Wonder how many idiots will be attempting to disprove the scientists after hearing of his? Or defiantly smoking while filling their cars up with petrol.
Sometimes new science proves a person innocent (esp the advances in DNA) and it is sad that they have spent many years in prison suffering because of that.
But there are many cases where a person should have been found innocent at the time.
The case of Stefan Kiszko comes to mind - they had a sperm/semen sample that had viable sperm taken from the victim's body. But Stefan Kiszko was infertile and it would have been impossible for him to be the donor.
The police at the time managed to ignore that relevant fact in their rush to get their conviction.
Barry, i've just watched a half dozen such videos and they all appear to have one thing in common. The fires begin when the person lights up while filling the tank. My guess, therefore, is that it is the fumes which ignite. The fumes from a pool of petrol on the ground will have sufficiently dissipated so as not to ignite when a cigarette is thrown on it.
It is the sparking that sets off the ignition, reacting against the petrol vapour. Diesel won't do this.
It's exactly the same with N-Gas and LPG - wit the Irish tragedy.
If you ever smell gas of either sort as they are stenched with mercaptan or equivalent to give them an odour, DO NOT TURN the lights off etc or equally so DO NOT TURN the lights on. If you see a light switch without a cover on, you will see a spark jump each time you flick them on or off.....
the thread omits his acquittal on appeal - the home secretary was the defence barrister and understood the import of the report he should have ordered 15 y ago. So he immediately orders his release ! It takes six weeks - "we know you are innocent but it will take a few months" - There is alot about Kiszko ( Judge: "if the police lie to me it is no conern of mine" but really nothing - explosive )