Welcome
to our legal advice page, here we try to give some links to legal
representation that we know to be of the highest quality, as well as
giving lay legal advice ourselves. APPEAL
ADVICE FROM SOFAP: OUR LAY LEGAL ADVISOR
Every prisoner who has protested his innocence at trial is entitled to a document written by his barrister immediately (days) after conviction. This is called “Advice on Appeal” and should encompass his/her opinion on whether there are grounds for appeal against sentence and conviction. If you barrister tells you that you have no grounds you do not have to believe them. That is only their opinion. If they say it is not worth you having an “Advice on Appeal” because “there are no grounds” you are still entitled to one on Legal Aid. He/she is probably being downright lazy and cannot be bothered. Other barristers are hoping to become judges and refuse to criticise a judge’s summing up. I have personally reviewed several cases since mid 2003, three of which have been allocated £8,000 legal aid and are on their way to the Court of Appeal. The barrister in each case claimed that there were no points to appeal on. I found points. Three other cases taken in to the Historic Abuse Appeals Panel this year I am told have strong grounds for appeal and are being progressed and awaiting funding.
The quickest appeals occur when the barrister at trial puts in an application asap. As long as an appeal is lodged within 28 days of conviction with the Court of Appeal, there is no time constraint afterwards. My friend Rob walked out 8 months later after conviction. He had a decent caring solicitor and a hard working barrister at trial. Unfortunately the majority of wrongly convicted guys have chosen solicitors who do not specialise in false allegations.
If you are one of the unlucky ones who have been told you have no grounds to appeal – take heart! An application for appeal can be made “out of time” if there is good reason. Good reasons can be; appearance of “fresh evidence”; proof that the trial defence team were negligent; points of law found in the Judge’s Summing Up (JSU) not noticed before. The JSU is an important document and if you can get supporters to club together to buy this, it can mean all the difference between getting into C o A and not. This can be bought from the Court Transcribers – you can find out who they are from the Crown Court you were convicted at.
Many prisoners believe that old evidence can’t be used at appeal. This is not true. Old evidence cannot get you into the C o A (except under special circumstances). However, old evidence can be discussed and gone over once you are there.
If you have a copy of your paperwork in prison with you, it is a good idea to check that the trial judge has not confused the Counts in his summing up with the counts on the Indictment. One of my latest cases is being proceeded partly on the grounds that the judge not only got the counts wrong and described the different alleged offences as something completely different as to what they are on the indictment, but also sandwiched in other complaints not on the indictment – this would clearly have confused the jury and is a ground to appeal with in some circumstances.
RIGOROUS EXAMINATION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS AND INTERVIEWS IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.
Recent Complaint:
Recent complaint is the complaint the accuser makes to somebody while the alleged offences are ongoing or shortly after the “ending” of it. More often than not, because “recent complaint” is actually part of the collusion, the complaints made do not match what the charges are as more serious complaints are often added later on in order to strengthen the prosecution’s case. Recent complaint is actually “hearsay” as it is the word of the complainant to somebody else and they’ve repeated what they’ve been “told”. There is a special direction for this a judge must give. If he does not, it could confuse the jury and in some cases can be a point to appeal with. Sometimes the “Islam” direction is given for hearsay evidence. If it is not, it can be a ground, in some circumstances, to appeal with.
It is important to examine very carefully the accuser’s police interview or witness statements and compare them with the witness statements or police interviews of the person they’ve made their “recent complaint” to. Often there are very subtle signs of collusion. In one case, the accuser said that she made her “recent complaint” to her friend but “I don’t know where she lives”. On examination of the friends witness statement, she made her statement the same day as did the accuser. That was quick work on behalf of the police! I have an idea that “off the record” she gave the address or telephone number. This is one occasion where the “police note books” would be helpful, but rarely brought into trial.
Collusion:
I found some compelling evidence of collusion in one case that is on it’s way to allocation of funding for appeal: The accuser went to her new GP to register. On the notes it said: “Previous History of Sexual Abuse. Patient has just moved back home due to her father being arrested two months ago. Paternal Aunt also involved”. In fact her father was arrested the day before she registered with the new GP. Why is she lying? Additionally she moved in while her dad was still in the family home. Furthermore, she had claimed she had had no contact with paternal auntie prior to her making her complaints. I examined paternal auntie’s witness statement and it was dated 6 weeks after the accuser made her police witness statement and therefore also after the visit to the GP. How can the accuser inform her GP that paternal auntie is involved if they haven’t spoken about it???
