Crown Prosecution Service - corrupt & politicised

[TonyGosling]

Report alleges major errors in Crown Prosecution Service’s handling of Lynette White police corruption trial
http://cardifflocalguide.co.uk/report-alleges-major-errors-in-crown-pr osecution-services-handling-of-lynette-white-police-corruption-trial/
Serious criticisms have been made of the way the Crown Prosecution Service approached the disclosure of evidence in Wales’ most serious police corruption trial.
The trial of eight police officers and two civilians charged with perverting the course of justice during the notorious Lynette White murder investigation collapsed in December 2011. Three men had been wrongly jailed for the 1988 murder of Cardiff prostitute Lynette, 21.
The corruption trial collapsed when it emerged that material that should have been disclosed to the defence had not been. It has been estimated that the years-long re-investigation of the case and the aborted trial cost up to £30m.
A report by Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate says major errors were made and recommends changes for the future.
Mr Starmer said: “The importance of proper disclosure cannot be understated. In the most difficult cases, prosecutions will stand or fall on the quality of disclosure, and failings can leave the court with no choice but to acquit defendants who have a case to answer.
“The case of Mouncher and others was an incredibly complicated prosecution, involving close to one million pages of material generated over almost 25 years of criminal proceedings, which failed due to significant issues around disclosure. Having read and carefully considered the report, I have decided that it is in the public interest to publish it in full, without any alteration or redaction.”
The report found that some elements of disclosure were not adequately managed from the outset, leading to the prosecution team of police and prosecutors being overwhelmed by the scale and complexity of the disclosure exercise. It also acknowledged that there was no evidence to suggest prosecutors or police acted for any improper reason.
Mr Starmer said: “HMCPSI’s report focused on a particular case, but it also identified broader issues, such as the need for a clear disclosure strategy from the outset and effective oversight of the disclosure process. I am pleased that the report’s recommendations on disclosure are very much in line with the work that has already been undertaken. The reports of Lord Justice Gross into disclosure have also highlighted the importance of better case management.
“I completely agree that the CPS, in collaboration with the police and judiciary, needed to improve the management of disclosure in large and complex cases. It is clear that treating Mouncher and others as an isolated failing by a particular team would have done nothing to prevent this happening again. That is why I took action when the trial collapsed to address this issue. I am determined that the CPS plays its part to ensure that this situation will not be allowed to happen again.”
The following reforms have been embedded into practice across the CPS:
* Prosecutors with expertise in disclosure will independently review all cases where there is a serious risk of disclosure difficulties and the Chief Operating Officer will ensure that these risks are properly managed.
* A clear prosecution strategy document will now be prepared before or at the point of charging. This will identify disclosure risks and include an audit trail of important disclosure decisions.
* Senior managers will take direct responsibility for their team’s handling of disclosure and will report to meetings chaired by the Director of Public Prosecutions.
* Sue Hemming, Head of CPS Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division, has been appointed as the National Disclosure Champion. Her role will be to disseminate best practice and ensure that it is complied with.
* When counsel is required to assist with disclosure, only those with substantial experience in disclosure will be selected and they will receive clear instructions from the CPS. Similarly, leading counsel in such cases will be instructed to supervise and assist junior counsel in dealing with disclosure.
