R v Anderson (William Ronald)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE PURCHAS |
| Judgment Date | 25 May 1984 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1984] EWCA Crim J0525-1 |
| Docket Number | No. 2622/A/83 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Date | 25 May 1984 |
[1984] EWCA Crim J0525-1
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Lord Justice Purchas
Mrs. Justice Heilbron
and
Mr. Justice Hobhouse
No. 2622/A/83
MR. C. SMITH and MR. N. TIMMS appeared as Counsel on behalf of the Applicant.
MR. H. DUNN QC and MR. D. GREEN appeared as Counsel on behalf of the Crown.
This appeal against conviction arises out of a trial held in the Crown Court at Lewes on a number of days prior to and including 28th March, 1983. The appellant stood charged on an indictment together with three others, namely, Ahmed Moktar Chairi Andaloussi, Mohammed Chairi Andaloussi and Mohammed Assou, with conspiring to effect the escape of a prisoner contrary to s.1 of the Criminal Law Act 1977 ("the Act"). The particulars of offence alleged are that on days unknown between 27th March, 1981 and 22nd October, 1981 the four accused conspired together and with persons unknown to effect the escape of Ahmed Andaloussi. On 14th March, before the trial commenced, the indictment had been amended to delete the words "to common law and", which were formerly between the words "contrary" and "to s.1 etc".
Although the appeal turns in the event upon a short point of construction of s.1 of the Act, it is necessary to consider some of the background. In the main this was not in dispute. Ahmed Andaloussi was on remand at Lewes Prison, awaiting trial upon serious drug offences connected with a massive drugs operation known as "Operation Bentley". Mr Smith, who has appeared for the appellant and who also appeared in the Crown Court, assures us that the amount of money involved in "Operation Bentley", and available to Andaloussi in numbered bank deposits abroad, was extremely large. An indication of the finance available is given by the production by Assou at one stage of the conspiracy of £2,000 which was paid to the appellant as an advance upon £20,000 to be paid to him.
In June, 1981 the appellant, also on remand in custody, had shared a cell with Andaloussi for one night at Lewes Prison. During this time a plan was hatched between Ahmed Andaloussi and the appellant which also involved Ahmed Andaloussi's brother, Mohammed Andaloussi, and Assou, who was an "interpreter" and was to act as a contact man. It will be necessary to return in a little detail to this plan. The appellant was confident of being shortly released on bail pending the trial of the matters for which he was on remand. He agreed to organise, together with Mohammed Andaloussi and Assou, the outside details of the escape, and also to provide Ahmed Andaloussi with equipment with which to break out of his cell, being either "diamond lace", or a hydraulic jack, or some other similar equipment.
The appellant agreed to take further parts in the planned escape, as appears from admissions he made in an interview with the investigating police officers. He was to provide a ladder or rope to enable Ahmed Andaloussi to get from the roof of the industrial building in the prison over the main wall, where the appellant was to be present with transport. The appellant was also to organise "safe accommodation" in Lewes and elsewhere.
Evidence demonstrated that the plan was put into actual execution in a number of ways. A piece of paper (Exhibit 18) was discovered in the appellant's handwriting giving two addresses, one the address of his brother in Leeds and the other an address of a man referred to as Pancho, in Slough, together with his telephone number. The appellant admitted giving this piece of paper to Ahmed Andaloussi in Lewes Prison during the time they were togehter. There was a meeting between Assou and the appellant, then on bail, at Victoria Station, when the appellant told Assou he would require £2,000 to purchase some diamond lace. This sum was paid to him by Assou at a meeting at Euston Station a week later. At one of the meetings between them Assou had mentioned to the appellant that there was a second man who wished to escape from Lewes Prison. It was after the second meeting, on his way home, that the appellant was involved in a road accident, which inhibited his further physical participation in the enterprise, but did not prevent the continued execution of the plan as a whole. Assou had indicated Andaloussi's concern with the delay, and all were aware of the threat of the latter being removed to more secure accommodation at Brixton Prison. So at a further meeting between the appellant and Assou, after the former's accident, the appellant showed Assou the injuries he had sustained, presumably to excuse his lack of action.
Mohammed Andaloussi and Ahmed Andaloussi pleaded guilty at the outset of the trial, and were sentenced to twelve months' and three years' imprisonment respectively. Assou and the appellant then stood trial. Assou was convicted and sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment, which was varied on appeal by the substitution of a partially suspended sentence effective from 6th September, 1983. The course that the trial took was unusual. The prosecution presented their case. At the end of the case the appellant then read from a prepared statement from the dock. This document is of considerable importance, and it will be necessary for us to cite extracts from it. Mr. Smith very helpfully told us that the document was drafted by the appellant, whom he, Mr. Smith, has never at any time suggested to be other than an intelligent and educated person. There are some minor amendments in manuscript by way of deletions and one addition made at the suggestion of Mr. Smith.
