03 September 2011

'S truth Bruce


Currently reading Albion Dreaming by Andy Roberts. Fascinating stuff, the book is a 'popular history of LSD in Britain' and is well worth the investment of time to read it. At p162, the background of one of the Free Festival Organisers, Bill Ubi Dwyer, is being described. Dwyer used to sell LSD at a club in Sydney called the Cellar, the book explains,
The police sent undercover officers to the Cellar but this did not seem to bother Dwyer. ...he was buying LSD directly from the police, who largely controlled the Sydney LSD trade at that time.20

Following Andy Roberts' reference takes us to a Parliamentary speech by R L S Jones, which gives many other examples of police corruption. I found the following particularly amusing,
"The other day a solicitor told me that some time ago one of his clients was busted at Terrey Hills for amphetamine possession. He was taken to the police station and the police officer behind the counter was the one who had sold him the amphetamines, so his case never came to court."

2 comments:

  1. In October 1999, Andrew Rennison was a Detective Superintendent in West Yorkshire Police, who was the 'Director of Intelligence responsible for the management and use of informants in West Yorkshire'
    (See paragrapgh #73 here: http://preview.tinyurl.com/3sf8wf6 )

    Under Andrew Rennison's watch/responsibility at that time, gross misconduct involving crown witnesses occurred, involving West Yorkshire Police who took a Mr Karl Chapman (aka Karl Ryan), a murder trial witness to a brothel and allowed him to use heroin & cannabis to ensure he co-operated, Chapman also had sex with a policewoman and socialised at police officers' homes, whilst on remand. More here: http://preview.tinyurl.com/3quu6eu &
    http://preview.tinyurl.com/3r7cy7z


    The Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal (CDCA) has stated that the convictions secured by the WYP use of Karl Chapman as a prosecution witness were procured by ‘gross prosecutorial/police misconduct on the part of the West Yorkshire police’. See http://preview.tinyurl.com/3k6mvpx

    The same Mr Andrew Rennison is now the present Forensic Science Regulator, CCTV Regulator & who also sits on the National DNA Database Strategy Board.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for dropping by, Sinclair.

    I remember reading R v Hoey and wondering what became of the two witnesses mentioned in the following extract,

    "In this case a most disturbing situation was exposed by the Defence. It came to light that a Ms Cooper, then a SOCO but now apparently a police officer, gave evidence that she was wearing protective clothing at this scene when in fact she was wearing nothing of the kind, as photographs taken at the scene fortunately revealed. I add that she gave similarly incorrect evidence in relation to her apparel at Forkhill, again happily exposed by the availability of photographs. A Detective Chief Inspector Marshall also gave evidence about his wearing protective clothing at Altmore which photographs proved to be incorrect. These two witnesses were responsible for dealing with exhibits from Altmore including the TPU and for transporting it to the Forensic Laboratory in Belfast and later to the laboratory in Birmingham for DNA examination. The explanation as to how their untruths came to be told and the deliberate attempts, as I am satisfied they were, to conceal what the Defence not unfairly characterised as the "beefing up" of the initial statement of Ms Cooper are deeply disquieting. I am left in the position that I do not know what if anything I can believe of the evidence of these two and I am satisfied that, had photographs not been available to gainsay their lies, they would have persisted in seeking to and very possibly have succeeded in convincing me that, being at that time (somewhat unusually if the evidence of others is correct) alive to the possibility of DNA contamination, they were wearing suitable protective clothing to obviate such a risk. Such was my disquiet at their evidence and that of others connected with this matter that upon its completion I had transcripts of the evidence on this issue sent to the Police Ombudsman. The effect of this, as I find deliberate and calculated deception in which others concerned in the investigation and preparation of this case for trial beyond these two witnesses may also have played a part, is to make it impossible for me to accept any of the evidence of either witness since I have no means of knowing whether they may have told lies about other aspects of the case that were not capable of being exposed as such."

    ReplyDelete