A second report by the Independent Police Complaints Commission concentrated on the circumstances under which crucial evidence was said to have been destroyed, but later turned up at South Wales Police headquarters.
IPCC Commissioner Sarah Green said: “The IPCC investigation was focused on establishing when the documents came into the possession of South Wales Police, and what happened to them.
“When the documents were discovered the IPCC was able to verify that these were the same documents that had been sent by the IPCC to the police for disclosure purposes.
“I have concluded on the balance of probabilities that no instruction was ever given by the senior investigating officer, or any other officer, to destroy the documents. In fact, the finding of these documents proves the veracity of the officers’ accounts that the documents had not been destroyed.
“However, mistakes were made by individual officers in relation to the receipt, recording and storage of the documents which meant that the documents could not easily be located.
“I have concluded that these mistakes should be considered performance issues and I have recommended that three officers should receive management action regarding proper disclosure processes. However, I agreed in the circumstances – including that these mistakes were made in the context of the volume of over 800,000 pages of documents required to be processed – that they did not warrant formal misconduct proceedings.”
South Wales Police Chief Constable Peter Vaughan said: “We welcome today’s reports and their conclusions. They clearly show how disclosure issues in such a complex case and the mishandling of a small number of documents played a part in the discontinuance of proceedings against former South Wales Police officers.
“Over the last decade the force has transformed its approach to major cases like this and has successfully re-investigated a number of murders and other undetected crimes. These include the conviction of Jeffrey Gafoor for Lynette White’s murder.
“The reports conclude that although questions around some documents could not be answered satisfactorily during the trial, the documents were not destroyed and their destruction was not directed by the Senior Investigating Officer. It is clear from the reports that there was no misconduct on the part of officers and prosecutors, who acting in good faith made errors which reflected the wider challenges the prosecution team had faced from the outset.
“Of course these errors are disappointing when viewed against the high standards we set ourselves as a police force and they had significant consequences in a case of great public interest. The errors should however be seen in the context of a hugely complex prosecution case involving in excess of 800,000 pages of material, spanning nearly 25 years.
“The reports of HMCPSI and the IPCC identify how improvements can be achieved. The CPS and South Wales Police have worked together to address these issues and a number of recent high-profile prosecutions have highlighted the professionalism and thoroughness of our investigations. The disclosure process continues to play a key role in these cases.
“I therefore welcome the proposal that the HMCPSI and HMIC will consider the thematic question of disclosure as part of their joint inspection programme for 2014”.
South Wales Police and Crime Commissioner Alun Michael, who was the MP for Cardiff South and Penarth between 1987 and 2012, said: “Through my long-standing association with this case, I believe it was a courageous and correct decision by the former Chief Constable to address the difficult legacy of this case and the associated allegations of police wrongdoing. These reports do not undermine that. Indeed both reports recognise the sustained commitment by South Wales Police to the investigation.
“I am pleased to see that the Director of Public Prosecutions acknowledges the learning for the Crown Prosecution Service and prosecutors involved in this case.”
http://cardifflocalguide.co.uk/report-alleges-major-errors-in-crown-pr osecution-services-handling-of-lynette-white-police-corruption-trial/

