A SUSPECTED murderer, a rapist and a cocaine importer were among those caught up in the missing records scandal at Leeds Magistrates’ Court.
They are on a list released by Ministers of 62 of the most serious cases where magistrates’ records were blank because court officials failed to record the outcome of cases.Court inspectors rushed to examine the cases because of their seriousness and have concluded all defendants were dealt with properly at Crown Court and did not escape justice.

But the list of crimes – which also includes attempted murder, conspiracy to commit armed robbery and racially-aggravated assault – prompted fresh questions about what happened during a quarter of a century of failings in record-keeping at the court, where up to 1,200 criminals may have escaped without having their details put on the Police National Computer.

Leeds North West Liberal Democrat MP Greg Mulholland, who obtained the list through Parliamentary questions, renewed his calls for a criminal investigation into the failings, a demand he has made in a letter to West Yorkshire Chief Constable Sir Norman Bettison.

“The scale and seriousness of the cases involved is truly shocking,” Mr Mulholland said.

“It is quite terrifying to think that the results of criminal proceedings including for rape and murder were missing.

“Yet this list only scratches the surface; there are over 1,500 offences… where we still don’t know what happened and even whether those involved were brought to justice for the offences they were charged with.

“There are still a lot of unanswered questions in this whole episode and the terrible fact is, we may never know about all the cases that went unreported.”

Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Herbert said “the failings” at the court had “undermined justice and let down victims of crime” and “proper assurances from the Government that these failings are not more widespread in the court system” were needed.

Justice Secretary Jack Straw condemned the “lamentable” failings and a “systematic covering up of errors” revealed in a report by Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Courts Administration published earlier this month.

A failure to log court results in hundreds of cases between 1980 and 2004 – mostly after 2001 – meant there were no accurate results of what happened to 2,206 defendants accused of 3,260 offences. To cover up some of the errors false registers were created and some results were even guessed at.

While the outcome in 62 of the most serious offences has been traced, checks continue into whether any of the other offenders have escaped being put on the police database, effectively wiping clear their criminal record.

Blunders also meant up to 555 defendants were either never tried or never served their sent-ence for offences including indecent assault, wounding and burglary after legal advisers – or clerks – withdrew warrants to clear backlogs without the cases being properly considered.

Justice Minister Maria Eagle told Mr Mulholland none of those had yet been brought before court and their cases are currently being reviewed by a Criminal Justice System team in Leeds.

Mr Mulholland said: “We still also need a criminal investigation into this whole matter.

“So far all that has happened in terms of holding people to account is that two individuals are facing internal disciplinary action at Leeds Magistrates Court. Considering the scale of mismanagement and malpractice, this is not acceptable.”

A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice said work would continue to identify results for the outstanding cases.

“The results of 62 of the most serious offences have already been found and verified – and I can confirm the outcome of cases were appropriately resulted in the Crown Court,” she said.

“Her Majesty’s Court Service continues to work with the other agencies to seek the missing adjudications and resolve what should happen in relation to the withdrawn warrants.”

Leeds criminal lawyer Grahame Stowe said mountains of paperwork put court staff under immense pressure.

“While Leeds Magistrates’ Court clearly has some particular questions to answer I expect it is simply being used as a
whipping boy for a criminal
justice system that is creaking under a mountain of red tape.”

 Grahame Stowe is Peter Hills Solicitor and had this to say “This decision (to drop the case) is a vindication of what we have said all along - the charges were based on spurious intelligence and had little basis in fact.  Despite several months of investigation at taxpayers’ expense, no proceedings have been worthy of pursuing against Mr Hill, yet his career and personla life have been devastated.

After being detained for five harrowing dys, the subsequent investigation lead to Peter losing his home and his reputation within the local community being destroyed.  Mr Hill is noiw considering the avenues of redress available to him.”

 THIS LIFE:HOME MADE 

GRAHAME Stowe was raised in a Jewish family in north Leeds and attended Allerton Grange High School, leaving with just one O-Level to his name. Now 59, he’s senior partner of one of the most high-profile and respected practices in Leeds, the 27-year-old Grahame Stowe Bateson, specialising in criminal and mental health law. But he didn’t have an easy start in life.He was just 19 when his father died at the age of 80 leaving young Grahame as the man of the house.As a result he took on numerous part time jobs while studying to retake his qualifications and get himself through a law degree at Leeds University. He met his wife Marilyn, also a highly successful lawyer, while they were both offering their legal advice to the Citizens’ Advice Bureau in Chapeltown – and five weeks later they were engaged. They have a 19-year-old son called Ben and the family still lives in north Leeds.Mr Stowe deals with cases ranging from fraud, representing both the Department of Trade and Industry and HM Revenue & Excise, up to ‘unwitting crimes’ where people breach legislation enforced by the Health and Safety Executive and local authorities and he also handles around six murder cases every year.

