13 May 2008 - Pauline Campbell has criminal proceedings dropped
Report by Pauline Campbell
Criminal trial abandoned as CPS comes
under fire
Summary
-
Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) caves in under pressure
-
Case abandoned after written representations to CPS and Attorney General
-
Letters of complaint submitted to CPS and Attorney General from serving prisoners and ex-prisoners, and other concerned individuals, slating the vindictive nature of the case, and demanding to know how the prosecution could be in the 'public interest'
-
Chief Crown Prosecutor Ian Rushton admits case is no longer in the public interest - letter to defendant Pauline Campbell, dated 30 April 2008
-
Three-day criminal trial called off (Macclesfield Magistrates sitting at Knutsford Crown Court, 30.07.08-01.08.08)
Criminal trial called
off
Letter dated 30 April 2008, addressed
to defendant Pauline Campbell, signed by Chief Crown Prosecutor Ian
Rushton, CPS Cheshire (based at Chester):
"Re: Proceedings for
Obstruction of the Highway: I write following the recent
Pre-Trial Review in this matter and following receipt of your letter dated 27 March [2008] the contents of which I have carefully
noted. We have given your submissions careful
consideration and, in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors have
re-reviewed the matter with particular regard to the points that you make
in respect of the public interest test. We have carefully assessed both
the factors for and against the prosecution in this matter, and paid particular
regard to your current medical situation and have decided that it would no
longer [* be in the] public interest to proceed
further with this matter. We have also taken account of the fact that this
incident was generated by the unfortunate death of Lisa Marley at Styal Prison
in January of this year which I appreciate will have caused you particular
distress. According to my information you are not
legally represented at this time which is why I have enclosed the Notice of
Discontinuance** with this letter for you
personally. In short this effect is to bring these current proceedings to
an end. You will not be required to attend Court in relation to this
matter any further."
* these 3 words need to be
inserted if the sentence is to make sense
** the Notice
of Discontinuance was not enclosed with the letter
Notice of
Discontinuance
Received by Pauline Campbell on Saturday
3 May 2008 - a two-page formal letter from Crewe CPS, dated 30 April 2008, which
states: "The decision to discontinue this charge has been taken because a
prosecution is not needed in the public interest."
Background to
case
-
Arrest and charge (obstructing the highway): 5 February 2008, at a prison-death demonstration outside Styal Prison, to protest against the death of the young mother Lisa Marley from Blackpool, who died on 23 January 2008 in the care of the jail. Thirty-two year old Ms Marley was on remand, and therefore legally innocent when she died. Lisa was on 'suicide watch' at Styal when she was found hanging in her cell. She was taken to hospital, unconscious, having suffered 'catastrophic brain injuries', and died four days later.
-
Three court hearings were held at Macclesfield Magistrates' Court: a 'not guilty' plea was entered on 27 February 2008; and two pre-trial reviews took place on 19 March 2008 and 9 April 2008.
-
Legal aid was denied on the grounds of 'interests of justice': I was without legal representation at the three court hearings.
Comment
- on the case
generally
From start to finish, this senseless
prosecution was a waste of the court's time, a scandalous waste of public money,
and an enormous drain on my emotional health. Yet another attempt to
criminalise and punish me has failed, and the CPS and the Attorney General
have met with a barrage of letters complaining about the vindictive nature
of the case, demanding to know how the prosecution could be in the public
interest (I have seen copies of some of these letters).
This prosecution has felt like an attack
on my reputation, especially the false allegations made about me by serving
police officers. But I believe in standing up for principle because it is
one of the few ways in which people can make a difference. I refuse to bow
to pressure, and will stick to my resolve to hold prison-death
demonstrations outside jails in England when women kill themselves in the
so-called care of the State. It is mediaeval, and people must speak
out. Justice Secretary Jack Straw is the one who should be in the dock, not
me. I am not the wrongdoer. The message will not go away simply by
trying to shoot the messenger.