[TonyGosling]

So why is the CPS chief having a tete-a-tete with blonde barrister?

He's a Cherie crony and the head of the Prosecution Service, but this pictorial evidence will open him to charges of a serious conflict of interest:
He gazes fondly into the eyes of his smiling blonde companion as they share an intimate evening out at a fashionable Thames-side eaterie.
Oblivious to dozens of other diners in the Real Greek gastro-pub, the couple only have eyes for each other. They sit tete-a-tete at the softly lit bar, nibbling souvlaki and tzatziki washed down with lager.
He murmurs in her ear and she laughs coquettishly. After an hour, they leave. He pays the £26 bill, leaving a £2 tip, no stretch for someone who earns £145,000 a year.
Surprisingly, they do not stroll the short distance to her £500,000 apartment hand-in-hand. Indeed, all affection ceases once outside the pub. As they walk, his hands stay firmly in his pockets, and her arms remain folded.
Why such formality after the romantic intimacy of the pub? Perhaps it is because the man is a married father-of-three, and his companion is not his wife.
He is Sir Ken Macdonald, QC, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Head of the Crown Prosecution Service and newly ennobled knight of the realm.
The 54-year-old lawman at the heart of Tony Blair's legal executive is a key figure in the cash-for-honours controversy and, as co-founder of Matrix Chambers, is also a crony of Cherie Blair.
His female friend is vivacious barrister Kirsty Brimelow, 37, who has confided in friends that she is in a serious romantic relationship with a 'married senior legal figure'.
The CPS chief, who has never prosecuted a case in his career, is set to face the biggest cross-examination of his life...from his wife of 27 years and the mother of his three children, Linda, 51, a TV producer.
For months, I can reveal, Sir Ken has been using his official car and chauffeur to ferry him to and from Miss Brimelow's riverside apartment.
{2}
He instructs his driver to park discreetly around the corner, and is also picked up a short distance around the corner from Miss Brimelow's flat in a trendy block of 20 apartments on London's South Bank. After his visits, he is then driven to his office near the Old Bailey.
As he prepares to face the biggest decision of his professional life - whether anyone should be prosecuted over the cash-for-honours affair - he has been giving Miss Brimelow extra legal tuition during overnight stays at her apartment.
As the head of the state's prosecution service, a relationship with a barrister who regularly practises in the Crown Courts could lead to accusations that Sir Ken risks compromising his professional position.
There will also be concerns that a secret relationship might leave the DPP open to attempts to influence him in his post as head of the CPS, the agency responsible for prosecuting criminal cases in England and Wales.
Sir Ken's appointment in 2003 provoked accusations of 'rampant 'cronyism' from Tory MPs. Despite his formidable reputation as a defence barrister, there were concerns that he had no prosecution experience.
The closest he has ever come to a prosecution was as an Oxford student, when he was fined £75 for sending cannabis through the post.
The knighthood at the turn of the year for one of 'Cherie's cronies' also raised fresh questions about the independence of any criminal prosecutions in the cash-for-peerages affair.
He announced last autumn that he would exclude himself from any decision-making to avoid suspicion or perceived conflict of interest.
{8}
However, it is known that he receives regular briefings from Carmen Dowd, head of the Special Crime Division at the CPS, who is overseeing the police investigation.
It is she who will make the final recommendations on charges, aided by David Perry, QC, a top criminal barrister brought in to act as adviser to the CPS.
Sir Ken is also in regular contact with Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, Tony Blair's close friend, who has provoked uproar by continuing to insist that he will make the ultimate decision on whether there should be prosecutions.
Sir Ken lives with Lady Macdonald and their three children - a daughter, 25, and two sons, aged 22 and 13 - in a £1.5 million, four- storey home in North London.
His wife, nee Linda Zuck, is the managing director of Illuminations, an independent TV and media production company which produces live coverage of the Turner Prize for Channel 4.
Her husband has gone to great lengths to conceal the relationship with Kirsty, which began last summer.
The head-turningly attractive blonde, a spokesperson for the Criminal Bar Association who lists kung fu and kickboxing among her pastimes, is making a name for herself as a defence barrister, once representing hardman footballer Vinnie Jones.
She regularly appears on TV and radio - as well as being a behind-the-scenes legal adviser to BBC soap EastEnders. She shares Sir Ken's interest in human rights, acting as lawyer for Liberty and providing free legal aid to a Bosnian charity.
Miss Brimelow recently went to Jamaica on behalf of the Bar Human Rights Committee helping attorneys prepare the defence of clients on Death Row.
Not only has Management Today magazine listed her as one of the 'leading ladies' of her generation, she has also featured as 'Lawyer of the Week' in one broadsheet newspaper, and has voiced ambitions to become a Recorder - a part-time judge.
The daughter of a teacher from Chorley, Lancashire, Miss Brimelow was called to the Bar in 1991 and is based in the chambers of Andrew Trollope, QC, at 187 Fleet Street, London.
During an interview in the Daily Mail in 1999 highlighting sexual harassment in City and legal circles, Miss Brimelow recalled some unwanted attention from a senior legal colleague.
She received an unexpected present from a male admirer: a carefully wrapped package containing a negligee and a note inviting her to spend the night with him.
She barely knew the man, but he was married with children, was nearly 20 years her senior and was an influential figure at the chambers where she was working.
'I opened it after he left,' she said. 'I was stunned. On the note, he had written something like: "When we meet again, put this in your overnight bag." I was concerned about what was going to happen if I upset him. But in the end, I returned the gift with a polite note.'
Thankfully, she seems to have no such misgivings about the attentions of Sir Ken. However, news of the relationship is likely to stun his colleagues at the CPS offices.
A source at the Bar Council said: 'As far as I know, nobody at the CPS has had any inkling about this.'
When asked about his relationship with Miss Brimelow, Sir Ken would say only: 'No, no...Oh, I've got...I'm not going to talk about things like that. I'm off to work.'
Miss Brimelow was equally non-communicative. All questions about her friendship with the DPP were met with a firm: 'No comment.' When asked whether she was denying a relationship with Sir Ken, she again replied: 'No comment.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-435856/So-CPS-chief-having-tet e-tete-blonde-barrister.html

