CPS News Brief

Statement on the prosecution of hunting offences

There have been a number of recent reports inferring that the CPS is reluctant to, and does not, prosecute hunting offences. This is wrong.

Where there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction, and it is in the public interest, the CPS does prosecute such cases.

Indeed, since the introduction of the Hunting Act in 2005, 371 offences have been charged and brought to magistrates’ courts

Clarification on social media guidelines

Some of the recent media coverage of the CPS interim guidelines on cases involving communications sent via social media has wrongly implied that claiming to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time of sending a message would be a valid defence against prosecution.

This is incorrect. Rather, where a communication has been sent that is grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or false, there are a number of factors that are likely to mean that a prosecution is not in the public interest. One of these factors is whether the suspect has taken swift action to remove the communication or expressed genuine remorse.

It is this swift removal or genuine remorse that prosecutors would consider when deciding whether to prosecute, not whether the sender was under the influence of alcohol at the time of sending the communication.

It is important to note, however, that where communications amount to credible threats of violence, a targeted campaign of harassment against an individual or breach court orders, cases will be robustly prosecuted.

The guidelines are available for public consultation on the CPS website.

Seven convicted in ‘largest cannabis production case in Europe’

Seven people were convicted today at the Central Criminal Court for their involvement in the “largest case of its type in Europe” concerning the production of high-strength cannabis and the supply of equipment for production.

The second of two trials centred on the supply of specialist equipment to produce high-yield crops of skunk cannabis between January 2006 and December 2010. The people convicted will be sentenced at the Central Criminal Court on 18th January, 2013.

Jenny Hopkins, CPS London Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor, said:

“This case was described in court as seminal and the largest of its type in Europe. This conspiracy by a family-centred criminal organisation concerned the production of skunk cannabis on a truly industrial and unprecedented scale.

"It also involved producing and supplying specialist equipment to produce high-yield crops in cannabis farms, setting up companies to conduct criminal activity, staffing the cannabis farms and harvesting the crop.

“The conspiracy was linked to dozens of cannabis farms spread across the UK and Ireland including a cannabis farm in a warehouse in Essex which had some 8,000 mature cannabis plants and is believed to be the largest single cannabis farm discovered in the UK.

"These convictions, amounting to 18 in total, follow the second of two criminal trials which involved many months of work by the prosecution team who were faced with over 200,000 pages of material and an unprecedented volume of seized exhibits and equipment. In 2010 this conspiracy could have produced up to £120million worth of cannabis.

“CPS London is committed to working with its partners to help tackle drugs production and misuse and to protect our communities from these criminal operations.”

Eighteen people have now been convicted in connection with the conspiracy.

Trial 2 – 12th December 2012

Ngat Le, Hung Van Le, Thoung Van Tu, Than Nguyen, Freddie-Ross Johnson, Gary Hadley and Shaun Byrne were convicted of conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug between January 2006 and December 2010 [count 1].

Than Nguyen was also convicted of conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug between September 2011 and September 2012 [count 3].

Gary Hadley was acquitted of conspiracy to produce a controlled drug between January 2006 and December 2010 [count 2].

Hoang Thanh Huynh and Richard Hilditch were acquitted of conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug between January 2006 and December 2010.

Count 1 and 3 of the indictment alleged a conspiracy to be knowingly concerned in the production of a controlled drug by another. This conspiracy is essentially directed at the agreement to supply equipment to produce cannabis. Such equipment was distributed to shops (so-called “head” or “hydroponic ”retail shops) and/or directly to individuals concerned in the production of cannabis at so-called cannabis farms across the United Kingdom.

Count 2 alleged a conspiracy to produce cannabis. The essential difference was that the cannabis production in question was at cannabis farms set up and controlled by the named conspirators, with the resultant cannabis available for them to supply for profit.

Trial 1 – 14th February 2012

Manh Toan Dang and Hung Tuan Dang convicted of conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug, conspiracy to produce a controlled drug, false imprisonment and damaging property.

Guilty pleas (various dates)

Van Quan Dang - conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug, false imprisonment and damaging property.

Nhien Van Dang - conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug and conspiracy to produce a controlled drug.

Ngoe Tien Ly - conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug and conspiracy to produce a controlled drug.

Hai Ban Tran - conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug and conspiracy to produce a controlled drug.

Tuan Van Le - conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug. Andre Davis - conspiracy to produce a controlled drug.