Demonstrations will continue because
where there is injustice there will be protest. The unjust sentencing
of vulnerable women; their suffering, and deaths - that is the injustice. The way forward is to implement the recommendations of the Corston Report www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/corston-report/ but Ministers' feeble response (December 2007) was to say the
recommendations couldn't be funded, yet it seems money is available to build
three new 'Titan' prisons. Forty-one women prisoners have died from
self-inflicted injuries since my daughter's death in January 2003 - unless
reform is introduced, more women will die.
As far as my defunct criminal trial is
concerned, Chief Crown Prosecutor Ian Rushton, Cheshire CPS, appears to have
recognised at least some of the distress this case has caused me. Referring to Lisa Marley's death at Styal Prison, he says "I appreciate [this]
will have caused you particular distress". Being arrested, handcuffed, and
dragged to a waiting police car outside the jail responsible for my daughter's
death was immensely distressing, but this was compounded by being held in police
custody for over nine hours, and released in the early hours of the following
morning, with bruised and swollen wrists and a raised blood pressure. (The
bruising and swelling to my wrists was logged by my GP two days after the
arrest.) I am still a grieving mother, and this kind of physical and
psychological battering is inexcusable. Shame on the criminal justice
system.
The case leaves unanswered
questions. Why did it take three months for the CPS to realise the
prosecution was not in the public interest?
- on the police
I will be writing to the Chief Constable
of Cheshire Constabulary, Peter Fahy, to complain about members of his police
force - in particular Police Constable (PC) 4671 Phillip Tuck, and Police Community Support Officer
(PCSO) 20305 Gareth Harding, both based at Wilmslow Police
Station. In signed statements dated 11 March 2008, referring to
the incident outside Styal Prison, both officers state: "Campbell began to kick
out". This statement is untrue. Page one of any witness statement
clearly states: "This statement ... is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be
liable to prosecution if I have wilfully stated anything which I know to be
false or do not believe to be true." Had the trial gone ahead, and had the
officers persisted with their allegation - which I would have strongly denied -
the court would have been faced with having to decide who was telling the
truth. To lie on oath is to commit perjury.
Furthermore, although I was not charged
with assault, or actual/grievious bodily harm, Sergeant 4083 Roy
Crouch, and PC 4301 Nina Ashton, both submitted
signed witness statements dated 5 February 2008, referring to an apparent injury
to PC Ashton's leg (two-inch lump and bruising, with broken skin), although both
officers stopped short of alleging I had caused the injury. Sgt 4083
apparently photographed the alleged injury. The police were attempting to
submit the photo in evidence against me.
Sgt 4083 Roy Crouch's
first statement, dated 5 February 2008, was not without error - he stated
that PCSO Andy Roberts attended the incident, but in his second statement dated
27 March 2008, he said it was PCSO 20305 Gareth Harding, and not PCSO
Roberts, at the scene (Sgt Crouch refers to this as "a clerical
error").
- on legal aid
It is incompatible with the principle of
access to justice that anyone should have to stand criminal trial and attend
pre-trial reviews without legal representation. I was denied legal aid,
even though I have no paid employment and no savings. As "the accused", I
found it enormously stressful having to conduct my own case in court on three
occasions - I am not a lawyer, and have no legal training. The Lord Chief
Justice, Lord Phillips, who has voiced concern about the growing number of
people representing themselves in court, said last month: "I view with concern
the steadily increasing numbers of litigants in person, due in part to
difficulties of getting legal aid. It makes the task of dealing with a
case more difficult and time-consuming." http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk/7326377.stm
[All comments above by Pauline
Campbell]
Summary to
date
Number of protests: 28
Arrests: 15
Number of times charged: 5
Convictions: 0
Further
information
Manchester Evening News, 2 May
2008: "Cushy jails? They're disgusting!"
(Note: jail population has risen again
since letter was published)