[TonyGosling]

'Total disgrace' - Judge's verdict on corrupt senior lawyer
http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/8273340._Total_disgrace____Judge _s_verdict_on_corrupt_senior_lawyer/
9:24am Thursday 15th July 2010 in NewsSouth Wales Argus: JAILED: Sarfraz Ibrahim - JAILED: Sarfraz Ibrahim
A FORMER senior Gwent crown prosecutor who admitted taking a share of a £20,000 bribe for advising that an assault case be dropped was called a disgrace for betraying his employer and the public’s trust yesterday.
Newport-born Sarfraz Ibrahim, who until his dismissal was the head of Gwent Crown Prosecution Service’s trials unit, was sentenced to four-and-a-half years in prison after pleading guilty to corruption, perverting the course of justice and misconduct in a public office.
Ibrahim, 51, of Cyncoed, Cardiff, was caught in an undercover sting by the Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA).
The judge Mr Justice Treacy KT branded Ibrahim a “totally disgraced man” at Swansea Crown Court.
Jonathan Laidlaw QC, prosecuting, told the court how police were concerned when they saw Ibrahim and an associate meeting a major supplier of cocaine.
SOCA devised a strategy to test Ibrahim’s integrity with an undercover officer posing as a rich businessman asking for the two men’s help after one of his employees, who was another undercover officer, had been arrested after committing a fictitious assault.
The pair met the undercover officer and Ibrahim said he would keep an eye out for the file and ensure it was marked as “no further action”.
Mr Laidlaw said the pair asked the officer to write a letter of complaint to Ibrahim so the file got into Ibrahim’s hands.
On August 19 last year, £20,000 was handed over and split between the two.
They were arrested the next day and £9,900 was recovered from Ibrahim’s home.
Mr Laidlaw said Ibrahim was living beyond his means and was in substantial debt amounting to £927,000.
But Andrew Langdon QC, defending, said Ibrahim does not accept that he was drawn into the trap by a desire to make money.
But he said his reputation, the respect he won and the inspiration he was in his community, is now in tatters.
Mr Justice Treacy KT told Ibrahim: “You are an intelligent and resourceful man. You fully and deliberately embarked on a course of criminal conduct which you knew was extremely serious.”
He said the offence would have “terminal” consequences for Ibrahim’s career and serious consequences for his family which he said only he alone was responsible for.
“You betrayed the most sacred rule of your profession,” he told Ibrahim.
The director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer QC, said that Ibrahim had disgraced the service through a serious breach of trust.
He was immediately dismissed from the CPS when he entered his guilty pleas.
He said: “The public has a right to expect the highest standards of professional behaviour from CPS employees and I will not tolerate anything less."
Three separate reviews of Ibrahim’s previous cases had been carried out which found no evidence of dishonesty or impropriety.

