Law should change to allow review of cases of jailed officers, lawyer says
Mr Campbell, who died in 2004, was found guilty in April 1977 of theft and conspiracy to steal from the Bricklayers' Arms goods depot in south London, where he was a British Rail employee, and jailed for 18 months.
The case against him was led by the discredited British Transport Police (BTP) officer Detective Sergeant Derek Ridgewell, who, along with two colleagues, later pleaded guilty to stealing from the same depot.
The assistant chief constable of the BTP said following the Court of Appeal's ruling that he was 'disgusted' by Ridgewell's actions, and the force was 'sincerely sorry' to those affected.
He also said the force is continuing to 'actively pursue a criminal investigation' into those involved.
Lord Justice Holroyde, sitting with Mr Justice Wall and Mr Justice Butcher, said on Thursday it was with 'regret' that the court could not undo Mr Campbell's suffering.
But they said they hope clearing his name 'will at least bring some comfort' to his surviving family, including his son, Errol Campbell Jr.
Speaking to the media following the hearing, Mr Foot, who represented Mr Campbell Jr, said: 'In 1980, when Ridgewell was convicted, nothing happened to his cases.
'We are calling for a change in the law that, when a police officer goes to prison, there is an automatic review of their cases to look for miscarriages of justice.
'If that had happened, that would have saved more than 45 years of misery for the Campbell family.'
When asked if he had political support for the law change, Mr Foot said: 'We are talking to the Justice Select Committee, we're talking to the junior minister, and we believe that it is something that could be put into Hillsborough Law, alongside that, as a very simple reform that could stop this sort of thing ever happening again.'
He also called on BTP to name those who 'harboured' Ridgewell, claiming it was 'no secret' in the 1970s that the officer was 'racist and corrupt'.
He added that there were 'bound to be others' who were victims of miscarriages of justice.
Mr Campbell unsuccessfully appealed against his conviction in 1978, but his son applied to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), with the help of the charity Appeal, to look at the case in September 2024.
The CCRC had already referred the convictions of Mr Campbell's co-defendants, Saliah Mehmet and Basil Peterkin, whose convictions were quashed in January last year.
Henry Blaxland KC, representing Mr Campbell on Thursday, told the court it was dealing with victims of a miscarriage of justice brought about by 'state crime'.
In a statement read out by Mr Foot outside the Royal Courts of Justice following the ruling, Mr Campbell Jr said that BTP knew that Ridgewell was 'corrupt' but 'let him carry on regardless'.
He continued that his father's conviction 'caused absolute misery', but that his father was 'dapper' and 'a good man'.
He also said that he was 'angry that Ridgewell is not alive for this day'.
In 1980, Ridgewell, along with detective constables Douglas Ellis and Alan Keeling, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to steal from the Bricklayers' Arms Depot, with Ridgewell dying in prison before he had completed his sentence.
In a previous judgment, the court found that their criminal activities between January 1977 and April 1978 resulted in the loss from the depot of goods to the value of about £364,000, 'an enormous sum of money at that time'.
In a statement, BTP Assistant Chief Constable Charlie Doyle said: 'We are sincerely sorry to those affected by the criminal actions of former BTP Detective Sergeant Derek Ridgewell, whose appalling actions in the 1970s and 1980s led to the criminalisation of innocent people.
'We're continuing to review records relating to his corrupt practices, which includes those relating to officers who were associated with DS Ridgewell or may have assisted him in his criminal activity, and the review team has recently been provided with additional resources to support its work.
'I am disgusted by the actions of Derek Ridgewell, and while we know we can't change the past, his actions do not represent the BTP of today.