Nhat Nguyen - conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug.

Trong Van Le - conspiracy to be concerned in the production of a controlled drug.

Jamie Covington - conspiracy to produce a controlled drug

DPP launches public consultation on prosecutions involving social media communications

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer QC, has today published interim guidelines setting out the approach prosecutors should take in cases involving communications sent via social media.

The guidelines are designed to give clear advice to prosecutors and ensure a consistency of approach across the CPS to these types of cases.

Mr Starmer said:

“These interim guidelines are intended to strike the right balance between freedom of expression and the need to uphold the criminal law.

“They make a clear distinction between communications which amount to credible threats of violence, a targeted campaign of harassment against an individual or which breach court orders on the one hand, and other communications sent by social media, e.g. those that are grossly offensive, on the other.

“The first group will be prosecuted robustly whereas the second group will only be prosecuted if they cross a high threshold; a prosecution is unlikely to be in the public interest if the communication is swiftly removed, blocked, not intended for a wide audience or not obviously beyond what could conceivably be tolerable or acceptable in a diverse society which upholds and respects freedom of expression.

“The interim guidelines thus protect the individual from threats or targeted harassment while protecting the expression of unpopular or unfashionable opinion about serious or trivial matters, or banter or humour, even if distasteful to some and painful to those subjected to it.”

ACPO lead on communications, Chief Constable Andy Trotter said:

“This interim guidance sets out clear advice to police forces in England and Wales on handling complaints from the public relating to social media. It takes a common sense approach and will help support consistency from prosecutors and police. We welcome the opportunity for early consultation to take place between CPS and police before any action is taken in these cases.”

Chief Executive of Victim Support Javed Khan said:

“Victims tell us that sustained and vindictive targeting on social media can leave long lasting emotional and psychological scars, so we warmly welcome clarification on how prosecutors will deal with online threats or harassment.

“The distinction between communications which constitute a credible threat and those which may merely cause offence is sorely needed.

“In particular we welcome the guideline which makes a prosecution more likely if a victim is specifically targeted and this has a significant impact on them.

“We will watch how the interim guidelines are used with interest and will respond to them in detail during the consultation period.”

The interim guidelines do not change the law, but set out the approach prosecutors should follow when considering cases relating to communications sent via social media. The guidelines come into immediate effect, and are subject to a three-month public consultation which starts today.

Mr Starmer added:

“We want the interim guidelines to be as fully informed as possible, which is why we held a series of roundtable discussions and meetings with Twitter, Facebook, Liberty and other stakeholders, police and regulators, victim groups, academics, journalists and bloggers, lawyers and sports organisations ahead of drafting them. I would now encourage everyone with an interest in this matter to give us their views by responding to the public consultation.”

Initial assessment

As part of their initial assessment, prosecutors are now required to distinguish between:

1) Communications which may constitute credible threats of violence

2) Communications which may constitute harassment or stalking

3) Communications which may amount to a breach of a court order

4) Communications which do not fall into any of the above categories and fall to be considered separately i.e. those which may be considered grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or false.

Those offences falling within the first three categories should, in general, be prosecuted robustly under the relevant legislation, for example the Protection from Harassment Act (1997), where the test set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors is satisfied.

Cases which fall within the final category will be subject to a high threshold and in many cases a prosecution is unlikely to be in the public interest.

The high threshold

Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 and section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 engage Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, therefore prosecutors are reminded that they must be interpreted consistently with the free speech principles in Article 10.

Prosecutors are also reminded that what is prohibited under section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 and section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 is the sending of a communication that is grossly offensive. They should only proceed with cases involving such an offence where they are satisfied that the communication in question is more than:

• Offensive, shocking or disturbing; or

• Satirical, iconoclastic or rude comment; or

• The expression of unpopular or unfashionable opinion about serious or trivial matters, or banter or humour, even if distasteful to some or painful to those subjected to it.

The public interest

In line with the free speech principles in Article 10, no prosecution should be brought unless it can be shown on its own facts and merits to be both necessary and proportionate.

A prosecution is unlikely to be both necessary and proportionate where:

a) The suspect has swiftly taken action to remove the communication or expressed genuine remorse;

b) Swift and effective action has been taken by others, for example service providers, to remove the communication in question or otherwise block access to it;

c) The communication was not intended for a wide audience, nor was that the obvious consequence of sending the communication; particularly where the intended audience did not include the victim or target of the communication in question; or

d) The content of the communication did not obviously go beyond what could conceivably be tolerable or acceptable in an open and diverse society which upholds and respects freedom of expression.

