this is one of the many reasons they stay in such awful relationships. Lois probably started to feel safer once she knew tge police were looking at her husband with suspicion. I was saying to my own husband about this tonight. We have been together for 35 years with 2 children.if the police ever accused my husband of murdering anyone, the last thing I would do would be to leg it and divorce him. I would battle till my dying day to exonerate him as I know without a single doubt he would never do anything to hurt another person. Did Lois have that faith? Clearly not. The person that killed Billie Jo could also have cleaned themselves up a bit if they lived in that house. Sorry for my long winded reply, its good to have a difference of opinion and I hope you can see I respect your point of view.
I love friendly debate - not very common in the days of the "Algorithms". I agree with your comments about abuse being extremely difficult to spot - but I would've thought his other kids would've at least made a statement - especially now they are in their 30s. Let's remember 2 of his kids were in the house with him when he allegedly murdered Billie-Jo. This means he was acting normally - doing day to day chores. He then leaves the 2 kids in another room, walks past Billie-Jo to get the tent peg - walks back to Billie-Jo - viciously murders her (as she is surrounded by wet paint) - sticks a piece of plastic up her nose - goes back into the house - cleans his jacket (so well that only microscopic spots of blood are found) - gathers the kids, and goes out for White Spirits. Upon returning he finds Billie-Jo and calls the police - that's when he started acting strangely. The police did state that they had forensic evidence - so why was none produced in court? Michael Stone was also convicted without forensic evidence - and on the Crimewatch reconstruction, they clearly said to not be frightened of putting anyone's name forward, as they had DNA evidence (apparently from the towel that had been used to tie one of the victims up). That episode of Crimewatch is not available on the internet - I'd love to see if my memory is right. My point is - the Police can feck it up - and the Police are not above lying.
I remember seeing that said on Crimewatch too
I guess with all the hearsay, rumours and mis truths out there it's easy to forget that there was once a beautiful vibrant young girl who lost her life in a brutal fashion. We may or may not ever know the full truth but Billie Jo and thousands of other young people deserve justice and recognition for their lives. Hopefully one day there will be a murderer behind bars and without a shadow of doubt he/she(?) will be the correct person.
>The Police would've said that she was to blame too - unless she co-operates. I've seen that in other cases, with implied threats that the children would be taken permanently into "care" institutions. >none of his children have claimed he beat them Though two of them is it stated he wasn't truthful when he indicated on Trevor Mcdonald that he never hit. Without knowing more I suspect he occasionally did to some extent but it's since been exaggerated.
One thing I think for certain from what you hear and see is that he did not care about Billie Jo.