Thursday, 17 September 2009


Trial of 'Columbine-style massacre' plot was 'farcical' says defence lawyer

The decision to prosecute teenagers Matthew Swift and Ross McKnight for fantasising about blowing up their school in a Columbine-style massacre has been condemned by their legal teams as a “farcical” waste of public money.

CPS only managed to jail two innocent boys for six months

McKnight said: “I would like to make it clear that at no time was any person put at risk either at Audenshaw High School or Crown Point North Shopping Centre.

"This was just a fantasy. This was never a reality."

He hoped his ambition to join the Army would not be harmed by his appearance in the dock.

Swift thanked his family, friends and legal team, but said he now wanted to put the matter behind him.

He also thanked God that he wasn't a Paki. If I had of been one, the teenager said, they'd a just kept trying me until they got the verdict they wanted.

Police and CPS staff defended their decision to try to frame the two teenagers. It normally works, said Chief Superintendent Gob and if we had a framed them that woulda been two less terrorists on the streets, which is exactly what the people want. A policeman's lot is not a happy one. My right worshipful brother is exactly right, said the arsehole from the CPS, there was a very strong case against these two terrorists, I know because I made it all up myself. It's a sad day for British justice

In other Rumpole News, Lady Scotland, the Attorney General,

who authorised the prosecution of the two naughty boys above said, How the fuck was she expected to know that her cleaner was an illegal. I'm a fucking Attorney fucking General, what do I know about cleaning, only that the taxpayer pays someone to do mine. Now fuck off or I'll have you charged with something.


lilith said...

£300k? And the rest. At Calfy's trial, whilst the Judge was out considering his verdict on how much of everyone's time and money had been wasted, the nauseating CPS bloke prosecuting my girl mused smugly on how he would get paid anyway, whatever the outcome of her trial. Ironic isn't it, that the CPS was invented to stop the Police wasting everyone's time and money?

woman on a raft said...

Spokesperson for the Greater Manchester police and probably up to her arse in it:

Asst Ch Con Terry Sweeney, of Greater Manchester Police (GMP), said senior officers and the CPS felt it was in the public interest to take the case to court. "In this case the jury took the decision not to convict and we respect their decision," she said.

She says it like it's optional for her to accept the verdict. Oh, wait, with the loss of double jeopardy, it is optional. To continue, how do we know is she up to her arse in it?

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) flew two detectives to Colorado ahead of the trial to talk to Columbine lead investigator Kate Battan, who was listed as a witness in the Manchester case but never called.

The officers had transatlantic jollies to justify. They felt big, important, and did exactly what the spods on the Satanic Panics do - wank their egos in to a frenzy from which they can't retreat.

Expert witness appearance fees are as much as £7k a day, possibly a retainer depending on contract, plus expenses. The MP John Hemmings discovered that an expert report can cost £25k.

The police needed to believe they had foiled a plot. It's only unusual that they didn't manufacture evidence such as 'salt-filled syringes' suddenly appearing in cupboards. That's what they usually do.

The police bought in to the boys' fantasy. That's indecent. That's fucking obscene. The CPS then bought in to the police fantasy.

What is surprising is the early nailing of Baroness Scotland. John Lord, reviewing lawyer at the Crown Prosecution Service, had the authority to go ahead on his own, but might have wanted to clear it with Kier Starmer. Why would Starmer have wanted the Attorney General (to whom the CPS is answerable) to approve the prosecution? If you need the A-G's signature, it's only to cover your arse - and if it's arse-covering time, then there must be known problems with the case. It's bizarre. Perhaps an explanation will emerge as the boys do a deal with the papers to sell their story.

Let's move on to the prosecution.

The CPS wheeled out the very biggest gun prosecutor they had.
Peter Wright QC.

"In September 2006 was appointed Senior Treasury Counsel, the first person ever to be so appointed as a silk and directly to that role. His backlog of cases includes the Heathrow terrorist plot to blow up transatlantic airline, the Suffolk strangler, the cartoon protesters convicted for inciting murder, Shipman (GP serial murderer)".

We all know how barristering works, OK - they have to their client but they also have a duty to the court. Wright, of all the prosecutors, knows when he's looking at a shit case. What he should have said to John Lord was

"Yeah, I know, I'm your bitch, but can you get me some actual evidence. You know, explosives in quantity, plans which could conceivably be more than a badly-written screen play. At least show me they could hot-wire a car, or a plan to hi-jack a cab and strangle the driver. Because, if you can't do that, then all I've got to lay before the jury is that one of them was a bit gobby at the shopping centre and neither of them are oil paintings. They can't drive, John. How were they going to transport anything?".

A QC with integrity would have threatened to stand up in court and ask for the judge to dismiss the case for lack of evidence.

The judge (will check who was running this one) let material go before a jury, effectively ruling that it was evidence, but that it was for the jury to decide what, if anything, it was evidence of.

That's a fine-line call. Judges are reluctant to stop cases because it undermines the jury system which already under attack. However, there have been a number of cases recently where the judges have just said sorry, the prosecution case is just not strong enough to be construed as evidence of anything at all.

Lilith is correct. £300k is petty cash. This is a £2million pounder.

mongoose said...

First they came for the ragheads and I said nothing because I am not a raghead...

It is unspeakable. And it is nothing that could not have been sorted out in five minutes by any competent adult. OK, true the pair of them are prats but kids are allowed to be prats.

Shame on us all.

Daisy said...

That we are favoured by an expert briefing by our resident legal correspondent, Mrs lady on a raft, means that those who congregate here are better informed than most.

I still found it difficult, however, looking at the pics, to tell the illegal immigrant from the Baroness, or whether the South African hermaphrodite was perhaps doing a bit of moonlighting, on the side.