The age and maturity of suspect should be given significant weight, particularly if they are under the age of 18. Children may not appreciate the potential harm and seriousness of their communications and as such prosecutions of children are rarely likely to be in the public interest.

The public consultation is available on the CPS website and closes on 13 March 2013.

Two teenage gang members convicted of the murder of a 17-year-old boy

Two teenage gang members have been convicted of the murder of a 17-year-old boy who had been caught up in a “poisonous” gang feud.

Nelson Idiabeta and Nathaniel Okusanya were found guilty at the Central Criminal Court of the murder of Kwame Ofosu-Asare who was stabbed to death on a housing estate in Brixton on 2nd March 2012.

Jenny Hopkins, CPS London Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor, said:

“Kwame Ofosu-Asare’s senseless murder was part of a poisonous feud between two gangs in south London in which he had no part.

“Kwame was not a member of any gang yet he found himself in the wrong place at the wrong time with tragic consequences. Two gang members – Idiabeta and Okusanya - sought revenge in a rival gang’s territory, chased Kwame and his friend down an alley and stabbed him several times in the back.

“CPS London is committed to working with its partners in the fight against gang and knife crime and this conviction should be seen as a clear signal that these acts of violence which destroy young lives and families will be robustly prosecuted wherever we can.

“We hope that this conviction will bring some justice for Kwame’s family and our thoughts are with them at this time.”

Nurse who circumcised baby boy convicted of gross negligence manslaughter

Nurse Grace Adeleye was today convicted of gross negligence manslaughter following the death of Goodluck Caubergs, who at 27 days old bled to death after being circumcised at home.

Jane Wragg, Specialist Prosecutor in the CPS Special Crime Division, said:

“Goodluck Caubergs was a healthy little boy whose tragic death was wholly unnecessary. This case was not about the rights or wrongs of circumcision, but the grossly negligent way in which the procedure was undertaken. Circumcision is a medical procedure which, like any other, carries very real risks to the patient that must be properly managed. This was not done in this case.

“Goodluck died because the standard of care taken by Grace Adeleye in carrying out the circumcision fell far below the standard that should be applied. She also failed to inform his parents of the risks and possible complications, which ultimately led to his tragic death.”

 

Five convicted for forced labour conspiracy

Today, a jury at Bristol Crown Court has returned guilty verdicts for charges of forced labour against five members of the same family.

William Connors, 51, Breda Connors, 48, John Connors, 29 and James Connors, 20, all formerly of Gloucester Road in Staverton and Miles Connors, 24 formerly of Bowling Back Lane in Bradford were all found guilty of conspiring to require other persons to perform forced or compulsory labour.

Ann Reddrop, head of the CPS South West Complex Case Unit said:

"The jury’s verdict concludes a lengthy investigation into the criminal activities of the Connors family and their punitive relationship with those whom they forced to work for them.

"The CPS has worked closely with DCI Selwood and his team at Gloucestershire Constabulary since March 2011 when the police were about to arrest the offenders. "The five members of the Connors family who stood trial were charged with offences involving the serious mistreatment of people who, because of their personal circumstances, had little option but to continue to remain with the offenders.

"The defendants used violence to prevent the victims leaving them or from alerting the authorities to their treatment. They forced them to undertake physically demanding work for long periods. They did not pay them for their work and took advantage of their vulnerable situations.

"There was a very stark contrast in living conditions between offender and victim and the way in which the offenders materially benefited from their criminal activities will be the subject of further applications for confiscation by the Crown under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2003.

"This case illustrates the way the CPS and police work together to secure justice in even the most difficult circumstances."

The charges relate to the period between 5 April 2010 and 23 March 2011, when the Connors exploited a number of victims, many of whom were perceived as vulnerable members of society, forcing them to perform a range of building and manual labour jobs across the country. When paid they received only a pittance and were subject to assaults, theft of benefits, ill-treatment and exploitation. Many of the victims were housed in squalid conditions in caravans at sites including Beggars Roost in Cheltenham.

A year-long investigation, including a five month surveillance operation by Gloucestershire Constabulary, culminated in March 2011 when officers carried out warrants at sites in Gloucestershire, Leicestershire and Derbyshire and 19 people were rescued.

