Hundreds of cases dropped over evidence disclosure failings
The number of prosecutions in England and Wales that collapsed because of a failure by police or prosecutors to disclose evidence increased by 70% in the last two years, the BBC can reveal.
Last year, 916 people had charges dropped over a failure to disclose evidence - up from 537 in 2014-15.
It comes after recent collapsed rape cases highlighted a failure to share evidence with defence solicitors.
The Crown Prosecution Service said the justice system had "systemic" problems.
In the lead up to criminal trials, police and prosecutors have a duty to disclose evidence that might either assist the defence case or undermine the prosecution's.
However, the recent collapse of several rape cases has heightened concerns that evidence is not being disclosed early enough, and that the rules are not being followed.
In December, the trial of Isaac Itiary, who was accused of raping a child, collapsed when new evidence came to light.
During Mr Itiary's trial, police failed to disclose messages which showed the girl, then 16 years old, had told the defendant she was 19.
The same month, the trial of Liam Allan, who faced 12 counts of rape and sexual assault, was also halted.
The case against Mr Allan was dropped when it emerged evidence on a computer disc - which police had looked through - showed messages from the alleged victim pestering him for "casual sex".
Last week, a rape charge against Oxford University student Oliver Mears was dropped on the eve of his trial, after a diary which supported his case was uncovered.
Surrey Police admitted its investigation had been flawed and launched an internal review.
Surrey's Chief Constable Nick Ephgrave told BBC Radio 4's Today: "For too long disclosure has been seen by many officers as something that is subsequent to an investigation, ie. an administrative process at the end, rather than something that should be integral."
He acknowledged it was "no small task" to train the police force to think differently, but an improvement plan would be published shortly.
Jerry Hayes, the prosecuting barrister in Liam Allan's case, fears innocent people were "probably" being jailed because of disclosure failings.
"And it may have been some time ago and it may well be that evidence is destroyed. Their lives are now destroyed," he told the Today programme.
'Breaking point'
The new figures, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, reveal the total number of people whose trials have ended or the charges against them dropped due to a failure to disclose evidence:
2013-14: 583
2014-15: 537
2015-16: 732
2016-17: 916
Over those four years, the number of completed prosecutions fell by almost 150,000 cases - from more than 736,000 in 2013-14 to just over 588,000 in 2016-17.
Angela Rafferty QC, chair of the Criminal Bar Association, blamed issues on a "lack of investment, training and attention to the criminal justice system".
She said barristers face "a daily struggle in respect of disclosure, delays and all the other disastrous consequences of a system that is openly described by MPs as at breaking point".
"The reasons for it must be properly explored and dealt with," she added.
She said Richard Foster, chairman of the Criminal Cases Review Commission, had written to the director of public prosecutions and the attorney general 18 months ago about the problem.
A CPS spokesperson said the number of dropped cases due to evidence disclosure failures represented just 0.15% of the total number of prosecutions.
"That is still too many, however, and we are clear that there are systemic disclosure issues across the criminal justice system which will require a collective effort in order to bring about improvement.
"Getting this right is a priority, and along with the police and other criminal justice partners we are working to improve how we fulfil these vital disclosure obligations."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42795058
"Thursday, 09 August 2018
"Dear Chief Constable Ephgrave and PCC Munro;
Let’s cut through the bullshit and get straight to the point.
Your press release, talking about “victims” or “complainants”, is useless jargon designed to cover up the appalling behaviour by Surrey Police, including both yourselves directly. The false accusers, provoked by “Investigating Officers” and serving Surrey Police, have been shown to be - at best - confused and - at worst - after compensation or some other reward. Your release fails to mention that HHJ Taylor writes about “persistent misleading of the court” - not just failures to disclose. Surrey Police behaviour could amount to Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice. But that is another matter.
I shall go into the specific complaints, that your ironically named Professional Standards Department will be pretending to investigate, in a moment. Unless, of course, you decide that an “independent review” might be more appropriate. It’s all bollocks, of course; cover ups with no intention of correcting the appalling, deep, institutional faults in Surrey Police, going back long before either of you reached your exalted positions. Deepcut. Milly Dowler. Amelie Delagrange. Marsha McDonnell. And, of course, Jonathan King in 2001. Just after Surrey Police tried, and failed, with both Paul Weller and Mick Hucknall (links below).
But both of you should fall on your swords.
Munro, you avoided any scrutiny of Ephgrave’s lack of control over his officers. I gave you detail and facts. You pushed them aside. This will be copied to the IOPC and to Surrey County Council, who had the sense to see the error of your ways and reprimanded you, suggesting you apologise to me. Which you failed to do, being certain I would be tried and convicted; my claims brushed under a carpet. I’m sure they are not fooled by your sudden burst of hot air, desperately demanding an “independent review”. More bollocks. You know, they know and I know you should have investigated, then and there. You totally failed in your duty.