"She had a social security number, and everything" said the Baroness, in her defence. Don't think I'd like her defending me, if that's the best she can do. The rules are strict, the penalties even more so, and they say very explicitly that a social security number may not be relied upon. Hilarious that ignorance is apparently her primary line of defence.

There is a consistency, of course, between this and the expenses scandal - they never feel, these political aristocrats, that the rules they make apply to them. Mind you, if the number of prosecutions that have resulted over expenses is any guide, they're not wrong, are they?

call me ishmael said...

THat's all perfect and I can't add to it, save to say that I found it really moving that one of the boys so keenly wanted, still, to wear the uniform of the same state which would cruelly have seen him rot for twenty-five years or more. Shame on us all, indeed.

Daisy said...

It was that or the dole. Money's about the same, but with the Army you get the chance of an extra thrill by being chauffeured through Wootton Bassett.

The other thing with the Baroness is what she did when she found out. Presumably she immediately informed the Police and the Immigration Service. I mean, she wouldn't have just let her go and forgot all about it, would she, not with her being AG and all?

Verge said...

On the other hand the lad may want to join up in hope of getting to slot someone for real after all. (Still agree the case was a pile of shite - did I imagine it or was there some mention of tennis balls at one point? "Projectiles removed for analysis" no doubt. Twats.)

call me ishmael said...

Wanting to slot someone - or worse - for real is always a possible factor when evaluating the Queen's shilling transacion. It was the lad's apparent uncertainty as to whether or not the recruiting sergeant will accept the verdict of the jury that was poignant, his recognition that Authority might accept his acquittal with the same generosity of spirit as did ACC Terry Sweeney.

black hole sunset said...

Wasn't it Scotland who tried to silence debate of an extradition case in the Lords (can't remember which one) by claiming it was still before the courts and thus sub judice?

It turned out that the defendants had "exhausted all legal avenues", or something like that, so it wasn't.

Wouldn't have known either way myself, but then I'm not a lawyer, and she, supposedly, is. As I recall, this was even put to her at the time by someone on the benches, but she chose to press on regardless, what with being a bit thick and all - she'd definitely been put up to it; principles not much, if at all, in evidence.

Amazing how something as simple as the promotion of inferior candidated can bring a whole system into disrepute. The subject of the main post being a case in point - the shit bastards.

woman on a raft said...

Werrl, yes Mr BHS. When you consider that Lord Goldsmith is commonly regarded as one of the cleverest lawyers of his generation - a fair assessment - there was no question that he was a superior candidate. Also quite a charmer and a safe pair of hands to all seeming.

The man still turned out to be a cunt, though.

You have it in your 3rd para: principles. That's all. That's all that's lacking. A competent mediocre, provincial, lawyer could make a good A-G but they would have to be committed in the space where their hearts should be to concepts such as upholding the law, and that law looking to justice, not political expediency. I know they'll get things wrong - I just want them not to be wicked.

Such an independent lawyer would never be appointed, though.

A good A-G should give consistent legal advice which does not change with the underwear of the questioner. It should be barely worth the effort of appointing a new one because they ought to be that impartial, not part of the 'programme' - a law wrangler dedicated to twisting the fabric of the law in to a noose.

We used barely to know that A-Gs existed - that the job has become a high-profile role of itself needs to be explained; it is a symptom of something in the body politic. It might just be the natural change of things, or it might be the action of ruin. I don't know which it is, yet. All suggestions gratefully recieved.

In fairness to Lord Goldsmith, he's only a 3rd rate cunt because he did try to tell his client that the war didn't have the legal certainty they required. Being so clever, he then got himself all confuzled when the client didn't want to hear that. His client doesn't believe in objective law - they believe all law is subjective and the lawyer's job is to mill it on demand. On the credit side though, he did campaign against Guantanamo. The mouse finally had a go at roaring, but by then the damage had been done.

Lord Goldsmith's punishment is that he is clever enough to know how far he failed. Mr Screwtape will have to think of another penalty for Baroness Scotland.

Caractacus said...

I found your comment above, very interesting - thanks.

black hole sunset said...

Crikey, thanks for the information Mrs Raft. It, the legal profession, being an area of interest, but no real insight on my part, I've always assumed that Goldsmith was just some horrible, chiseling stooge that they, the architects of Ruin, dug up from God only knows where to do their bidding. Worked out that way in the end, though; or, as good as.

I'm definitely, as ever, looking forward to Mr Screwtape's assessment of those who fall within his province =)

mongoose said...


"..only a third rate cunt..."

Excellent line! And so disappointing as a summary of a life and career. Bring's tear to the eye, it does.

mongoose said...

"Bring's"! Where's that apostrophe nutter when you need him?

baroness shorthand said...


I still found it difficult, however, looking at the pics, to tell the illegal immigrant from the Baroness, or whether the South African hermaphrodite was perhaps doing a bit of moonlighting, on the side.

very diplomatically put, miss daisy - i used miss tapui to shine my boots and generally enhance my public image. as i have stated repeatedly, the practice of introducing obsessive immigration legislation to create an illegal underclass and then profitting by employing said underclass at exploitative rates is technically quite naughty, but everyone's at it so why shouldn't i be treated equally? from where i stand, the fine i received was no more than a parking-ticket because st tony the baptist made sure i was stinky winky witch - an honour bestowed upon me in recognition of my services of his stinky winky willy. i am currently working towards the introduction of further socially progressive legislation which will see abduction, transportation and slavery punishable by a fixed-penalty notice - this being simply a civil matter.

jocelyn jack esien said...


yeah! all power to your feminist elbow! or did i mean arse? yeah man! go girl go!!