Lead officer for Operation Tundra David Sellwood said:

"This was the first investigation of its kind nationally and we faced unique challenges. The rescued men had been victims of the Connors family for up to 30 years; many were 'institutionalised' and did not recognise themselves as being victims. The family generated significant wealth off the backs of some of the most vulnerable in society and we are delighted that they have finally been held to account."

Four men from East London charged with sexual offences and child exploitation

Kris Venkatasami, Head of the Special Casework Unit and Special Operations Unit at CPS London, said:

“I have authorised the Metropolitan Police to charge Naeem Ahmed, Nabeel Ahmed, Anas Iqbal and Hassan Raza, all from East London, with a range of offences under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 which occurred between January and September 2012.

“Naeem Ahmed has been charged with six counts of rape, one count of controlling a child prostitute, one count of paying for sexual services of a child and one count of causing or inciting child prostitution.

“Nabeel Ahmed has been charged with six counts of rape. Anas Iqbal has been charged with paying for sexual services of a child and Hassan Raza has been charged with sexual assault.

“This decision to prosecute was taken in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

“The four defendants will appear before Barkingside Magistrate’s Court on 14 December 2012.

“They now stand charged with criminal offences and have the right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that nothing should be reported which could prejudice this trial."

Joint CPS/MPS statement on the case of Gary McKinnon

Statement by Keir Starmer QC, Director of Public Prosecutions, and Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service Mark Rowley QPM on the case of Gary McKinnon

Between 1 February 2001 and 19 March 2002, Gary McKinnon allegedly gained unauthorised access to 97 United States (US) Government computers. An investigation was launched in the US and a request for assistance was made to the National Hi-Tech Crime Unit in England and Wales. Following discussions between the US Department of Justice, the police and the Crown Prosecution Service in the autumn of 2002, a decision was taken that the appropriate place for Mr McKinnon to be tried was the United States.

The reasons for that decision were:

1. The harm occurred in the US - the activity was directed against the military infrastructure of the US;
2. An investigation had already been launched in the US;
3. There were a large number of witnesses, most of whom were located in the US;
4. All of the physical evidence (with the exception of Mr McKinnon’s computer) was located in the US;
5. The US prosecutors were able to bring a case that reflected the full extent of Mr McKinnon’s alleged criminality; and
6. The bulk of the unused material was located in the US. Given the nature of the offence, this inevitably included highly sensitive information and the US courts were best placed to deal with any issues arising in relation to this material.

As a result, the US sought Mr McKinnon’s extradition from England and Wales for trial in the US.

The decision that the appropriate place for Mr McKinnon to be tried was the US was affirmed in 2009 and subsequently challenged in the High Court. That challenge failed. As Lord Justice Stanley Burnton said in his judgment: “… [it is] the decision of the DPP, which I consider to be lawful and unchallengeable, not to prosecute him here … the USA is the appropriate forum for his prosecution.”

On 16 October 2012, the Home Secretary decided not to extradite Mr McKinnon to the US on the basis of his health. She also announced that it was now for the DPP to decide whether Mr McKinnon had a case to answer in a UK court. At that stage there was no live criminal investigation in England and Wales, nor had there been for many years.

The DPP and the Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police therefore agreed to convene a joint police/CPS panel to consider whether a new criminal investigation should be commenced.

None of the reasons for the original decision in 2002 that the appropriate place for Mr McKinnon to be tried was the United States have altered. So far as the evidence is concerned, the position in 2012 is the same as it was in 2002. Most of the witnesses are in the US, as is nearly all the physical evidence and the bulk of the unused material, some of which is sensitive. Accordingly, in November this year, the CPS and the police met senior officials from the US Department of Justice to discuss the possibility of bringing the US witnesses to England and Wales for trial and of transferring all the US material to this jurisdiction to be considered.

The potential difficulties in bringing a case in England and Wales now should not be underestimated, not least the passage of time, the logistics of transferring sensitive evidence prepared for a court in the US to London for trial, the participation of US government witnesses in the trial and the need fully to comply with the duties of disclosure imposed on the CPS. The prospects of a conviction against Mr McKinnon which reflects the full extent of his alleged criminality are not high.

After consulting with the Metropolitan Police Service and the CPS and having carefully considered matters, on 4 December this year, US authorities indicated to us that they would be willing to co-operate with a prosecution in England and Wales if that would serve the interest of justice. However, they do not consider that making all the US witnesses available for trial in London and transferring all of the US material to this jurisdiction would be in the interests of justice given our representations and the reasons for the decision that the US was the appropriate forum as set out above. That is a decision the US authorities are fully entitled to reach and we respect their decision.

