CPS News Brief

One individual charged and one summonsed for conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office

One individual charged and one summonsed for conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office

A CPS spokesperson said,

“In February 2014 the CPS received a file from the Metropolitan Police, supplemented by further evidence on 12 June 2014. We have today authorised the police to summons Ryan Sabey, a former News of the World journalist, and charge Paul Brunt, a serving soldier at the time of the offence, with an offence of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.

“Both will appear before Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 21 August 2014.

“May I remind all concerned that criminal proceedings against Ryan Sabey and Paul Brunt will now be commenced and of their right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.

“These decisions were taken in accordance with the Code of Crown Prosecutors and the DPP’s guidelines on the public interest in cases affecting the media. We have decided there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and that a prosecution is in the public interest.”

Details of the full charge:

Paul Brunt and Ryan Sabey, between 1 April 2006 and 1 November 2007 conspired together and with others to commit misconduct in public office contrary to section 1 (1) Criminal Law Act 1977

 

No further action against one individual for misconduct in public office 

A CPS spokesperson said,

“In a separate file, the CPS has today decided that there is insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction in relation to one individual, a serving police officer, for an allegation of misconduct in public office. This decision was taken in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors and the DPP’s Guidelines on Assessing the Public Interest in Cases Affecting the Media. Accordingly, no further action will be taken against this individual in respect of that allegation.

“Any decision by the CPS does not imply any finding concerning guilt or criminal conduct; the CPS makes decisions only according to the test set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors and it is applied in all decisions on whether or not to prosecute.”

For editors:

The CPS's function is not to decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence, but to make fair, independent and objective assessments about whether it is appropriate to present charges for the criminal court to consider. The CPS assessment of any case is not in any sense a finding of, or implication of, any guilt or criminal conduct. It is not a finding of fact, which can only be made by a court, but rather an assessment of what it might be possible to prove to a court, in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

This assessment is based on the evidence available arising out of the police investigation and not on the evidence that is likely to be gathered by the defence, and likely to be used to test the prosecution evidence. The CPS charging decision is therefore necessarily an assessment on the basis of the evidence that is available to the CPS at the time the decision is made.

CPS prosecutors must also keep every case under review, so that they take account of any change in circumstances that occurs as the case develops, including what becomes known of the defence case. If appropriate, the CPS may change the charges or stop a case.

CPS Statement: One individual cautioned for an offence and no further action against another individual for perjury and PCJ

Gregor McGill, a senior lawyer at the Crown Prosecution Service, said,

“In April 2014 the CPS received a file as part of Operation Tuleta. The file concerned allegations against two individuals of perverting the course of justice and perjury, and an additional allegation of unauthorised access to computer material against the second individual. In relation to the allegations of perjury and perverting the course of justice, it has been decided that no further action should be taken, as there was insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction for any offence.

“Any decision by the CPS does not imply any finding concerning guilt or criminal conduct; the CPS makes decisions only according to the test set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors and it is applied in all decisions on whether or not to prosecute.

“In relation to the allegation of unauthorised computer access, that individual has been cautioned for an offence contrary to Section 1 of the Computer Misuse Act 1989.

“The evidence was considered carefully in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors and the DPP’s guidelines on the public interest in cases affecting the media.

“In accepting a caution an individual accepts responsibility for the offending set out.”

For editors: The CPS's function is not to decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence, but to make fair, independent and objective assessments about whether it is appropriate to present charges for the criminal court to consider. The CPS assessment of any case is not in any sense a finding of, or implication of, any guilt or criminal conduct. It is not a finding of fact, which can only be made by a court, but rather an assessment of what it might be possible to prove to a court, in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

This assessment is based on the evidence available arising out of the police investigation and not on the evidence that is likely to be gathered by the defence, and likely to be used to test the prosecution evidence. The CPS charging decision is therefore necessarily an assessment on the basis of the evidence that is available to the CPS at the time the decision is made.

CPS prosecutors must also keep every case under review, so that they take account of any change in circumstances that occurs as the case develops, including what becomes known of the defence case. If appropriate, the CPS may change the charges or stop a case.

CPS Statement: One individual faces charges for conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office

Gregor McGill, a senior lawyer at the Crown Prosecution Service, said,

“In April 2014 the CPS received a file from the Metropolitan Police and we have today authorised the police to charge Anthony France with two offences of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.

“Anthony France will appear before Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 21st August 2014.

“May I remind all concerned that criminal proceedings against Anthony France will now be commenced and of his right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.

“These decisions were taken in accordance with the Code of Crown Prosecutors and the DPP’s guidelines on the public interest in cases affecting the media. We have decided there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and that a prosecution is in the public interest.”

Details of the full charges:

Anthony FRANCE, between the 31st March 2008 and the 1st July 2011, conspired together with Timothy Edwards, and with others unknown, to commit misconduct in public office, contrary to section 1(1) Criminal Law Act 1977

Anthony FRANCE, between the 19th July 2009 and the 14th August 2009, conspired together with others to commit misconduct in public office, contrary to section 1(1) Criminal Law Act 1977

Court refuses to write off Terry Adams debt

A judge today decided that a confiscation order now worth £653,947.74 against Terry Adams remains in force.

Mr Adams had a confiscation order made against him for £750,000 after he had pleaded guilty to money laundering in 2007. Following the sale of his home in north London in 2009, Mr Adams paid the court £234,166.21 and another £130,323.43 following the sale of other assets.

In seeking to have the confiscation order reduced, it was Mr Adams’s case that his current assets were worth less than the outstanding balance of the confiscation order. He claimed that he and his wife were living on expenses of £200 per week, paying rent of £250 and living on £23,000 - £24,000 per annum. However, visits to the Royal Opera House and expensive meals out, spa memberships at luxurious hotels, high cost dental treatments and other treatments at private clinics all indicated a very different lifestyle.

Nick Price, Head of Proceeds of Crime at the Crown Prosecution Service, said:

“Through a series of nefarious means, Terry Adams has consistently sought to hide the proceeds of his crimes. However, today’s judgment is proof of our determination to see that crime doesn’t pay and that those who seek to hide their wealth will be challenged and held to account.  

"Mr Adams argued that he couldn’t afford to pay what he owed and yet his lavish lifestyle showed this was not the case. I’m pleased that, presented with our carefully gathered evidence, the judge has decided that Mr Adams does, in fact, have the ability to pay and has assets that he has not put before the court. We will now work hard to ensure that Mr Adams pays his confiscation order.  

"Many of the criminals we face go to extraordinary lengths to avoid paying what is owed under confiscation orders, such as applying to the High Court to write off debt and hiding their assets. Depriving criminals of their ill-gotten gains disrupts organised crime and the new CPS National Proceeds of Crime Service is leading this fight across the country. Dedicated prosecutors will work tirelessly with investigators to claw back assets from those who seek to benefit from their crimes.

Head of the NCA’s Centurion Team, Mark Blackwell said:

“Today’s judgment shows the real value of Lifetime Management and especially Ancillary Orders such as FROs. Terry Adams’ FRO remains in force until 2017 and his Confiscation Order will continue to incur interest until it is settled. The NCA, in partnership with the CPS, will monitor both these Orders very closely.”

Background

Terry Adams pleaded guilty to money laundering in 2007 and a confiscation order was made against him, agreed at £750,000, with a default jail term of 4 years should he fail to pay or make efforts to do so.

Since the confiscation order came into force £369,286.19 has been paid.

A balance of £653,947.74 remains outstanding as of 11^th August 2014. This is subject to interest of 8% p.a. which is accrued daily.