Brother cleared of Sarah Melia murder (From This Is Lancashire)

Brother cleared of Sarah Melia murder

6:30am Saturday 16th May 2009

• Print
• Email
• Share

POLICE investigating the murder of Sarah Melia reopened the case last night — after a jury cleared her brother of killing her.

Mark Kitchen, who was alleged to have stabbed his sister to death, was found not guilty after standing trial for a THIRD time.

And today, the extraordinary chain of events which led to him being exonerated can be revealed in full for the first time.

Yesterday’s verdict, which was reached by the jury after two-and-a-half hours, ended 12 months of uncertainty for Mr Kitchen.

But it marked the start of a new chapter of anguish in the life of Ms Melia’s children and family, who now face the prospect of never knowing who killed her.

Ms Melia was found stabbed to death at her home in Catherine Street West, Horwich, on January 14, 2008. Her 15-year-old daughter discovered the body when she arrived home from school at around 3.30pm.

Mr Kitchen was arrested when it was alleged he was a man shown on CCTV footage who the police said was linked with the incident.

The prosecution alleged Mr Kitchen had visited her at her home that morning and carried out a frenzied attack. But Mr Kitchen, aged 34, of Richard Gwyn Close, Westhoughton, always denied murder.

He first went on trial in December last year. Proceedings were halted after five days when the prosecution called a witness whose evidence conflicted with their case and issues were raised with CCTV footage offered as evidence.

Mr Kitchen appeared in the dock on trial for a second time in March.

The second trial collapsed when, in a shocking twist, it was revealed that a juror — a serving police officer — knew the leading detective in the case, Det Supt Ian Foster, on first name terms and had been involved in shared correspondence about the defendant 13 months earlier.

Problems with the second trial started after the jury had been sent out to deliberate.

They were called back and asked if they had any knowledge of those involved in the case or its background.

The juror said that as a police officer he knew of Det Supt Foster, but did not know him personally.

Judge Andrew Gilbart was satisfied with his response but the following day, he told the court: “I have received a series of emails which show that on February 20, 2008, a member of the jury who is a serving police officer was copied into an email concerning the conduct of this case, as to how to deal with the defendant.

“A further email came from him on how to conduct his assessment in relation to dangerousness.

“To say that I am taken aback by this is an understatement, given the care taken at the beginning of the trial and the answer given by the juror yesterday afternoon. I am certain that the juror cannot remain on the jury.”

Charles Chruszcz, defending Kitchen, then told the court: “In Ian Foster’s statement he said ‘I have no professional dealing with him (the officer) and have not worked with him on any investigation’.

“The statement put our feeling to bed but it has arisen that Ian Foster would call him (the officer) by his first name.

“Mr Foster and the juror are in the same email correspondence about Kitchen and how to control him.”

Judge Gilbart decided the trial must end and the jury be discharged because of the link between the two police officers He said: “With a reluctance that I cannot even begin to describe, this trial must stop. I am not forming a view of the juror concerned, that will be left to others.

“This is extraordinary. A number of persons knew his involvement and it did not come out at an earlier stage. This is one of the most difficult decisions I have had to make in my career. I want to express my sense of disappointment and sense of feeling that the system has failed in such an anxious and difficult case. I will be taking this matter up with the Chief Constable.”

Assistant Chief Constable Terry Sweeney, said “ A senior officer has met with His Honour Judge Gilbart following a letter he wrote to the Chief Constable. Both Judge Gilbart and GMP are satisfied that the officer in question acted in an entirely honest way and did absolutely nothing untoward.

“Recommendations are now being made to assist officers to prepare if they are called for jury service.

“The officer concerned, who declared from the outset of the trial that he was a serving officer with GMP, is a decent man who has acted with the utmost integrity. He has an unblemished 28 years service with the Force and this has had a devastating effect upon him.”

The cost of the two collapsed trials to the taxpayer was £95,000.

Yesterday, there were gasps from the public gallery as the foreman read his verdict, but Mr Kitchen showed no emotion.

Judge Andrew Gilbart QC thanked the Kitchen family for the dignified way in which they had handled the long and difficult case.

Police have said the case will continue to be investigated. Det Ch Insp Jeff McMahon said: “Sarah was brutally murdered in her own home.

“This remains an ongoing murder investigation and we will now be reviewing all evidence in relation to this inquiry.”

• Print
• Email
• Share