As Essex Police announce they will not charge the 50-year-old arrested for the rape and murder of Stuart Lubbock, Matthew Steeples joins those demanding Michael Barrymore finally man-up and tell the truth
After announcing they will not be charging the 50-year-old arrested in March on suspicion of the rape and murder of Stuart Lubbock at the home of the disgraced ‘entertainer’ Michael Barrymore, Essex Police’s Detective Chief Superintedent Lucy Morris expressed that “this news was a huge personal disappointment to all detectives involved in this case.”
Claiming they “had [found] insufficient evidence to reach the level where there is a chance of a successful prosecution,” Morris added: “We have tried our best. We will continue to try our best.”
Frankly, as the victim’s father Terry Lubbock faces death from terminal cancer, this development yet again brings to light the fact of the matter. Nine people were present at the Roydon, Essex bungalow on the night of the murder. One of them died and they died at the hands of one of the five other men present. It is jolly well time that the reprehensible lot of them told the truth and it is jolly well time for justice for Stuart Lubbock.
Justice for Stuart Lubbock – The people who need to tell the truth about what happened at Michael Barrymore’s home on 31st March 2001
Michael Parker (AKA Michael Barrymore) – Allegedly loudly said: “I need a f**k” in a taxi as he left the Millennium Nightclub to return to his home, the scene of the death of Stuart Lubbock. Barrymore later lied to a coroner’s court about facilitating drug taking at his house on the night in question also.
Barrymore claimed to have been first to have discovered the body of Stuart Lubbock at 5.45am, called his manager Mike Brown before the ambulance arrived and then left the premises. He admits that was “wrong” and also bizarrely told Piers Morgan that in spite of “knowing others were hiding secrets about what happened to Mr. Lubbock” that “I am not going to say their names. I just hope they are brave enough to come forward one day.”
Mike Brown – Agent of Michael Barrymore. Called to the property before emergency services arrived.
Kelly Campbell – Had met Michael Barrymore for the first time on the night of the incident. Claimed not to have been aware of what happened.
James Futters (sometimes spelt ‘Futers’) – A paper boy turned chef. Described as “a local from the village” and a “friend and neighbour of Barrymore.” Claimed to have been the first to discover the body with Simon Shaw and stated: “[It was not] Michael Barrymore and not Jonathan Kenney [who found him].” Later, of him the Evening Standard reported: “Barrymore offered James Futters a white powder on his finger saying: ‘Do you want to try this?’ Mr Futters told the inquest that he leaned forward and licked the powder.”
Claire Jones – Then aged 17. Had met Michael Barrymore for the first time on the night of the incident. Claimed not to have been aware of what happened but told the police that she “saw Barrymore rummaging through drawers and changing his clothes before police arrived. When he left the house, he had a ‘bundle of material’ under his arm,” according to the Evening Standard. “She added: ‘Jonathan (Kenney) was rushing through the bungalow before the ambulance and police arrived. I got the impression he was hiding something.’”
Jonathan Kenney – Estate agent, drag queen and Michael Barrymore’s then lover; later arrested on suspicion of murder but never charged; known for having a “record of violence.” Claimed to have been the first to have discovered the body and is now aged 50.
Justin Merritt – A dustman from Essex. Later arrested on suspicion of murder but never charged. Later paid £30,000 by the News of the World for an interview in which he stated Barrymore had “rubbed cocaine on Stuart Lubbock’s lips shortly before he died.”
Kylie Merritt – Sister of Justin Merritt. She also alleged Barrymore “rubbed cocaine on Stuart Lubbock’s lips shortly before he died” (curiously in the wake of her brother selling his account of the night).
Simon Shaw – Described as “a local from the village.” Michael Barrymore supposedly “ran off” to Mr. Shaw’s house to “buy himself thinking time [for two hours] before he was questioned by the police [at 7.49am].”