I’m not aware whether any other Surrey Residents have suffered smashed in front doors with illegal warrants, obtained through lies to Judges - officially sanctioned by Ephgrave. As admitted in his legal letter to my solicitor, which you read several times. And shrugged your shoulders. No interest in this “complainant” or those “victims” back then; and no interest in preventing further damage, by immediately examining your Chief Constable - essentially your only job, unless you count all the trivial accounting and PR you do.
Operation Ravine contributed to the deaths of at least three Surrey residents. Did Munro or Ephgrave care? As long as they kept their jobs and salaries - no. Well, I strongly suggest you both jump before you are pushed.
Have Surrey Police contributed to any other deaths since then? I bet they have; hidden away. Incidentally, I am still pursuing the Surrey Coroner to review the three deaths just mentioned. So that deals with David Munro. You can stop reading here, PCC Munro, and go back to your worthy PR, supporting women’s rights and dealing with gypsies and budgets and councillors. At least Hurley tried to do something about the dreadful state of Surrey Police top management.
Chief Constable Ephgrave - well, you were only Deputy CC when Breck Bednar was having his throat cut, thanks to Surrey Police essentially telling his worried mother to f..k off. And only Deputy CC when Owens sanctioned Operation Ravine; that cruel, incompetent, corrupt example of Surrey Police behaviour. But somehow you got the top job.
You must go. After sacking Mizzi, Hayes and Bridge - or whatever their current names are - Surrey Police officers change names more often than uniforms. Get shot of those women - at very least (they may need to face trial and prison). Then tell your staff they need a total overhaul of their disgraceful behaviour. And then leave the profession. Without a huge pension. Donate that to a charity, trying to free wrongly jailed, innocent people. Of which I am certain there are dozens of Surrey Residents, set up, lied about, trawled. Victims of Surrey Police.
Now onto those specific complaints. I write this because I have received official notification that your PSD are now intending to investigate the numerous complaints put on hold until the trial finished. The numbers below relate to the numbers on their letter to me, opening the investigation.
Most serious of all. I believe there was not even an anonymous phone call alleging Deniz Corday had abused Laurence or Liam. I believe Mizzi, Hayes and Bridge invented one. The clues are in the handwritten Hayes notebook. But you will be able to track down the recording, if it exists. And to decide - if it does, should Surrey Police not first, privately and discreetly, have questioned Laurence and Liam before arresting a frail 86 year old man? And then, when they had done so, if Deniz Corday was under arrest, they should surely have released him with sincere apologies, when both Liam and Laurence totally, absolutely, unequivocally denied that any abuse had ever taken place? Laurence told me it was the worst thing that had ever happened to him. The stress sent him, a quadriplegic, into hospital for weeks. My defence team has never been shown the notebook of the police officer who tried, in Laurence’s words, “to get me to say you, JK, had tried anything on with me, which I refused to do, obviously. They went on and on about it”. Failure to disclose (one of a million). Laurence then died. He told me, before doing so, this was due to Surrey Police and Operation Ravine. Rob Randall told me if there were further false allegations he would consider killing himself. There were. He did - leaving suicide notes, obtained by Bridge from Corday. Did she reveal them to the Coroner? Deniz lost the will to live. I watched him stop eating and drinking. He said “Surrey Police are killing me”. He had to leave his beloved home and go into a care room. Then he died. You know all this from my 2017 letter. Why did you not investigate? Shocking, appalling behaviour.
2 to 8) - The original, multiple premises search warrant application. Your legal representative says the magistrate would have issued the warrant anyway. Perhaps so. My QC pointed out that, had they informed G R Pelham that an elderly lady lived in the flat, he would not have granted the warrant. Either way; how can you endorse officers misleading judges, let alone lying to them? This was an ingredient in the decision to stay the trial, but can a Chief Constable really condone that behaviour? And can a PCC not be concerned, on behalf of Surrey residents? Or, at very least, investigate? As Surrey County Council reprimanded him? I won’t go into the numerous other specific complaints here but why put the colour of a car into the application, and on the warrant, at all? And, if you do, why not check that the colour is correct? Answer - because you know, if it’s wrong, your Chief Constable will back you up, because police, these days, have no respect for judges or magistrates and consider them mere hurdles in the quest to obtain convictions, promotion and budget increases. So the answer to my question - why lie on oath to a judge? - is “because the Chief Constable says it’s OK”. Your legal representative justified this particular minor mistake as “the warrant would have been issued anyway”, thus providing the answer we wanted - that the Chief Constable considers it fine to lie on oath to a Judge. I don’t expect you to fire the officer who searched a silver car with a warrant particularly detailing a red one, but this is another minor detail in my fury at the corruption and institutional incompetence of Surrey Police. Yes - the junior person who answered the phone call by Breck Bednar’s mother was a minor detail, easily fixed by firing her, without Owens or Ephgrave suffering even a dip in their enormous salaries. But that minor detail caused Breck to die. When a force is happy for officers to breach discipline in such areas as lying on oath to Judges, these things happen. These minor details caused Laurence Pollinger, Deniz Corday and Rob Randall to die. They should have caused an innocent man - myself - to go to prison and die in there. Thank heavens for a decent, honourable and efficient Judge, HHJ Taylor. Who clearly understood that Surrey Police considered lying on oath to a Judge a minor inconvenience, sanctioned from the very top of the force.
