R v Matthews
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE PURCHAS,MR. JUSTICE THOMPSON |
| Judgment Date | 01 July 1983 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1983] EWCA Crim J0701-4 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | No. 1759/C2/82 |
| Date | 01 July 1983 |
[1983] EWCA Crim J0701-4
Lord Justice Purchas
Mr. Justice Kenneth Jones
and
Mr. Justice Drake
No. 1759/C2/82
1786/C2/82
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
MR. G.F.B. LAUGHLAND, Q.C. and MR. P.W. O'BRIEN appeared on behalf of the Appellant Donald Walter Matthews.
MR. G.F.B. LAUGHLAND, Q.C. and MR. C. SELLON appeared on behalf of the Appellant Royston Maurice Matthews.
MR. E.J. PROSSER, Q.C. and MR. R. EVEREST appeared on behalf of the Crown.
(As approved by the Judge)
On 14th June, 1983, we heard the applications for leave to appeal against conviction of Donald Walter Matthews and Royston Maurice Matthews which had been referred by the single judge to the full court we refused the applications indicating that we would give our reasons subsequently. This we now do.
Between 18th January and 11th March, 1982, the Applicants stood trial at Cardiff Crown Court together with two others, Thomas Terence O'Driscoll and John Frederick Higgins, charged on an indictment, the first count of which alleged that between 1st July, 1977, and 6th April, 1981, they conspired together and with others, including Alan Jones, Alan John Sammonds and Peter Chrisp, to assist at Cardiff and elsewhere in the United Kingdom in the commission in Norway of an offence punishable under the provisions of a law corresponding to Section 3(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 in force in Norway.
On the second count, both Applicants and Higgins were charged with the substantive offence between the dates of 23rd February, 1981, and 8th March, 1981. On the third count, both Applicants, but without Higgins, were charged with the substantive offence between 24th March and 6th April, 1981. O'Driscoll pleaded guilty to the first count in the indictment and the case proceeded against the other three accused.
The conspiracy charged extended over a long period of time and involved numerous combinations of the various persons named either as defendants or co-conspirators in the indictment. The evidence produced by the prosecution of overt acts and also the direct evidence of two of the conspirators, namely Chrisp and O'Driscoll, disclosed an extensive and convoluted picture. It involved the movements of various members of the conspiracy between North Africa, Europe and Scandinavia using a series of motor vehicles, some of which were purchased and some hired. They were specially adapted by O'Driscoll for smuggling large quantities of cannabis using circuitous routes so as to give the semblance of innocent touring across numerous frontiers in Europe and Scandinavia. No less than seven different vehicles were involved.
As part of his defence, Royston Matthews introduced evidence of his previous involvement in a similar activity as a result of meeting some Moroccan and Spanish drug smugglers in Norway through whom he became involved in smuggling cannabis out of Morocco to England and Norway. This took place over a period of two years between 1972 and the beginning of 1974. O'Driscoll was also involved and their activities resulted in each of them being sentenced to prison. Royston Matthews received a sentence of six years in the Crown Court at Cardiff from which he was released in August, 1977. The relevance in Royston Matthews' defence of this history was that he alleged that his trips to Norway and to North Africa between July, 1977, and April, 1981, were concerned not with further smuggling of cannabis, but with collecting money from buyers in Norway and paying it over to sellers in Morocco arising out of the transactions leading to his imprisonment in 1974.
It will be impossible for us to avoid going into various statistics in the course of this judgment. Notwithstanding numerous admissions made by the defence, the evidence of 100 witnesses, over 40 of whom were actually called before the jury, was adduced to establish the conspiracy. Apart from the direct evidence to which we have already alluded, the burden of the case proposed by the prosecution was the coincidence of the presence of the various conspirators at relevant times in relevant places conforming with the direct evidence of two co-conspirators, Chrisp and O'Driscoll.
During the course of the conspiracy, Royston Matthews held no less than six different passports, including a false identity in the name of Llewellyn; Donald Matthews had three different passports; and Alan Jones, another conspirator, had five different passports. These were obtained by claims that the original passports had been destroyed or defaced by dropping in the sea or by being put in washing machines by children and so on.
As the years went by the personnel active in the furtherance of the conspiracy varied. It is convenient in summary form to refer to three different periods. The first stage involved Royston Matthews and O'Driscoll with Jones as the courier, working between Algiers and Oslo. This continued until Jones was arrested at Ceuta in Tangier in July, 1978, when O'Driscoll became the driver, Royston Matthews was operating both in Wales and Oslo, whilst Donald Matthews operated between Amsterdam and Oslo.
