A murderer’s bid to appeal his conviction for the fatal shooting of a much-loved 20-year-old in front of his family has been rejected.
Michael Foy was jailed for life after jurors found him - and his brother James Foy - r esponsible for the killing of popular Michael Rainsford. His lawyers believe they should have been told about a plot to shoot James Foy and another boy - who was quizzed over Mr Rainsford’s murder but faced no further action.
But the Court of Appeal dismissed their concerns, with three judges agreeing there were no grounds to suggest Michael Foy’s conviction was unsafe.
READ MORE:
Mr Rainsford was struck by two bullets fired through the kitchen window of his Litherland home in April 2020. Jurors found the Foy brothers carried out the shooting after bricks were thrown through the windows of their Seaforth home.
Crucial evidence included CCTV showing two males making the journey between the two scenes on an electric bike, data suggesting their mobile phones were making the same journey at the same time, and an apparent warning posted on James Foy’s SnapChat account minutes before the killing. It read: "Tell ye mar duck don't use bricks. " Two ‘explosion’ symbols also formed part of the message.
Their vicious actions were said to have been motivated by revenge but, tragically, there was clear evidence Mr Rainsford played no role in the brick attack and nothing to suggest he was directly involved in any dispute involving the Foys.
Both brothers denied murder until, moments before they were sentenced to life terms, James Foy’s barrister told the court the then-teenager wanted the world to know he had pulled the trigger. Months before the fatal shooting, James Foy was the subject of a shooting plot orchestrated from behind bars by a man named Darren Russell.
Prison phone calls recorded Russell making plans for Foy and a teenage friend to be targeted over claims the pair had shot at Russell's dad in Bootle. Neither James Foy nor the teenager, who is also believed to have been shot in another incident involving Russell, have faced any action over the allegation they were involved in an attack on Russell’s dad.
James Foy’s teenage friend was questioned on suspicion of Mr Rainsford’s murder but detectives concluded he was not involved and he was faced with no further action. In an application lodged with the Court of Appeal earlier this year, lawyers for Michael Foy argued they should have been made aware of the case involving Russell, James Foy and the teen.
It was said that failure to do so prevented them from exploring the potential involvement of the other suspect in the murder of Mr Rainsford and that it undermined their confidence in the other information provided to them by the prosecution.
In response, prosecutors argued the alleged involvement of James Foy and the teenager in the Russell incidents was mere speculation and, regardless, offered no support to Michael Foy’s claims he was not present when Mr Rainsford was shot.
The teenage suspect faced no action over the murder after he was provided with alibis that he was at home at that time - claims backed up by messages sent via his games console and his mobile phone data. These also suggested that he was at his home, which was miles from the scene of Mr Rainsford’s murder.
Three Court of Appeal judges rejected the application to appeal Michael Foy’s conviction, finding there was nothing to undermine the safety of the verdicts and adding that any attempt to suggest the teenage suspect may have been involved in Mr Rainsford’s shooting would be “speculative in the extreme” should it be made.
James Foy, now 20, was sentenced to life with a minimum of 28 years.
Michael Foy, now 24, was sentenced to life with a minimum of 30 years.
Russell, of no fixed abode, admitted possessing a gun with intent to endanger life and encouraging or assisting offences.
He was jailed for 20 years, with an extended four years on licence He therefore must serve at least two thirds of his sentence - more than 13 years - before he is eligible for parole.