Medical Evidence:
In the same case, there was medical evidence staring me in the face – it took me all of ten minutes to find the vital piece of evidence which will get this case into C o A. The accuser had certain injuries to her private parts, which were not explained to the jury. No medical experts were brought in and the jury had no choice but to find him guilty. How else did the injuries get there? What is in the medical file is the fact she was a right little tart who was having sex every which way she could. She also had two miscarriages. Very sad I hear you say. Actually, this was not gone into further but should have been. In the records it showed that she had two “incomplete miscarriages” which necessitated an “evacuation procedure”. Hurray! New medical expert witnesses will hopefully prove to the C o A that these injuries were not caused by abuse but by these evacuation procedures. Without that information the jury had no choice but to convict him.
If medical records are not brought in by defence at trial, which could have assisted, this can be another point to appeal with in some circumstances. If the accuser has had genital warts, thrush, whatever, scars can be a result of these, especially if the thrush sufferer has long finger nails! Genital warts are often burnt off by something that can be obtained from GP’s or hospitals. These can produce scars. Tampax can produce some injuries if not inserted correctly as the outside cardboard housing tube can get caught. I know – I’ve done it!
Police interviews:
If the jury only went into the jury room with the summary police interviews of the defendant, it might be an idea for supporters to club together to buy the full transcript. A new appeals solicitor should be able to obtain this. I read one interview where the summary said something like: “ your accuser says you did this, this and this.” Defendant: “True”. On examination of the full transcript the defendant said: “That’s not true” but the words “that’s not” had been conveniently edited out.
Police Notebooks:
The police notebooks hide a multitude of sins and this is why often they are put into a folder named “Not to be disclosed to defence” at trial. It is a wonder to me that many trial solicitors don’t ask themselves: “There were three children in the bedroom. Why were they not interviewed?” Then sit back and do nothing. As potential victims of course they will have been interviewed. But as with most of these cases, they were not helpful to prosecution so no formal interview was made. However, the notebooks should be made available and demanded by defence lawyers. Sadly, more often than not, they are completely forgotten.
Good character:
As with most of these cases, the majority of people sitting in prison accused of these crimes are in fact of previous impeccable character. Often defence solicitors will say to the defendant: “you won’t need good character references. You won’t be found guilty”. This is because they cannot be bothered with the extra work of interviewing these potentially vital defence witnesses. In some circumstances, this can be a point to appeal on if excellent references from upstanding persons in the community could have been called but were not.
Delay:
Often the judge does not give the correct delay direction in his JSU if there have been a number of years in between alleged offences and the making of complaints.
LINKING APPEALS:
Many people who make false allegations and their supporters make quite a good living out of this. Two of my appeals are linked in this way although the two guys do not know each other and have never met. The wife of the “Albany Appeal” came to stay with me. We went to the island so I could do the legal visit in the morning and she saw her husband in the afternoon. When she arrived she showed me a newspaper saying: “What a coincidence. The instigator in my case may be related to this guy who has just gone to prison for similar offences”. It was a very unusual name and in the same town. I wrote to the Crown Court where the 2nd guy was convicted and asked for both barristers details. I wrote to them both and the defence barrister rang my mobile one night. He was convinced of his client’s innocence but could find no grounds. His client contacted his partner who then made contact with me. I took the paperwork and within a month I had grounds for appeal plus compelling, ultra strong evidence of a link. Those two are progressing as “joint appeals” because of this.
The moral of the above is for supporters outside to keep eyes and ears open for anything at all that might link their cases. Instead of seeing it as a coincidence – do something with it. People don’t realise that often the answers are in the paperwork. You have to search. And search.
POLICE CONTAMINATION OF EVIDENCE:
The police are very good at messing with the evidence. One case I am currently dealing with they turned four potential strong defence witnesses into “victims”. This is a scouting case: One defence supporter said he had shared a tent with the defendant and woke up one morning to find the defendant’s hand on his shoulder. Obviously he thought nothing of if, and was trying to explain to the police that accidental touching does occur in close proximity when people are sleeping in the same small tent. Unbeknown to the guy, his name ended up on the Indictment as a “victim”. Just before the trial all the charges related to these four guys were mysteriously dropped. Possibly because they were not aware that they had been turned into victims so would never have given evidence in any event. However, because they had signed Section 9 police statements they believed they were prosecution witnesses and could no longer talk to defence.
Consequently, the police have infringed the Human Rights Acts Article 6, Right to a Fair Trial, 3 (d) “to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him”. They have denied him the right to his own witnesses.
Not only that, they are guilty of contamination of evidence because they wrote witness statements which were not the words of the four guys. I interviewed one such person. While he read “his” witness statement his face went all colours of the rainbow. He was horrified that his name was at the top of the statement. He has since written a new witness statement which will serve as “fresh evidence” and will hopefully be a ground to appeal on, using Article 6 (maybe) and of course “contamination of evidence” – God willing and a fair wind behind the bewigged old farts who have no idea about the real world and it’s injustices.