A second phase, commencing early in 1979, involved Royston and Donald Matthews with Chrisp as the driver and Sammonds in Oslo. This continued until Chrisp became suspicious that he was under observation in Oslo when Higgins was brought in to be the courier. In September, 1979, Royston and Donald Matthews were stopped, searched and questioned by customs officers at Oslo airport. They thought they were being followed. They made their escape through Sweden. After this, Donald Matthews was based in Amsterdam, Royston Matthews in Cardiff and Sammonds was in Oslo. At the end of this period, Sammonds and Chrisp were caught in Oslo and were convicted and sentenced to prison in Norway.
Chrisp came to England from prison in Norway to give evidence in support of the prosecution in the instant case. This was done in circumstances in which it would not have been possible to force Chrisp to give evidence, but his presence was, it appears to us, a matter of trust. Needless to say, as an accomplice in these circumstances, Chrisp's evidence which was in direct conflict with that given by the two Applicants over the crucial aspects of cannabis smuggling, but not as to the movements or presence of the Applicants in various places in Europe and Scandinavia, came under a direct and heavy attack launched at the trial on behalf of both Applicants.
Evidence was led in relation to the motor cars, some making more than one journey. As we have already said, some were hired and some bought. If they were hired, some were hired in Newport with a false address for the hirer given in Cardiff, and if hired in Cardiff, a false address in Newport was given for the hirer.
There were 26 different visits described to Oslo involving various combinations of the two Applicants, Chrisp and others. They stayed at various times at eleven different addresses in Sweden, Amsterdam and England, some hotels, some hired "safe houses and chalets", or motels. Evidence of innumerable flights between Oslo, Amsterdam, Cardiff, Heathrow and Gatwick had to be led. Other journeys were made by boat.
The devious execution of the conspiracy involved many innocent people, such as a girl friend of Donald Matthews called Rasmussa and others. Alan Sammonds used as a cover a business selling clothes called Gentlefolk. It is clear from this brief description of the nature of the case that Mr. Prosser's submission that the learned judge had to keep a tight rein on the conduct of the case, in order to ensure an intelligible and chronological story to develop before the jury, was amply justified.
The terminal date alleged for the conspiracy was the date Chrisp was arrested in Norway on 5th April, 1981. Both Applicants and Higgins gave evidence. Their defences in the briefest summary form were as follows. Donald Matthews, whilst disputing the direct evidence of Chrisp and O'Driscoll, did not seriously dispute that he was present in the various countries at the relevant times, as indeed he could not, because of the documentary evidence available. He said that he was pursuing business interests in the music and entertainment world and also, at a later period, he was continuing a friendship with his girlfriend, Rasmussa. Royston Matthews, as we have already indicated, said that he was involved in collecting and paying money owing and owed as a result of his previous smuggling activities and Higgins, who was involved in the period between February and March, 1981, said that he was not aware that drugs were concealed in the car he was driving.
On the first count both Applicants were convicted of conspiracy, but the jury disagreed as to Higgins. On 29th July, 1982, after a re-trial Higgins was convicted on this count and Count 2 of the indictment. He was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment on each count concurrent. Before the trial Sammonds and Chrisp had been convicted and sentenced in Norway in April, 1981, and Alan Jones had been caught exporting cannabis from Spanish Morocco and dealt with in July, 1978.
On Count 2 only Royston Matthews was convicted, the jury disagreeing in the case against Donald Matthews, whose case was ordered to lie on the file on the usual terms. Both Applicants were convicted on Count 3 of the indictment. Donald Matthews was sentenced on Counts 1 and 3 to two terms of six years' imprisonment to run concurrently. These sentences were subsequently reduced to five years and a further imposition of a fine of £13,000 with an alternative of 12 months'...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- R v Sharp
-
Mohammed Ali bin Johari v Public Prosecutor
...of the crucial matters which are in issue. [emphasis added] 128 In the English Court of Appeal decision of R v Donald Walter Matthews (1983) 78 Cr App R 23 (“Matthews”), Purchas LJ, who delivered the judgment of the court, made the following important observations (at To summarise these aut......
-
Jorgensen v Fair Work Ombudsman
...will be more readily able to correct and allow for preliminary opinions formed before the final decision is reached: see R v Matthews (1983) 78 Cr App R 23; E H Cochrane Ltd v Ministry of 3. Where a complaint is made of excessive questioning or inappropriate comment, the appellate court mus......
-
Mohammed Ali bin Johari v Public Prosecutor
...of the crucial matters which are in issue. [emphasis added] 128 In the English Court of Appeal decision of R v Donald Walter Matthews (1983) 78 Cr App R 23 (“Matthews”), Purchas LJ, who delivered the judgment of the court, made the following important observations (at To summarise these aut......