'We continue to actively pursue a criminal investigation into the actions of those involved and will present a file to the CPS for consideration once we have completed our inquiries.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
3 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Conor McGregor to be sued again by Nikita Hand after failed appeal
It comes a day after McGregor lost his appeal following a civil ruling that the former dual-weight UFC champion sexually assaulted Nikita Hand after a night out in December 2018 Conor McGregor is set to be sued again by Nikita Hand for his alleged abuse of the courts process. On Thursday, the former dual-weight UFC champion lost his appeal against a civil jury's finding in favour of Ms Hand - who accused of rape. McGregor lost his appeal on all five grounds that the case was taken. Ms Hand successfully sued McGregor in a civil court over an incident in which he was alleged to have 'brutally raped and battered' her in a penthouse at a south Dublin hotel in December 2018. Ms Hand was awarded £214,994 in damages and McGregor was also ordered to pay about £1.1million in legal costs following November's trial. McGregor then launched an appeal on five grounds. On Thursday, the three judges of the Court of Appeal – Ms Justice Isobel Kennedy, Mr Justice Brian O'Moore and Mr Justice Patrick MacGrath – agreed to dismiss his appeal in its entirety. Neither McGregor nor his co-defendant James Lawrence were present in court on Thursday. Just a day on after losing his appeal, Ms Hand is suing McGregor once again. According to the Irish Mirror, the Dublin native is also suing couple Samantha O'Reilly and Stephen Cummins, who were withdrawn as witnesses at the final moment of the fighter's appeal. In a comment to The Irish Mirror, Hand's solicitors stated: "We confirm that further proceedings have been issued in the High Court and a Statement of claims has been prepared and will be served imminently." The outlet reports that the case against McGregor, Ms O'Reilly and Stephen Cummins are "for damaged for malicious abuse of the process of the court by the Defendants, and each of them, their respective servants and/or agents. She is suing for aggravated and punitive damages as well as costs." After agreeing to dismiss the Irishman's appeal in its entirety, Mr Justice O'Moore summarised the grounds for appeal before dismissing all five grounds. 'I therefore dismiss the appeal in its entirety,' he said. The judges also dismissed McGregor's co-defendant James Lawrence's appeal against the trial judge's decision not to award him his legal costs, after the same jury did not find he had assaulted Ms Hand. The judges raised the fact that McGregor had paid Mr Lawrence's legal fees and said the arrangement was 'shrouded in mystery'. Mr Justice O'Moore said that while it would not be 'fair or appropriate' not to award Mr Lawrence costs because it would 'wipe out' damages awarded to Ms Hand, as argued by her legal team, he said if costs were awarded to Mr Lawrence and he did not pass them on to McGregor, it would result in a 'bounty of several hundred thousand euros for his troubles." He also said the impact of awarding costs to Mr Lawrence and them being passed on to McGregor should be taken into account, before dismissing Mr Lawrence's appeal. Ms Hand, who was embraced by her supporters in the courtroom after the judgment was delivered, thanked her legal team, the Rape Crisis Centre, and the three judges. 'I'm also deeply grateful for everyone who supported me and those who believed in me and stood by my side throughout this case,' she said outside court. 'This appeal has retraumatised me over and over again (by) being forced to relive it, what happened has had a huge impact on me. To every survivor out there, I know how hard it is but please don't be silenced. You deserve to be heard, you also deserve justice. Today I can finally move on and try to heal." She said she did not have a message for McGregor as she left the Four Courts. When is Conor McGregor's next fight? Recently, US President Donald Trump announced his plans to host a historic UFC event at the White House in July 2026. Following this announcement, McGregor revealed his interest in competing at the event. The 37-year-old took to social media and posted: "Happy 4th of July, USA. Excited with President Trump announcing a UFC fight event at the White House! I would be honoured! Count me in!!" UFC boss Dana White also appears to support the idea after McGregor shared a conversation with him. The Irishman sent the UFC chief several voice notes, seemingly related to the proposed White House event, to which White responded: "I love it!" McGregor later reiterated his comments during a recent BKFC event, stating: "It's looking like I'm headed to the Oval Office again. That's where I'm headed next." The 37-year-old has not fought since losing to Dustin Poirier back in 2021. He was due to make a stunning comeback last year against Michael Chandler, but withdrew from the contest after picking up an injury in training.
