Northampton Magistrates' Court
Pre-trial review R v Lindis Percy
Day 1
Friday 26 September 2003
Alleged offence - USAF Croughton
26 March 2003
S.68 'Aggravated trespass' (Criminal Justice and
Public Order Act)
This was the second of two pre-trial reviews before
District Judge Freil. We had asked for a list of disclosures from the
CPS. The hearing was about whether or not the District Judge would
allow these documents to be disclosed to the Defence. The arguments centred
round the 'justicability' of the court and the 'lawfulness' of
the US security forces personnel.
Simply put, our defence is that the activities
of USAF Croughton are illegal because they played/play a
crucial role in the issue of the invasion of Iraq; therefore the US security
personnel are acting unlawfully. The list included a request for
the Attorney General's ruling on the 'legality' of the invasion of Iraq, the
activities of USAF Croughton and various other documents connected with the
'lawful' activities of this base and the 'lawfulness' of the US security
forces personnel.
District Judge Freil ruled against the Defence
saying that the documents were irrelevant to the case. The issues must
be confined to whether the activities of the US security personnel were
'disrupted' or not (one of the elements of s.68) during the incident.
A very short section (about 30 seconds) of a
CCTV recording of the incident was finally produced in the afternoon by the
CPS (Mr Blair - Barrister acting for the CPS) with Mr Nusspickel (US
Security Forces Operations Superintendant at USAF Croughton and a witness)
standing by to explain the video.
Razza Hussein (Defence barrister) applied for a
copy of the US security forces personnel 'respective orders and standard
operating procedures' (as mentioned in the witness Statement from the RAF
Liaison officer at USAF Croughton - Flight Lieutenant Richard Harwood).
Mr Blair said that the CPS had applied for a
copy of this document from the 'third party' (US authorities) and this had
been refused. He said that one of the options for the Defence would be
to make a request for this document under the US Freedom of Information Act
which would probably take up to 4 - 6 weeks. Even then, Mr Blair
thought that this request would probably be denied.
After taking instructions for Lyndon B James
(British solicitor based at USAF Mildlenhall and who has followed Lindis
round the courts over the years), an American from the base, an American
from USAF Mildenhall and a British observer from the base - these four sat
at the back of the court all day) Mr Blair said that possibly something
could be produced by Monday (the next hearing).
We return to Northampton Magistrates' Court on
Monday 29 September at 10 am when this document may be produced. The
trial of Lindis Percy will then start.
It was extremely disappointing that despite
alerting the press, there were no reporters in court. The case was heard in
Court 5 - a court tucked away in Northampton Magistrates' Court.
go to Day 3
Northampton Magistrates' Court
Monday 29 September 2003
R v Lindis Percy
alleged offence - 'aggravated
trespass' s.68
Criminal Justice and Public
Order Act 1994
The day revolved around a long struggle to get
disclosure of a copy of the US security forces personnel 'respective
orders and standard operating procedures' document. This was mentioned in
the witness Statement from the RAF Liaison officer at USAF Croughton -
Flight Lieutenant Richard Harwood.
Quarter of an hour before the hearing on
Monday, the CPS handed a few pages (some information 'blacked out') of the
document to the Defence.
We made an application to District Judge
(DJ) Freil for all the document to be disclosed as it was central to the
Defence case. The US officials in court predictably objected. Mr
Blair (Barrister CPS) said that he had not been allowed to see the
document either.
The CPS suggested that the DJ might retire to
look at the document by himself. This was agreed. The document
was handed over by a representative of the US Staff Judge Advocate's
Office at USAF Mildenhall who was sitting in court.
The DJ returned after some time to say that
about 10 chapters of the document were missing. We were under
the impression that the whole document had been handed to him. He had in
fact only been given the 'headings' of the chapters of the document.
The CPS then made an 'ex parte' application
for the Staff Judge Advocate's representative to explain to the DJ the
apparent necessity not to disclose all the document on the grounds of
'national security'. (An 'ex parte' application is when one party is
before the DJ without the other party present).
This was accepted by the DJ and the court was
cleared. In fact two US officials and a British 'observer' from USAF
Croughton stayed in court with the Clerk and the DJ. Mr Blair
was not allowed in court. This 'proceedure' was highly unusual and
irregular. We had strongly objected to this application.
District Judge Freil recalled the US
officials twice to answer more questions. He then ordered that
certain parts of the document be released to the Defence. Mr Blair
said that the US authorities would not object to this. Copies were
made (still with a section 'blacked out').
Razza Hussein (Barrister - Defence) made an
application that the case should be stopped as Lindis had now been denied
a fair trial under Article 6 (Human Rights Act 1998) as the document
had not been disclosed in it's entirety. The application was denied.
