Monday, 26 February 2018

Staying On

I am glad that David Duckenfield is to be able to apply for more Legal Aid. Everyone is entitled to a proper defence. But there remains a stay on charging him, despite the Coroner's verdict of unlawful killing, and despite 95 dead bodies, plus another one who died too late to be counted for this purpose.

Whereas I remain charged, despite the fact that the Crown Prosecution Service admitted on 6th December, albeit outside court rather than in front of the judge, that the one and only item of evidence against me "had been destroyed", or, as I prefer to phrase it, "never existed".

If any item of evidence is produced on 11th April, a year after I had been charged, then know that four months earlier the CPS had denied "still" having it, so that it must have been reconstructed from its ashes or what have you.

The same barrister has never appeared twice for the Crown against me, and they have all been in their twenties. None of them has shown any sign of having done any preparation. On paper, the allegation against me would seem to call for prosecution by a QC. But as it is, the most junior person in the office that morning is being sent, never the same one twice, and without ever having seen the file before.

Come 11th April, will the Crown have counsel at all, or will the entire Bar have decided that this brief was professionally toxic? Of the barristers who have already appeared, how many have worked since, and as what?

I say again that on 6th December, albeit outside court rather than in front of the judge, the CPS admitted that the one and only item of evidence against me "had been destroyed", or, as I prefer to phrase it, "never existed".

So I say again that if any item of evidence is produced on 11th April, a year after I had been charged, then know that four months earlier the CPS had denied "still" having it, so that it must have been reconstructed from its ashes or what have you.

No comments:

Post a comment