EDITORIAL COMMENT: It's time to rebuild trust
CORRUPT lawyer Sarfraz Ibrahim's jail sentence reflects the seriousness of the crime committed by this top crown prosecutor.
For when he agreed to behave corruptly by accepting a £20,000 bribe to drop a court case, he immediately betrayed not just himself but his whole profession. Worse than that he betrayed public trust.
The Crown Prosecution Service is one of those organisations which must be trusted wholeheartedly by the public.
The public has the right to expect the highest standards of professional behaviour from its employees.
It is the body which reviews evidence gathered by police and then decides whether or not cases should go to court.
As such it is a pivotal part of our justice system.
That this top prosecutor failed to respect the code of conduct which must be drilled into all who work there, is incredible.
It became increasingly clear that Ibrahim had willingly set out to break the law despite obstacles put in his way.
We fail to understand why such an obviously successful lawyer was prepared to risk his whole way of life and reputation in such a way.
But he did so and with no thought for the wider reputation of the Crown Prosecution Service.
He must have known from the outset the risks he was taking.
Ibrahim was caught when police officers in a discreet operation tested his integrity and honesty following suspicions about his behaviour. A test he failed.
The problem left for the CPS in Gwent is that it will now have to rebuild the trust damaged by the actions of this one individual who put personal gain above all else.

Thames Valley CPS criticised over lack of convictions and guilty pleas
Chief Constable Sara Thornton said the data in the report was a concern
Continue reading the main story
Prosecutors have been criticised in a report for continuing cases where people should not have been charged.
Inspectors analysed CPS Thames Valley for "its record of poor legal decisions, weak case progression and low rate of successful outcomes".
Data for June 2013 showed it had the worst rates nationally in terms of the number of domestic violence cases which did not lead to a conviction.
Thames Valley CPS said it was "determined to improve".
Thames Valley Police's Chief Constable Sara Thornton said the findings of the report were "a concern"...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26024635

[TonyGosling]