I think a lot of people see this rather tall chap, smooth voice and capable but I haven’t always been this confident or had much reason to be. But that’s a bonus in my mind because it’s given me the ability to talk to anyone and empathise with anyone.We run free weekly advice surgeries at the practice and sometimes I deal with people with no money who live in a skip but I’ll treat them in exactly the same way as I would a high court judge. I cannot abide snobbery.My first crush was on a girl I met when I travelled to America.To me she was like the vision of Cindy Crawford and I fell head over heels with her – so much so that I actually made her a written proposal of marriage after a matter of days, sadly I had to come back to the UK though.Favorite things…..Food: Bread and cheeseTV Show: Fawlty Towers and One Foot in the GraveActor: Sean ConneryMovie: Sleepless in SeattleAuthor: Bernice Reubens (author of Brothers)Star sign: GeminiFINE EXAMPLE - EDITORS COMMENTSIN his own words Grahame Stowe was ‘a short, fat kid’ who was bullied mercilessly and developed a stammer.  He left school with barely a qualification to his name and sold sandwiches door-to-door around Leeds.  Now he’s a top Lawyer who heads up one of the city’s most successful legal practices. 

Court staff face disciplinary

A disciplinary inquiry was under way last night after a report found that thousands of convicted offenders had not been listed on the Police National Computer because of a catalogue of court errors, while hundreds of other suspects had escaped trial. Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, announced that an investigation would take place into the “lamentable” failings at Leeds Magistrates’ Court, possibly leading to criminal charges against court staff involved. Up to 555 defendants who had their warrants to appear in court withdrawn may now be recalled over the 1,709 charges that they faced. Most were for motoring or other minor matters, but 115 were for serious offences that should be recorded on the Police National Computer. Yesterday’s report by four independent criminal justice inspectorates also found that Leeds Magistrates’ Court had failed to record the outcome of cases concerning 2,206 defendants in respect of 3,260 offences, of which 1,568 were serious.

·         Court staff reject ‘postcode’ pay offer

·         Solicitors strike to hit court cases

At worst, 1,200 defendants have not had the outcomes of the 1,568 most serious offences, including grievous bodily harm, wounding with intent and possession of a firearm, recorded on the computer. The report calls for an inquiry into whether checks run through the Criminal Records Bureau have been compromised. Nick Herbert, Conservative Shadow Justice Secretary, said the “catalogue of negligence and poor record keeping” had undermined the justice system in West Yorkshire and let down victims of crime. He added: “The systemic nature of the errors, widespread managerial failings and length of time over which they occurred raises the question of whether these failings might be occurring in other courts.” The report, by the inspectorates of Court Administration, the Crown Prosecution Service, the Constabulary and the Probation Service, shows a pattern of “historic failure” dating back to 1980, although most incidents occurred between 2001 and 2004. Mr Straw said he accepted the findings entirely and insisted that the Government was acting on them. A separate report was being sent to the Lord Chief Justice, he said. Disciplinary action has already begun against the court staff involved. Two managers have been found guilty of gross misconduct on the basis of “neglecting official duties and failing to ensure accurate records were maintained”. Grahame Stowe, a solicitor in Leeds for 35 years, said that the blunders resulted from a “national obsession” with statistics. “The general ethos of modern justice is ‘the cheaper the better’ – with little regard for standards,” he said. “The clerks, by processing cases themselves, ensured the number of cases ‘awaiting decision’ remained low – and they met government targets. “Whilst it may appear an administrative trick, serious offenders have gone completely unpunished as a result.” Off the recordThe failings led to: — Court results not being recorded and possibly being lost for good — Removal of numerous cases where the outcomes had not been recorded from computer system — Fabrication of results, with legal advisers “guessing the result of the case where the true court adjudication could not be traced”, and entering them as convictions — In 2007 588 cases for which results could not be traced were ordered to be marked as “untraceable”. All but three were then entered as “convicted” — Some results have now been traced but there are still 523 cases for which results cannot be found  

Ex-spy suspect’s relief as bomb charge dropped

A FORMER Territorial Army officer-cadet initially suspected of spying for Russia last night spoke of his relief after an explosives charge against him was formally dropped.The decision by the Crown Prosecution Service to halt the court case against Peter Hill, formerly of Skipton, brings to an end a near-six month police inquiry which began when he attempted to pass information to the Russian embassy in London last year. Mr Hill, 23, said: “I’m very relieved. I knew I was innocent all along but you never know how far they will take it.

“It led to me losing my job and my home – the last six months have been horrendous.”

He was initially arrested on suspicion of breaching the Official Secrets Act but was informed he would not be charged in connection with spying in January.

The CPS has now informed Mr Hill, 23, that a charge relating to an alleged bomb-making kit at his home has been dropped.

His solicitor, Grahame Stowe, said: “This decision is a vindication of what we have said all along – the charges were based on spurious intelligence and had little basis in fact.