Against this background, the joint CPS/police panel recommended to the Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police that he should not commence a new criminal investigation into Mr McKinnon. The Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police has accepted that advice.

CPS announces new board members

The Crown Prosecution Service has appointed Alison Porter and Jeremy Newman as new non-executive directors to the CPS Board.

Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer QC, said:

“I am pleased to welcome Alison and Jeremy to the CPS Board. They bring with them a wealth of experience and will undoubtedly make valuable additions to the governance of the CPS.”

In addition to sitting on the board, Alison Porter will be a member of the CPS Nominations and Governance Committee and Jeremy Newman will Chair the Audit and Risk Committee. Both have taken up their roles with effect from December 2012.

Biography – Jeremy Newman

Jeremy is a chartered accountant by profession and the former Chief Executive (2008-2011) of BDO International. Prior to that, he was managing partner (2001-2008) of BDO's UK firm, having joined them as a trainee in 1978 and becoming a partner in 1986. He has worked extensively in audit and corporate finance and has acted for a wide range of businesses across a variety of industries. Jeremy is the current Chairman of the Audit Commission, having been appointed to this role in October 2012. He is also Chair of Trustees of a local Primary school and trustee of a number of private charitable trusts. He has chaired, been a member of, and reported to numerous boards and committees including audit committees. He has managed relationships with governments, regulators and the media in the UK and globally.

Biography – Alison Porter

Alison has 20 years experience in strategic development, operational management and governance at board level in both the private and public sectors. Her early career experience was with HMRC and the Cabinet Office followed by 17 years with BT plc in a range of operational management, security professional and strategic roles. She is an experienced non-executive director having held posts with 5 Government Agencies over the past 11 years and is also a former Lay Magistrate. She recently completed an MA with distinction in Creative Entrepreneurship at the University of East Anglia where she is a visiting speaker. She is currently a non-executive board member at the National Fraud Authority.

Three men sentenced to a total of 53 years in prison for knifepoint robberies at London homes

A group of masked men who targeted wealthy victims and robbed them at knifepoint at their homes have been convicted of conspiracy to rob at Southwark Crown Court today.

Stephen Apted, CPS London Crown Advocate, said:

“The victims in this case were subjected to a horrifying ordeal in their own homes where they were robbed at knife point by masked men.

“These men targeted lone and older victims who they knew to be wealthy leaving restaurants late in the evening. They then followed them home and attacked them on their door step, stripping them of their valuables and jewellery.

“Jewellery worth approximately £300,000 was stolen during the course of five such robberies.

“People should be able to go about their daily lives free from fear of such attacks.

“CPS London will do all it can to prosecute those who bring violent crime to our streets.”

Gulam Gani, Nicholas Lewis and Sean Wallace were found guilty of conspiracy to rob and Lewis was also convicted of one count of robbery. Gani was sentenced to 18 years imprisonment, Wallace was sentenced to 15 years and Lewis was sentenced to 20 years. Trevor Benjamin was acquitted of two counts of conspiracy to handle stolen goods.

Royal Navy petty officer sentenced for misconduct and breach of Official Secrets Act

Mari Reid, Unit Head for the CPS counter-terrorism division, said:

“This was a classic story of betrayal. Edward Devenney was employed by the Royal Navy to protect this country from potential threats to our security. Instead, he pursued a course of conduct likely to put his country at risk.

“Today, Devenney has been sentenced to eight years' imprisonment for collecting official secrets from the submarine on which he worked, secrets that were likely to be useful to an enemy. He attempted to set up a covert relationship with Russian agents with the intention of harming the Royal Navy, at the expense of the UK. Luckily for us, the men he met on 28 January 2012 were not Russian agents, but members of the British Security Service.

“We rely on the men and women of our armed forces to keep us safe. It is hard to imagine a greater breach of that role than Devenney’s actions.”

Two sentenced in first ever ‘land banking’ fraud trial

Two sentenced in first ever ‘land banking’ fraud trial Two men have today been sentenced at Isleworth Crown Court in what is thought to be the first ever trial for ‘land banking’ fraud. Omar Eshpari and Stefan Mitchell secured at least £3m from their victims between April 2008 and October 2009.