We then made an application that the DJ
'disqualify' himself on the grounds that he had heard from a 'third' party
(the US authorities) who were not officially party to the proceedings and also
without the Defence being present in court to hear what was said - so
compromising his impartiality. This application was also
refused.
The trial eventually started at
3.45 pm. Ms Van West (US security 'police') was the first witness to
give evidence. The court finished at 4.45 pm.
The case continues at 10 am on Wednesday 1
October 2003 at Towcester Magistrates' Court.
Towcester Magistrates'
Court
R v Lindis Percy
Wednesday 1 October 2003
It was another complicated day (apologies for this long report).
The trial continued today with evidence being heard from US security
'police' from USAF Croughton. The whole day was once again
focussed on proceedures, and documents that the US authorities had in
their possession but were clearly reluctant to disclose.
There were many adjournments while District Judge Freil retired to
reflect on what he had just heard.
Giving evidence, Sergeant Nusspickle (US Security Forces Operational
Superintendent) said that they had been briefed about Lindis Percy and
other protesters when they came on duty that night. He gave
evidence that Lindis was known to be 'non-violent' and that she was a
Quaker. When questioned as to whether any more information was
held by the US authorities at USAF Croughton on Lindis, he reluctantly
said that there was indeed a 'file'.
Razza Hussein made an application to see the 'file'. He was told
by Mr Blair (after instructions from the US authorities who were again
sitting at the back of the court) that it might take some time to
obtain it but that they would 'do their best'.
During his evidence, Sergeant Nusspickle revealed that he had liaised
and been advised by Major Villarreal when Lindis had been taken
handcuffed and shackled with flexi-cuffs to Building 4 (US
Security 'police' building) at USAF Croughton on 26 March this year.
It is extremely important to note that Major Villarreal had been
present at the quaisi 'ex-parte' application on Monday when the DJ had
been advised by him and others as to what could or could not be
revealed in the US security forces personnel 'respective orders and
standard operating procedures' document. As the proceedings
continued it became more and more apparent how central the US
authorities had been to the prosecution against Lindis.
Before the court adjourned for lunch, the DJ revealed that he was
'uneasy' at this stage of the proceedings and expressed some concern
that Major Villarreal had been involved in Monday's 'ex-party'
hearing. He was now concerned that had he known about Major
Villarreal's significant presence during the incident, he may not have
agreed to hear from the US authorities in private.
The DJ then ordered that the two US authorities and the British
'observer' should leave the court and that they should no longer be
part of the proceedings. They duely left the court.
While we all waited for the 'file' to be produced, evidence was heard
from Senior Airman Carlos Ferreira who had been present when Lindis
was apprehended. The court also heard from Installation Entry
Controller Airman Eloia Forrest. The court also heard that Staff
Sergeant Rock Stilwell, who was a key witness had now left the USAF
and could not be traced.
Hand written documents dictated to Mr Blair CPS Barrister) over the
telephone were eventually produced in court concerning the 'file'.
Various incidents going back several years showed that Lindis had always
been escorted out of the base when apprehended on the base.
A photograph of Lindis was also produced which the US security
'police' are shown during their briefings.
Much discussion and argument continued concerning the 'abuse of
process' by the CPS. Razza Hussein tried to put the proceedings
into a chronology showing that Lindis had not been given a
fair trial under Article 6 Human Rights Act 1998. The DJ told
him that he had already ruled on this point on Monday and stopped him
from continuing.
Finally the DJ retired to 'collect his thoughts' and said he
would return with his decision concerning the central presence and
obvious influence by Major Villarreal in this prosecution. One
of the questions to be addressed - did Lindis have a fair trial?
District Judge Freil returned to court at 3.40pm. He said that
if 'an intelligent bystander who was witness to the facts believed
that the trial was 'unfair' then he must disqualify himself.
He went on to say that 'with great reluctance' he was
therefore disqualifying himself from the proceedings.
The CPS will now decide by 15 October whether there should be a
retrial or if the case is should be discontinued. Again there
were no reporters in court.
Thank you so much to everyone who came to support Lindis in court
during the three days.
Thank you to the Ffriends who came to support.
Anni Rainbow and Lindis Percy
Joint Co-ordinators
CAMPAIGN FOR THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF AMERICAN BASES (CAAB)
8 Park Row, Otley, West Yorkshire, LS21 1HQ, England, U.K.
Tel/fax no: +44 (0)1943 466405 0R +44 (0)1482 702033
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful,
committed citizens can change the world: indeed it's the only
thing that ever does." Margaret
Mead