The Unused Bundle:
The “unused” bundle often contains information that is prejudicial to prosecution’s case. Use it!
| Our
lay legal advisors credentials can be read below. |
My
background: My friend R was
falsely accused by his then 14 year old daughter in 1999. He was
convicted in October 2000 and went to HMP Blakenhurst. He was
released on Appeal July 30th 2001. His family fell apart and it
was left to his few friends to support him. I was the only one
with any kind of computer literacy so I spent long nights surfing for
support groups and information, after he went to prison. I
eventually came upon AAFAA (which no longer functions as a supporting
group, the guy who runs it is now campaigning and lobbying hard for the
falsely accused and wrongly convicted). I
wrote letters to MP's and anybody and
everybody I could think of. While
R was inside his divorce came
through, the family home was sold quickly at under the market value and
the bills piled up, some in his name and some in his wife's name.
Legal Aid only stretches so far so any post that was sent from
his previous home address was forwarded to me by his solicitors to deal
with. It was a long hard struggle but I prevented R from being
taken to debtors court from prison. This wasn't because I paid his debts but
because I spoke to his creditors and explained the situation. They were
understanding and "froze" the debts pending his Appeal. Once the
money from the house sale came through, it was left to me to ensure
that the majority of the debts
were paid. This was a full time job! I
visited R as often as I could, scrounging
lifts from his friends, some of whom did not want to visit the prison
"because I don't like going there". I would argue that R has to live
there! A day a month out of their lives was no big deal,
considering what R was going through! So with a lot of emotional
blackmail I made sure R got visitors at every opportunity. While
he was inside I had his legal
criminal paperwork. I have no legal training but read through it
as best as I could and liaised with his solicitor at every opportunity.
I am sure she got pig sick of me badgering her but in fact,
unlike many solicitors, she never complained and never pretended to be
out! R
did not attend the Court of Appeal
because he was frightened of how he would react if it was unsuccessful.
I will never forget July 30th 2001, 12.15pm when he rang me in
tears, barely able to speak, that he was coming home! The guy I
was then seeing who lived in Woking (I was then in Staffordshire) left
work immediately to go and collect R from the prison. R
should have been given £40 job
seekers allowance equivalence and a travel warrant, plus what was in
his prison bank account. Thank God I asked D to collect him.
He came out with 32 pence in his pocket. He
was brought back to my house for a
champagne and steak dinner and then went off to stay on a friend's farm
(after enjoying his first hot bath with bubbles for eight months!)
The room he stayed in for the first few months had no plaster on
the walls and no electricity. However, it was better than a park
bench and he was well fed. Nearly three years later, R still
continues to fight for compensation for his wrongful imprisonment, but
the Home Office are refusing to accept responsibility. The fact
that the police and CPS are answerable to the Home Office, and they
severely cocked up big time by withholding vital evidence, apparently
is neither here nor there. If he does eventually get compensated, he
will still probably have to pay a large proportion of it for his "bed
and board" while in prison. R
did not go to prison voluntarily.
He did not ask to share a cell with all manner of disgusting
perverts. He did not ask for his food to be contaminated with
other prisoner's bodily fluids. Yet, if he does get compensation,
then he may have to pay for that privilege. The way the judicial
system is going, I would have no doubt that every prisoner, once
released, guilty or innocent, will have to pay for their "board and
lodging" as well out of their benefits. They earn a pittance
while they are in prison, so I would have thought that would be "board
and lodging" in itself. Anyway,
I moved to the South East and
decided to help prisoners like R. I started to write letters at
first, then I started up SOFAP with Clive, who came out at the half way
mark from HMP Dartmoor. He too is still fighting to clear his
name and his case is currently with the Historical Abuse Appeals Panel. And now, in partnership with
PAFAA, Clive and I continue the fight for truth, and the end to false
allegations. SOLIDARITY!
As the SAFARI newsletter says at the bottom of each page: "The
only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing". For legal advice, click on my link
below.Helga
For legal advice from trained
solicitors, try these links:
Bivonas SolicitorsSea Containers House
20 Upper Ground
Blackfriars Bridge
LONDON
SE1 9PD
0207 261 4999
Bill Bache (Angela
Cannings solicitor) Brown
Turner solicitors11 St George's Place
Lord Street
Southport PR9 0AL
01704 542 002
Chris
Saltrese Parole solicitors: Melanie Woodward,
Jackson Quinn solicitors, 46Carrington Street, Nottingham NG1 7FG.
Tel: 01159 958 3472
Fax: 01159 484913.
Parole knock-backs
(refusals): Karen has proven to be extremely effective, and is our
solicitor of choice.
Karen Booth,
Paragon Law, Lookfine Studios,7b Broad Street, Hockley Village, Nottingham NG1 3AJ.
Tel: 01159 644 123
Fax: 01159 644 111