“Despite several months of investigation – at the taxpayer’s expense – no proceedings have been worthy of pursuing against Mr Hill, yet his career and personal life have been utterly devastated.

“After being detained for five harrowing days, the subsequent investigation led to Peter losing his home and his reputation within the local community being destroyed. Mr Hill is now considering the avenues of redress available to him.”Mr Hill was first arrested last November under Section 1 of the Official Secrets Act 1911 and following police searches he was charged under Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act 1883.

He had been due to reappear at Leeds Crown Court next month after police found an alleged bomb-making kit at his home in Lambert Street, Skipton.

Mr Hill initially came to the attention of MI5 after contacting the Russian embassy with the alleged aim of passing information relating to his involvement with the military.

He was arrested in a Metropolitan Police sting operation at Henry’s Bar on Greek Street in Leeds city centre after arranging to meet what he thought was a Russian contact.

Finally it seems the Government has recognised David Blunkett’s folly in relaxing drug laws in January 2004.

Today the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) will hear a second day of evidence as part of its review into the classification cannabis, a review which may lead to the drug being reclassified as Class B.

Amid growing concern that stronger strains of the drug were flooding British streets and emerging evidence on the long term effects of use, one of Gordon Brown’s first actions after moving into Downing Street was to demand the classification issue be revisted.

The evidence on the street supports this concern, in particular the rise of so called ‘skunk’ – a potent form of cannabis that in just six years has escalated from ten to upwards of seventy percent of all cannabis consumption. Unlike the herbal cannabis often associated with the rose tinted haze of the 1960s, the review heard yesterday how modern skunk contains far higher levels of THC - the active ingredient in cannabis – and a much lower level of cannabidol, which many believe acts as an anti-psychotic and moderates the effect of the drug.

This shift to more potent strains of cannabis undermines the belief that cannabis is a harmless recreational drug – as its current Class C classification alongside some prescription anti-depressants and muscle building supplements suggests. This review would be an excellent time to recognise that no longer can ‘skunk’ and more traditional cannabis be seen as the same drug, so vastly different are their effects.

The consequences of a reclassification are severe for those arrested. A conviction for possessing a Class B drug carries a maximum of five years in prison, three years more than with a Class C drug. However, as recent headlines have made only too clear, the criminal justice system simply does not have the room to lock up hundreds of youths for smoking cannabis. A rash approach could be the final straw for a prison service bursting at the seams.

For many years those of us who have worked in the criminal and mental health spheres of the legal industry have been acutely aware of the danger cannabis poses and the long term damage it causes. This review has come too late for those who have already lost their minds and livelihoods to the drug, although it is still a case of better late than never.

The link to criminality is of particular interest to the reclassification debate. The criminal impact of hard drug use is well documented, but all too often the impact of softer drugs is overlooked. Every week we in the legal profession see the number of young people who commit a vast number of crimes as a direct result of drug abuse. Without any doubt, drugs are a major problem in our communities and I firmly believe the only approach that works is zero tolerance.

While cannabis use in the UK has apparently fallen since declassification, according to the Association of Chief Police Officers the increase in domestic cultivation of cannabis has proved a lucrative line for serious criminal enterprises.

It is these criminal enterprises the police should be targeting, and if, as I expect, cannabis is reclassified, the implementation needs to be handled extremely delicate. The risk of widespread confusion as generation of young users accustomed to a liberal attitude are suddenly criminalised is extremely worrying.

As I have seen on too many occasions, for those susceptible to mental illness cannabis use can trigger a serious psychotic episode or more severe long term illness. Of particular concern should be the growing number of under-15s who have become users since the drug’s Class C status was introduced. The risk of developing schizophrenia can be between two and four times higher for these children and if left unchecked we could see a mental illness epidemic entirely brought on by cannabis use.

These kinds of changes go far beyond the simple legality of behaviour and go to the heart of our culture towards drug use. The impact of cannabis is difficult to measure, as rarely is it used in isolation and nor can we ever have an accurate measure of its potency. Indeed, the only way to deliver that would be to legalise and regulate – a move that I believe would be catastrophic.

The government needs to recognise what any criminal solicitor, prison guard or mental health worker sees every day – cannabis use is a catalyst to mental breakdown and crime.

Hopefully now the Government will adopt a clear position on cannabis use and spare us another decade of uncertainty and confusion, before any more lives are ruined.

Grahame Stowe is senior partner at the law firm Grahame Stowe Bateson.

Read the rest of this entry »

From The Times, February 15, 2008

Grahame Stowe, a criminal lawyer with Grahame Stowe Bateson, a law firm in Yorkshire, said: “More than ever before young people are turning to extreme violence, in some cases for no reason other than entertainment.

This case illustrates once again the gross callousness some teenagers are capable of.” He added that it was a bold move to prosecute someone “who, in a literal sense, does not have blood on his or her hands”. He said: “The principle that videoing a criminal offence taking place can be considered aided and abetting could have some serious ramifications.