Police 'covered up flawed' evidence on 21/7 London attacks

[TonyGosling]

Police 'covered up' warnings of 'flawed' evidence on 21/7 London attacks
Lawyers seeking to quash conviction of London bombing conspirator say police 'did not disclose concerns' about witness
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/27/police-covered-up-warni ngs-london-attacks-bombings

Shiv Malik and Rob Evans - The Guardian, Thursday 27 March 2014 22.14 GMT Manfo Asiedu

Metropolitan police officers covered up warnings from government scientists that key evidence in a major terrorist trial was seriously flawed and riddled with errors, an appeal court has been told.

Lawyers seeking to quash the conviction of one of several plotters behind the 21/7 attempted bombings on London's transport system argued that the Met did not disclose real concerns about a crucial expert witness in the original trial.

Stephen Kamlish QC, representing Manfo Asiedu, said police had been warned that Dr Stuart Black's evidence, which was about to be put in front of the jury in the 2007 trial of the 21/7 bombers, was seriously flawed.

The court was also told that three scientists at the government's Forensic Explosives Laboratory were so concerned about Black's evidence that they drafted a report warning of a possibility of a miscarriage of justice.

Those concerns, the court was told, were relayed to investigating officers in the Met. In an email on 17 November 2006 sent on to 11 police colleagues, a counter-terrorism officer, DS Jolly, wrote: "In essence some of Stuart's [Dr Black's] work … has been proved to be unsound."

Kamlish told the court that the legal abuse in not disclosing the forensic expert's critical report and police emails was "as bad as it gets".

Two weeks after the 7/7 bombings, which killed 52 people, four suspects were seen fleeing trains and buses after rucksacks they were carrying began fizzing but seemingly failed to detonate. Asiedu dumped his device beforehand and later handed himself in to police.

In 2007 Asiedu pleaded guilty to conspiracy to causing explosions after jurors could not reach a verdict about his guilt in the trial of the 21/7 bombers. His lawyers argue he would not have pleaded had he known the doubts about Black's evidence.

The event caused widespread panic and led to a huge security operation in the capital and the killing of an innocent young Brazilian man, Jean Charles de Menezes, by armed police.

Counsel for the crown, Max Hill QC, dismissed allegations from Asiedu's lawyers that crucial documents had been deliberately concealed.

He said that at all stages of the original prosecution Black had made his reports available to the defendants' lawyers. He said expert evidence that had been used to convict the terrorists came from a number of witnesses and that no single expert formed the cornerstone of the prosecution.Addressing Asiedu's demand for more documents, Hill said prosecution lawyers had nothing to hide and had not taken "a narrow approach" to disclosing documents to Asiedu legal team. He added that the criticisms levelled against Black by Doyle and the other FEL scientists had been "misinterpreted" and reminded the court that Asiedu had pleaded guilty to his part in the bomb plot.

The three judges, Lord Leveson, Mr Justice Irwin and Mr Justice Foskett, delayed giving a ruling on whether to allow Asiedu to launch his appeal. The delay came after prosecutors agreed to hand over more internal government documents to Asiedu's lawyers.Leveson told the hearing that it appeared to be "very important case" involving allegations of a conspiracy between police and a scientist or scientists to pervert the course of justice. He told the court : "I am concerned to ensure that we deal with all the issues that can be legitimately raised" adding that he was keen to ensure that the case did not drag on.

At the preliminary hearing at the court of appeal, Kamlish, for the applicant, told the court that Sean Doyle, a former chief government scientist at FEL turned whistleblower, had said in witness statements that he helped prepare the "potential miscarriage" report with two other FEL scientists before the start of the 2007 bombers' trial. Doyle said he also warned police directly that scientific analysis about to be put in front of a jury by Black was seriously flawed.

Kamlish told the appeal court that "the viability of the devices was the key evidence" in the trial.

"The crown's case was that they [the convicted terrorists] were incompetent," Kamlish said. However, he said repeated criticisms of Black's work from government scientists put into doubt whether the bombs could have ever been real.

"If you fill your rucksacks with cornflakes and everyone in the room knows it is cornflakes you can't agree to kill people, on the facts … you can't agree to kill somebody if you don't have the means," Kamlish said.