Unjustifiable

The Crown Prosecution Service was established over a quarter of a century ago. Among its high profile and spectacular failures is the Lynette White Inquiry. Its Code for Crown Prosecutors included criteria on sufficiency of evidence. When the Cardiff Five were prosecuted it had 13 – the overwhelming majority of them strongly suggested that it was a case that should never have been brought to trial.

The CPS has been avoiding taking responsibility for its numerous failures in this case for several years now. They even had the effrontery to claim that securing convictions justified the decision to prosecute. Since when has securing one of the most notorious miscarriages of justice in British history been a justification?

Excuses

When that was pointed out to it, they hid behind the recent proceedings against the former police officers, claiming that they could not answer the questions then. But they promised answers after the trial. The collapse of the trial was followed by pledges to respond that were quickly broken. The new excuse was that they would respond after HMCPSI reported, even though the concerns we raised were not part of that investigation and they knew that full well.

“The role of Her Majestyʼs Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) is to enhance the quality of justice through independent inspection and assessment of prosecution services and, in doing so, improve their effectiveness and efficiency”, Baron (James) Wallace of Tankerness responded in writing to Baron (John) Laird.

“Although HMCPSI examines a range of cases as part of its normal inspection process, it does not investigate and report on individual cases unless, exceptionally, a case is referred to HMCPSI by the Attorney-General using statutory powers for matters intended for cases of general public concern” Lord Wallace continued.

Inadequate

This plainly was a case of great public concern, but so were many others. There are now six vindication cases in England and Wales¹. Many of them raise issues over the original prosecutions. The CPS has yet to be held accountable over any of them. HMCPSI has not been asked to investigate those or others too where prosecutorial misconduct or incompetence may have occurred.

“However, as a rule HMCPSI is not an investigative body”, Wallace continued. “HMCPSI has undertaken two recent reviews at the request of the Law Officers”. The HMCPSI report allowed the CPS to evade responsibility for its numerous failures over this case. The CPS has never explained its dismal performance in the Lynette White Inquiry. It should not be allowed to evade its responsibility to the public.

Inadequate

Miscarriage of justice victim Yusef Abdullahi was shamefully denied the after-care that he was entitled to. Despite years to research the issue, the Home Office failed to ensure that the needs of miscarriage of justice victims were considered when devising a service for them. The Home Office Working Group charged to establish the service and the consultant they used failed to talk to those who would need the service.

Instead they decided what was needed and got it wrong – hopelessly wrong. They also allowed an outrageous mistake to be made that excluded the vast majority of miscarriage of justice victims from receiving even the limited assistance that the scheme provided. Nevertheless, this did not stop the government from making claims about the service that simply was not true.

Erroneous Response

Ministry of Justice Minister Baron (Tom) McNally, responded to a written question about after-care from Baron (John) Laird. As follows: “The Ministry of Justice funds the Miscarriage of Justice Support Service (MJSS) to help those who have had their convictions quashed by the Court of Appeal. The MJSS provides help with issues such as healthcare, accommodation, finance and relationships. The MJSSʼ funding has recently been extended for a further year to March 2012 and the Ministry of Justice is working with it to improve the support they provide”.

Unfortunately, this is not true. At best it provides those services to a very small minority of those whose convictions have been quashed. It does not provide those services to all victims of miscarriages of justice as McNally later acknowledged. Eight years after that error deprived Abdullahi and others of that help nothing has changed. That was shameful.

Misinterpreted

Yusef Abdullahi was wrongly convicted in 1990 of the Valentine’s Day 1988 murder of Lynette White along with Stephen Miller and Tony Paris. John Actie and his cousin the late Ronnie Actie were acquitted. All five were vindicated in 2003 when Jeffrey Gafoor pleaded guilty to Lynette’s murder. It was the first time that this had happened in Britain through DNA testing.

The Miscarriages of Justice Project (MJP) was established that year after a Home Office Working Group had considered the issue, but their consultant misinterpreted his terms of reference and excluded anyone whose conviction was quashed on a first appeal. And if, like Colin Stagg, they had never been convicted at all, they were not even considered for help by the Working Group. The scheme – a limited advice service – was restricted to those referred back for appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission, or an out of time appeal.

Untruths

“The Ministry of Justice funds the Miscarriage of Justice Support Service (MJSS) to help those who have had their convictions quashed by the Court of Appeal,” said the Minister of State at Ministry of Justice, Baron (Tom) McNally in a written response to Baron (John) Laird’s query.

“The MJSS provides help with issues such as healthcare, accommodation, finance and relationships”, McNally wrote. “The MJSS’ funding has recently been extended for a further year to March 2012 and the Ministry of Justice is working with it to improve the support they provide”.

There is a slight problem with this response; it is not true. The remit and funding agreement of the MJSS does not allow it to help anyone whose conviction was quashed on an in-time first appeal and never had. It is restricted in who it helps and actually excludes the overwhelming ajority of victims of miscarriages of justice.

Fend for Themselves

Almost eight years ago I asked the Miscarriages of Justice Project as it was called then to go and visit Yusef Abdullahi and Tony Paris in Cardiff. They agreed, but reneged on the agreement, claiming that it would affect their funding and therefore ability to help others. It was an uncaring response from people whose job it was to provide care.

Abdullahi in particular really needed help then. It was the least he deserved, but instead he was left to fend for himself. The MJP decided that it could not help him, because he did not come under their remit, which has not been changed. They did not even point out the absurdity of not being permitted to provide help to demonstrably innocent people. They even had the cheek to ask me to recommend their service to others.

Disgraceful

If he had asked for their help, he would have been referred to his local Citizen’s Advice Bureau (CAB) and they would have been advised that he would call and what to do, rather than receive help from those who had experience of these issues. What use is that? Abdullahi deserved the care he needed – nothing less.

Lord McNally really ought to have known this and the government should right this wrong without further delay. It is already too late for Abdullahi – he died last month aged just 49. Despite being vindicated Abdullahi had been excluded from receiving assistance from the MJSS. The same applies to Ronnie Actie and Phillip Skipper, neither of whom was convicted. They have other things in common. They were vindicated and died without reaching 50. They didn’t qualify for help either. Nor did Colin Stagg. What kind of system is this? What kind of way is this for society to treat its victims?