In addition, others, who’ve never been identified could also have possibly been present. If they were, they should come forward or be named by those listed above.
Michael Barrymore did not lie to any coroner’s court. He maintained his right to silence and his right not to answer any questions that might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings. This was done on the advice of his advocate Michael Mansfield QC. This investigation, as does any other criminal investigation, requires the police and prosecution to prove their case. Anyone accused or questioned does not have help the police or prosecution in any way. A person is legally entitled to say nothing from beginning to end.
I am not a lawyer but have had an awful lot of lay law experience from the [abusive] sharp end and at the cost to me of way into eight figures over decades. I have for a few years now in finally sorting it out seen the dither-capacity of the Police when furnished with startling incontrovertible evidence. I really feel for Mr Lubbock Snr.
You know with all of the huge salaries and young-taken pensions (and Dame-hoods) that are sinecure-d out I think that in this case we might expect a little more than ‘disappointment to all of the detectives’ due to ‘finding insufficient evidence’ and ‘we have tried our best’. May I respectfully suggest that they dig a little deeper and bring perhaps a little more sparkle with them this time. They might perhaps reflect that only 5 people were present (so say): That is not impenetrable. They might reflect that Barrymore had announced his need for sex. You might think that this has a voice to Mens Rea perhaps. Maybe following R v Woolin [1999] AC82 Barrymore being a huge [attractive] star to those present (whom he had specifically invited back at that late hour was for a purpose likely caught within ‘I need a f**k’ . Given then that it was a group of personally selected men of a likely persuadable disposition [!] by probably the most ‘persuasive’ man on the planet (apart from Rasputin-Cummings) it is reasonable that a jury could find that Barrymore intended his actions. You might think that facilitating drugs to Mr Lubbock, indeed rubbing Charlie into his lips (just before he died in a pool) would fulfill recklessness under the authority of R v Cunningham’s [1957]2 QB 396: Indeed to my laity it speaks hugely to Actus Reus itself.
Might (do you think) the Police stir themselves over Barrymore publicly saying ‘that he knew others were hiding secrets about what happened to Mr Lubbock’ continuing ‘I am not going to say their name. I just hope that they are brave enough to come forward one day’. This will not do Mrs Plod when a rape and murder has occurred: Get to the bottom of this knowledge now. Whilst at it it would be nice to know who did discover the body first as they clearly cannot near all have done as they seek to have us now believe. This is willful distortion and Dame Plod it has no place here. Why did he change clothes at a time like that unless to spirit the old ones away [evidence].
This case is riddled with nonsense and improper [none] action. If you look at ‘The Code’ for prosecutors it fulfills so much and positively screams through the test of ‘public interest’. Hang tight Mr Lubbock and best wishes.
Well Barrymore is a low life utter scum bag coward, so don’t hold your breath for him to fess up.
As far as I’m concerned, everybody at that party that night should be charged with aiding and abetting a murder, end of.
If they were all charged, I’m sure some of them would squeal, especially Barrymore.
I think you are right. He would do anything to save his own skin.. always has done. He’s a vile man. But you can be sure that the police do know what happened and have been told to ignore the evidence.. or not look too closely.
It’s just a massive cover up. We know it .. and they know it.
The way that this case has been handled is nothing short of disgraceful.
The facts are not exactly rocket science.
1. There were only eight other people at that party besides Stuart.
2. At least one (or likely more) of them was responsible for the terrible assault which resulted in Stuart’s death.
3. ALL of them have either lied or maintained a wall of silence about what happened that night.
Barrymore, especially, has gone to incredible lengths with his downright lies. Remember when he held that press conference, announcing that Stuart’s injuries were not inflicted at his house, but by a nurse at the hospital.
The pathologists quickly exposed that as utter rubbish. Basic, simple biology: dead bodies don’t bleed, but Stuart had severe haemorrhaging.
Why the whole lot of them are not in jail – for perverting the course of justice, at the very least, – is beyond me!