In his interviews with the police the appellant had maintained that he had never intended to participate in the eventual escape. When asked about his agreement to obtain a hydraulic jack and diamond lace, he answered:
"Yes OK, I probably did, but I told you I never had an intention of breaking him out.
Q. Did Assou mention the fact that another person wanted to get out with Andaloussi?
A. Yes probably.
Q. What was your reply?
A. I can't remember.
Q. Didn't you say that it would complicate matters?
A. Yes probably.
Q. You were told that Andaloussi had been moved to Brixton Prison?
A. Yes.
Q. Who is your friend who has got a flat which overlooks Brixton Prison?
A. What? No I don't know anybody who lives in Brixton.
"Q… Didn't you suggest that Brixton Prison would be an easier place to get Andaloussi out from, because you know someone with a flat nearby?
A. I am not going to say no, I may well have done.
Someone told me, I don't know who, that Andaloussi was going out on visits to Holloway to his girlfirend.
Anybody could see that would have been easier to spring him on transit than busting him out of a prison. It must be obvious to you as well.
Q. It was suggested that was an idea of yours which was passed on to Andaloussi?
A. No, you are trying to fit me up now, I never suggested that at all."
Right at the end of a long interview the appellant said this:
"Only to say again that I never intended to do it. Melanie had nothing to do with it, she didn't want to know, she tried to talk me out of it, and Assou was being used as a tool, Andaloussi had some sort of hold over him, I don't know what it was, probably his family, but Assou was a very frightened man. I feel very sorry for him."
Melanie was Anderson's girlfriend.
In his statement under caution the appellant set out in full his account. It is necessary to cite some extracts from this statement, viz.:
"It was a loose agreement between us, nothing firm was discussed, but I told him I would see what I could do "to get him out. I knew in my own mind I could never do it and in fact I never intended to do so. My girl and I were heavily in debt at the time and the money was there, I could virtually ask for what I wanted. The reason I knew I wouldn't be able to do it, because going into prison and busting someone out is not the sort of thing you can do every day …. I got out of prison on the Tuesday and I went home to my girl Melanie. I outlined to her in a very sketchy manner about ANDALOUSSI. I told her that he was on a conspiracy charge and he had got a load of money. I told her that I had discussed the possibility of an escape with my help and what did she think. She said, 'It sounds stupid to me'. The 'hows' and 'whys' of the escape never entered my head and that's a fact because I knew it was never on."
After the extract cited above, the statement continued in considerable detail with precise actions taken by the appellant, involving others, including one Pancho Jessop, who was a friend of the appellant, Assou, and Mohammed Andaloussi. It is not necessary to cite this part of the statement, except to say that it reads as if an active plot to effect the escape of Andaloussi was going on both before and after the appellant's accident.
We return to one more extract from the end of the statement:
"Ages afterwards ASSOU phoned me because ANDALOUSSI wanted proof that I had an accident. ASSOU and I met "at Victoria. I was alone and I showed him my injuries. I vaguely recall ASSOU mentioning that ANDALOUSSI had been moved to Brixton Prison. I experienced a certain amount of relief because it was now in the realms of the ridiculous because he was obviously in a "seg" wing. That was the end of any contact to do with the situation. I would like to emphasise that Melanie far from being in agreement with any of this business, was quite adamantly against the very thought of it. We discussed it between ourselves and she obviously tried her best to talk me out of any involvement at all, because she was aware from the start that I had no intention of trying "to spring" ANDALOUSSI. I would also...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Yip Chiu-Cheung v The Queen
... ... on A. v. Hayden (No. 2) (1984) 156 C.L.R. 532, 540 applied ... Reg. v. Anderson (William Ronald) [1986] A.C. 27, H.L.(E.) distinguished ... Decision of the Court of Appeal of ... ...
-
Maycock et Al v Commissioner of Police
... ... Anderson [1985] 2 All E.R. 961 at 965, [1986] A.C. 27 at 38-39; but in that case Lord Bridge was ... ...
-
R v Siracusa and Others
...to go to the jury at the end of the prosecution case. 11The appellants found their submission on the decision of the House of Lords in R. v. Anderson (1986) 1 A.C. 27. Before we examine the effect of that case, it is necessary to set out at some length how matters stood at the end of the pr......
-
R v Sakavickas (Rolandas); R v Reichwald (Stephen Howard)
... ... As we point out below, the House of Lords has held in Anderson [1986] 1AC27 that this premise is incorrect ... 14 The wording of ... ...