William Roache acquittal: inconsistent testimonies damaged prosecution
Case against actor - massive inconsistencies in evidence ignored by CPS
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/06/william-roache-acquitta l-inconsistent-testimonies
Helen Pidd, northern editor - theguardian.com, Thursday 6 February 2014 12.04 GMT.......
.....There were other signs during the three-week trial that the prosecution's case was looking shaky. Some of the witnesses provided inconsistent testimonies – understandable, said the prosecution, given the passage of time. Proof they'd made it all up, said the defence.
One woman, now 59, claimed Roache groped her in his dressing room at some point between 1968 and 1970. She originally told police that she had been warned off Roache by Mike Baldwin, a character played by Johnny Briggs. But in court, having been told that Briggs did not join the Coronation Street cast until 1974, she said it was Len Fairclough – played by Peter Adamson – who she claimed warned her: "You want to keep your eye on him, he will lead you astray" and called Roache "a cockroach with a capital C".
She also changed her story about getting lifts home from Roache, saying it was in fact another actor, Neville Buswell, who would drop her off. In her evidence she repeatedly referred to Ken Barlow, rather than Bill Roache as being responsible for the abuse she claimed to have suffered.
That woman's sister, now 57, was criticised by the defence for the account she gave the court about being assaulted by Roache in his gold Rolls-Royce – a car which Roache did not in fact own until 1986, according to a hire purchase agreement produced by his barrister.
The jury heard that the woman's husband called the Sunday Mirror last year after hearing of an interview Roache had given in New Zealand, in which the actor implied that those making historic allegations against other celebrities were somehow being punished for something they had done in a past life. Accused by the defence of trying to make a profit by lying about Roache, the man insisted he had wanted to "tell his story" rather than "sell his story" because his wife would not go to the police, but had since regretted it.
Then there was confusion over the cottage in which one of the rapes allegedly took place, leading to one of the alleged victims being recalled to give evidence.
Other women were criticised in court by Roache's barrister for not remembering many details of the alleged attacks, such as furniture, exact dates and descriptions of the rooms and cars in which assaults were said to have taken place.
The women repeatedly apologised to the jury, saying they couldn't remember everything because "it was all such a long time ago". But they insisted they had vivid memories of the assaults – the woman who could still recall the rubber smell of the condom, another who said she could remember a double-decker bus pulling up next to Roache's car as he forced her to masturbate him in the front seat.
One charge was thrown out halfway through the trial – a count of indecent assault, which hinged on another woman's claim that she "believed" Roache had forced her to masturbate him in his car, but couldn't remember for sure.
The court heard she was picked up by the actor from Granada Studios in his car and thought she had been indecently assaulted, but had "no actual memory" of the episode.
Instructing the jury to find Roache not guilty on that charge, the judge said: "In relation to that episode, the witness was not giving evidence that it did happen, she was giving evidence that she was thinking it did happen and that is not a sufficient evidential basis for the conviction of an offence."
Sometimes the prosecution were hamstrung by the judge's refusal to allow evidence pertaining to Roache's past. Halfway through Roache's testimony, Anne Whyte, QC, for the crown, suddenly asked the judge (in the absence of the jury) whether she could adduce in evidence quotes from an interview Roache gave to the journalist Piers Morgan in 2012.
In the witness box Roache had maintained that while he was unfaithful to his first wife, Anna Cropper, during the period the sexual offences were supposed to have taken place, he was in control of his sexual urges and would "never force myself on anyone".
This, Whyte posited, was at odds with a remark Roache made to Morgan on his Life Stories show, in which the actor said of his womanising in the 1960s and 70s: "I didn't have any control over my own sex drive. I didn't have the strength to control it."
In the well-publicised interview, he admitted that in real life he had slept with "more than 1,000" women – and claimed that other Coronation Street stars called him CockRoache. When pushed about whether the real figure was nearer 1,000 he replied: "Well, I'm not denying it."
The judge, Tim Holroyde, QC, ruled the evidence inadmissible because "the reference to a thousand women would have a tendency to linger in the mind" and thus would be too prejudicial against Roache. Plus, the judge said, it was Morgan and not Roache who introduced the idea of 1,000 women, and in the context of a light entertainment show rather than a more serious setting.
In the witness box Roache's testimony was calm and confident, and he was supported by some of the most famous soap actors in the land who trooped into court to give evidence in his favour.
Anne Kirkbride – who has played Deirdre Barlow, the on-off wife of Roache's character Ken Barlow, since 1972 – called him "a perfect gentleman". Helen Worth, who has played Gail Platt since 1974, said he was a "father figure" to the cast, and Coronation Street's "elder statesman".
Perhaps the jury thought Roache's accusers were jumping on some sort of post-Jimmy Savile bandwagon, as his legal team suggested: "Jimmy Savile is like an elephant in the room. You can't ignore it. Jimmy Savile has affected, in fact, infected this trial and investigation of these offences," said Blackwell in her closing speech.
"We submit to you everything you have seen in this case, that in the post-Jimmy Savile crisis of conscience, when someone makes an allegation against a celebrity, that a fair investigation does not take place. In the post-Jimmy Savile era, once someone makes an allegation, it's got to go to court, no sense will prevail, it has to go to court."
She said it didn't make sense that Roache would have behaved so appallingly during a seven-year window from 1965 until 1972 and then suddenly stopped being a sexual predator. "An expression, ladies and gentlemen: a leopard doesn't change its spots," Blackwell said.
"What the prosecution say is that for some weird reason between 1965 and 1972, for no discernible reason, Mr Roache departed from his usual character and behaviour and became a young woman-snatcher, a risk-taker, taking people into toilets. Then as soon as this madness is visited upon him, it passes. It's nonsense, it just doesn't happen in the real world."
Halfway through the trial, Nazir Afzal, chief crown prosecutor for the north-west, slipped in to court. Spotted by a reporter, he insisted his presence did not indicate nervousness at the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
But there is no doubt that Roache's acquittal will prompt much soul-searching among the CPS ranks. He was the first celebrity to go to trial accused of historic sex offences in the post-Jimmy Savile era. He will not be the last.