POL00048736
POL00048736
Fax Transmission BELL YARD
9-12 Bell Yard
From: TOM BRADFORD Landon WOZA 2JR
To: JULIET MCFARLANE
Date: 25.5.07
Fax No
This is a confidential transmission intended for the addressee only.
If you receive it in error please telephone:
Message: URGENT
Dear Juliet,
Further to our conversation earlier today, I am writing regarding the hearing
before HHJ Brodrick at Chelmsford Crown Court in the case of Josephine
Hamilton. Anita Saran represented the defendant. Prior to the hearing, the
defence requested that the prosecution state to the court that the material
referred to in their correspondence would be served, in order that an application
could then be made for two Counsel because of the resulting increase in the length
and complexity of the case.
As we confirmed earlier today, no such assurance could be given because the
defence has not yet shown this material to us. Mr. Brader attended and confirmed
the same. He said that the reference seems to correspond to item 8 of the unused
material, which, in his view, the defence would inspect in any event, if it fulfills the
disclosure test in the first place. He said that if the material was unused and could
simply be inspected by the defence, then there would be no need for it to be
photocopied and served in the manner suggested.
Before the Learned Judge, the defence highlighted that 2,700 pages of material
have been unearthed by the defence. The defence’s view was that, depending on
the opinion of the prosecution, it would be served as either evidence to be relied
upon or unused material. The defence stated that an application for two counsel
would be submitted in due course, and that the length of the trial may be effected.
The case was then adjourned to 10" September 2007. Until the defence show the
prosecution the material to which they are referring, it is impossible to confirm
what action will be taken.
After the hearing, it was suggested by the defence that the material would be
shown to the prosecution. It amounts, apparently, to 14 or so ring-binders of
papers. When it is forthcoming, this should be examined by the Investigator to
determine what the material is, its relevance, and whether it corresponds with
item 8 of the schedule of unused material. You will no doubt then be in a position
to determine whether it should be served, and, if so, whether it is to be served as
evidence relied on or unused material, in consultation with Mr. Jory. Would you
be so kind as to liaise with the Investigator to organise this, once the defence have
shown us the material to which they are referring. If the result is that the trial
estimate is affected, would you please confirm that any effected witnesses are able
to attend?
Regards,
Tom Bradford (mo!
POL00048736
POL00048736