Luke Dockwray, prosecutor for the CPS central fraud division, said:

“These fraudsters were purporting to sell individual plots of land as good investments. In reality, investors were buying grossly overpriced land, often marked up by at least 1000%. Far from being ripe for development, one site in Halifax was on a 40 degree slope with Tree Preservation Orders and a Japanese Knotweed problem. All the land consisted of undivided plots in fields; only a miracle would produce a development opportunity, let alone a profit.

“Investors were drawn in through a variety of sales techniques, including cold calls and impressive-looking brochures. They were given general historic truths; that the price of land like house prices always goes up. They were fed tales of local housing shortages and were even told there had been development interest from supermarket and hotel chains. There was no such interest and the defendants did nothing to get planning permission or enhance the value of the land, and never intended to. In this way, they were conspiring to defraud potential victims by fraudulently misrepresenting the land as a good investment.

“Some £3 million was secured from investors as part of this bare-faced fraud. Today’s conviction is a reminder that no matter what the nature of the fraud, if you dishonestly set out to part people from their money, you risk prosecution in the criminal courts. I hope it may also be a reminder to the public to be wary of offers of investments made to them in cold calls.”

Background

Investors were offered grossly overpriced freehold plots of land, some of which the defendants had the right to sell, some of which they did not. Plots of land were marketed and sold in Kent, London, Suffolk, Surrey and West Yorkshire. On one site near Folkestone the defendants had been told by their own solicitors that there was no likelihood of getting planning permission but sold it as a “superb development opportunity”.

The prosecution case was that the sites were being sold in plots to numerous investors who were all told that the land was a good investment opportunity. In reality this was a “get rich quick” scheme for the defendants. The investors were left with a small plot of worthless land surrounded by other plots and with no scheme in place to sell it on.

The CPS is working with the City of London Police to secure confiscation orders to deprive the defendants of the proceeds of their crime, and so far as is possible to compensate the investors who have lost their money.

Omar Eshpari and Stefan Mitchell were convicted on five counts of conspiracy to defraud, contrary to the common law. De’rial White was acquitted of five counts of conspiracy to defraud, contrary to the common law. Dean Straker was also acquitted of two counts, with the jury hung on the remaining three.

Christopher Weatherhead convicted of conspiracy to hack computers

Christopher Weatherhead has today been convicted on one count of conspiracy to impair the operation of computers, contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977, at Southwark Crown Court. This follows the earlier guilty pleas of three co-conspirators.

 Russell Tyner, Crown Advocate for the CPS Organised Crime Division, said:

“Christopher Weatherhead is a cyber criminal who waged a sophisticated and orchestrated campaign of online attacks on the computer systems of several major companies.

“A self-styled ‘hacktivist’, Weatherhead and his fellow conspirators targeted companies in the music industry involved in combating internet piracy and companies that had stopped processing online donations to WikiLeaks. Their campaign of attacks cost these companies over £3.5 million in additional staffing, software and loss of sales.

“These were lawful companies with ordinary customers and hard working employees. This was not a victimless crime.”

Background:

Jake Birchall, Ashley Rhodes and Peter Gibson pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to impair the operation of computers, contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977, at Southwark Crown Court. Birchall pleaded on 26 January 2012, Gibson on 6 March 2012 and Rhodes on 11 July 2012.

The companies they targeted were: PayPal, Master Card, Visa, the British Recorded Music Industry, Ministry of Sound and the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry.

Stuart Hall charged with indecent assault

The Crown Prosecution Service has today authorised Lancashire Police to charge Stuart Hall, aged 82, from Wilmslow, Cheshire with three charges of indecent assault following recent complaints to police about alleged incidents in the 1970s and 1980s.

John Dilworth, Head of CPS North West Complex Casework Unit, said:

“Following investigations by Lancashire Police into allegations of sexual assault by Stuart Hall I have reviewed all the evidence that they have gathered and have authorised Lancashire police to charge him with three counts of indecent assault. The charges are that between 1 September 1974 and 31 December 1974 he indecently assaulted a woman who was then aged 16 or 17 years, that between 1 January 1983 and 31 December 1983 he indecently assaulted a girl then aged 8 or 9 years, and that between 1 July 1984 and 27 September 1984 he indecently assaulted a girl then aged 13 years. He has been bailed to appear at Preston Magistrates’ Court on 7 January 2013.

“This decision is made in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors and I have concluded that there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and that it is in the public interest to prosecute this case. With criminal proceedings now underway, I would like to stress the importance that nothing is placed in the public domain that could prejudice a future trial. For these reasons, we will not be commenting further about the case at this time."