Juries 'should hear phone taps' to nail crime gangs

[Richard Clayton]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

http://www.observer.co.uk/crimedebate/story/0,12079,788274,00.html

text below, but first some comments above :)

The main reason that phone-taps are not admissible is that if so under
the "equality of arms" provisions of the ECHR then all taps would have
to be disclosed -- law enforcement isn't keen on this because it would
then become clear how effective their tapping was. There's a long
discussion of this in the 1999 consultation paper on amending IOCA.

A secondary reason is the complexity of presenting this type of material
to juries. Experts would testify that the noises heard were in fact
other words (few people being tapped are BBC announcers or speech
therapists) or were not made by the person the prosecution claims.

ALSO

There appears to be a problem with the figures in the article. One might
believe that the figures now reach 3,000 taps per year (the 2500 odd
from the Home Office need to be supplemented by the Northern Ireland and
Foreign Office taps), but 30,000 appears to be a fabrication :( [or a
confusion with traffic data requests ? but there one might believe
300,000]

or perhaps [and it appears to be NCIS being quoted] we're in for very
significant surprise when the next annual report comes out?

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juries 'should hear phone taps' to nail crime gangs 

David Rose
Sunday September 8, 2002
The Observer 

Sir David Calvert-Smith, the Director of Public Prosecutions, called on
the Government last night to end the ban on using bugged telephone
conversations as evidence in court. 

In an interview with The Observer, Calvert-Smith said the ban - which
has no parallel in the United States and most of the European Union -
had become a damaging restriction that was weakening Britain's fight
against organised crime, drug trafficking and terrorism. 

'This change would assist us enormously,' he said. 'As prosecutors, our
lives would be made much easier. I'm quite sure there are cases where
important evidence which would have strengthened the prosecution is
having to go by the board.' 

Speaking on the eve of a three-day conference on organised crime that he
is hosting in London for the International Association of Prosecutors,
he said there had been cases when the Crown Prosecution Service, which
he heads, had to drop charges due to lack of evidence that would have
gone ahead if the wiretap evidence had been admissible. 

The bugged conversations that police and prosecutors had been able to
hear but not put before a jury 'might have made all the difference'. 

Home Secretary David Blunkett has asked officials to review the law in
the aftermath of the 11 September attacks and the recent collapse of
several organised crime prosecutions. In Britain, bugged phone
conversations must be treated only as 'intelligence', and their
existence is invariably concealed from the defence. 

It is understood that police at the National Criminal Intelligence
Service, with the security service MI5, have made vehement
representations to Blunkett's review team, arguing against a change. 

They claim that allowing wiretaps to become admissible would give away
'trade secrets', and alert criminals to the fact that bugging now takes
place on a vast scale, with more than 30,000 lines tapped each year. 

Detectives in many parts of the country and Customs and Excise
investigators, however, support change. Sir David said he found their
opponents' argument implausible. Many villains knew they would be
tapped. 'It's been common knowledge for years.' 

He pointed out that the present law contained serious anomalies. A phone
or other conversation picked up by a bug in a wall is admissible; one
picked up by a wiretap is not. In at least one case, that of the former
Merseyside drugs squad chief Elmore Davies, jailed for his corrupt
relationship with the drugs baron Curtis Warren, a prosecution depended
on wiretap evidence produced by another country, the Netherlands.
Bizarrely, this was admissible. 

In many jurisdictions, wiretaps have become a foundation of organised
crime prosecution. In the US, for example, they were chiefly responsible
for huge inroads made against the mafia. 

Calvert-Smith said international links between prosecutors were vital.
The CPS now has staff in Paris, Rome, Madrid and Washington. 

The only way to defeat international terrorism was to ensure 'we can
present evidence fast and effectively wherever the accused is tried'. 

- -- 
richard                                              Richard Clayton

Are you a Friend of FIPR yet?       http://www.fipr.org/friends.html

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1

iQA/AwUBPXs02RfnRQV/feRLEQLBeQCg0GscJy3N7nzJwcha/t83HnMiOugAoMY2
PtrbyprNoyf++A2ZJceHdJrF
=sGko
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----