9) The NatWest bank search. According to Bridge, DC3196 is St John. But the notebook and statement look odd. My suspicion is that Hayes and Bridge colluded by forging an existing, partly filled in, warrant, allowing officers to search the bank vault in the morning, knowing that C R Warland would OK the warrant in the afternoon (at 12.22). I cannot prove this (yet). But you have the facilities to find the truth - if you care. A check with the other officers named will confirm the exact time. Forging a warrant is surely a serious matter, if that is what happened. My QC unearthed further lies (about the hard drive) involving DCI Mizzi. The woman who sanctioned keeping me in custody for 36 hours so I could not speak to the media but she could, implying (wrongly) that Ravine was about The Walton Hop. I think this fiasco is what sent Hayes over the top. Again, it all illustrates attitude. “The Chief Constable will back us up; just because a magistrate (Veronica Smith) dared reject our application at 17.45pm, why bother to stop officers breaking into the safe deposit box in the morning? We’ll mock up a warrant - nobody will ever notice - and get it approved after the event.” Your PSD people will interview St John and Warland, regarding the missing information on the warrant, and will find out if my theory is deluded, in which case I apologise, or accurate. Apart from anything else, should officers have raided a bank vault with an undated warrant which clearly says it is only valid for three months from the date, and without the Magistrates name, which specifically “must be included”?
You’ll notice I’ve not gone into my own situation here. Or the “failures to disclose”. The appalling Merseyside Report illustrates the malaise amongst British Police (“you will be believed”). The conventional wisdom is that all complaints should be thoroughly investigated. I am not sure this is right. Good old Dixon of Dock Green used to work out if the Moaning Minnie was deluded, lying, confused or mad and, if she was, send her home to have a nice cup of tea, so a charming officer could pop round and comfort her later. Of course he got one in a hundred wrong and I blame the media, for whom a good story is all that matters, which inflates the one in a hundred into a huge story (“Serial Killer escaped justice to kill again”) which then causes every cop to have to waste time on paperwork and justification.
People do lie. They do inflate. For a variety of reasons. Compensation cash. Revenge. Genuine delusion. The total lack of common sense has been drummed out of today’s police by senior cops, whose talent is simply rising without effort through the structure. The vast majority of senior police fit the Ephgrave, Munro, Owens mould. Thank God for exceptions like, I suspect, Cressida Dick (that is simply my opinion as an outside observer).
But the point in Operation Ravine is a different one. It is a very serious breach when police, or those working for them, provoke and encourage false allegations to fit the agenda. When publicity does not, as expected, bring in false accusers, to be used and abused according to their credibility, it is shocking that trawling takes over and retired transport police or family liaison officers or traffic wardens are brought back at huge cost and told to find “victims” at any cost, even if it means inventing them. Tomorrow’s force will be full of Mark Williams Thomas lookalikes.
No; I don’t want to go into the specifics my case here. Despite Munro’s PR handouts, packed with platitudes, like the speeches of his ghastly mentor May, that is for another place and another time. My complaints are simply echoes of those rejected or ignored months ago; now demanding examination, in the light of both the Judge and the CPS realising how appalling Surrey Police behaviour has become. Deniz, Rob and Laurence will not have died in vain if this leads to a wholesale, proper reformation of Surrey Police and British Police (and the law). Not just improving the ridiculous failures to disclose. But stopping the witch hunts. Changing the law. Allowing Police to do the job they are meant to do. I fear this will mean, and should mean, some junior officers losing their jobs and even some, possibly, being jailed. Senior staff must also go - and not with fat pensions to cushion their retirement. Government must act and, believe me, if I have anything to do with it, they will.
For now? Sort this mess out and then, Chief Constable Ephgrave and PCC Munro, for God’s sake fall on your swords and go.
Jonathan King
Copies of this letter will be sent to Surrey County Council, the IPOC, the media and the coroners. And of course, to your PSD and Investigating Officer Walker (11941).
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1375942/Simply-Red-star-cleared-after-arrest-for-rape.htmlhttps://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sun-staff-accused-of-corruption-on-a-grand-scale-pldj7hjbnn8https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/oct/28/2