South Wales Guardian
19 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Taxi driver jailed over Southport disorder loses bid to challenge sentence
Andrew McIntyre was jailed for seven and a half years in January for encouraging violent disorder and criminal damage and possession of a knife, after the knife attack in the Merseyside town on July 29 last year. After the attack, McIntyre set up a Telegram channel called 'Southport Wake Up' and shared content from a site called Tommy Robinson/Britain First/For Britain about a protest in Southport on July 30. At the Court of Appeal on Thursday, barristers for McIntyre claimed his sentence should have been lower as he was not given enough credit for his guilty pleas. Dismissing the appeal bid in his final oral judgment before retirement, Lord Justice Holroyde said: 'It was for the judge to decide what reduction was appropriate.' He continued: 'It is not arguable that the total sentence was excessive, let alone manifestly so.' After the Southport attack, McIntyre said in one post: 'Rise Up English Lads. 8pm tomorrow St Luke's Rd Southport.' Hours before violence broke out in the town on July 30, he wrote: 'Message to All … Stand in our way, even if you're just doing your job … prepare to fall.' Liverpool Crown Court heard in January that McIntyre's phone was in the area of St Luke's Road in Southport at 7pm on July 30, and the car he was later arrested in was also in the area when the disorder took place. Over the following days, McIntyre congratulated those involved in the disorder and shared information about immigration advisers. He was arrested in Liverpool on August 8, with a knife found hidden in the boot of his car. The court heard that when his home was searched, officers found weapons and a copy of Hitler's Mein Kampf. Sentencing him, Judge Neil Flewitt KC said McIntyre was 'motivated by racial hatred' and was 'prominent' among those spreading misinformation after the attack. McIntyre's jail term is believed to be the second-longest handed down for disorder related to the Southport attack, with the longest believed to be nine years. On Thursday, Julian Nutter, for McIntyre, said he should have been given a shorter sentence to reflect his guilty pleas. He said the case did not concern an offender who had 'provided the means' to commit offences or 'instructions to make those means'. He added: 'The sentence should have been about a year less.' Arthur Gibson, for the Crown Prosecution Service, told the hearing in London that the evidence of McIntyre's offending 'was there for the defendant to accept or deny as he so wished'. He continued: 'There were guilty pleas entered, but subsequent to that, even, the applicant was not accepting his full responsibility. 'The learned judge was entitled to use his discretion in determining a reduction in sentence for pleas of guilty.' In the Court of Appeal's ruling, Lord Justice Holroyde, sitting with Mrs Justice Yip and Sir Robin Spencer, said: 'The applicant incited violence and criminal damage by many people at different locations on multiple occasions. 'He thereby threatened public safety, promoted widespread damage to property and exposed police officers to serious injury. 'He boasted about the scale of disorder which disfigured Southport and other towns and cities. Throughout, his conduct was racially motivated. 'If the applicant wanted greater credit for his pleas, he could and should have entered those pleas at an earlier stage. 'He did not do so. Instead, he delayed until it suited him to enter them, and even then, he continued to contest aspects of the claims against him.' McIntyre, formerly of Rufford, near Ormskirk, watched proceedings by videolink from HMP Garth in Lancashire.
North Wales Chronicle
19 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Lucas Paqueta eager to ‘play with a smile' again as he is cleared of spot-fixing
The Brazilian has been under investigation since August 2023, with the Football Association charging him in May 2024 with four alleged breaches of Rule E5.1, which relates to any attempt to improperly influence any aspect of a match. It was alleged he deliberately attempted to receive a card in four Premier League games between November 2022 and August 2023. A guilty verdict would likely have resulted in a ban well in excess of the 10-year penalty imposed on former Reading defender Kynan Isaac in 2022 for spot-fixing, but the charges, which Paqueta strenuously denied from the outset, were found not proven by an independent regulatory commission. West Ham United can confirm that an independent Regulatory Commission has cleared Lucas Paquetá of misconduct charges made against him by the Football Association for alleged breaches of FA rule E5. — West Ham United (@WestHam) July 31, 2025 Paqueta learned the outcome on Friday. Two charges related to an alleged failure to co-operate with the FA were proven, with the FA stating that an appropriate sanction would be decided by the regulatory commission at the earliest opportunity. For Paqueta, the decision has lifted a huge weight from his shoulders. 'Since the first day of this investigation, I have maintained my innocence against these extremely serious accusations,' he said. 'I can't say anything more at this time, but I would like to express how grateful I am to God and how eager I am to return to playing football with a smile on my face. 'To my wife who never let go of my hand, to West Ham United, to the fans who always cheered me on, and to my family, friends and the legal team who have supported me – thank you for everything.' The FA said it would not comment until the written reasons are published and it remains to be seen whether it will appeal or whether Paqueta will appeal against the two charges found proven. Alastair Campbell, a partner at the law firm Level who led Paqueta's legal team, said the FA's case was built on 'circumstantial evidence'. He told the PA news agency: 'A circumstantial evidence case is built on various strands of evidence and, as a lawyer, you look at those strands of evidence and consider where they are subject to question or attack. That's how we approached it.' Paqueta's legal team also featured well-known sports law barrister Nick De Marco. Campbell said there had not been detailed pleading on sanctions at the hearing but added the FA would have been looking for 'north' of the 10-year ban imposed on Isaac. Campbell revealed reports of unusual betting activity had been the 'genesis' of the FA investigation. He said the FA had never claimed Paqueta had sought to benefit personally from the alleged misconduct. West Ham vice-chair Karren Brady welcomed the decision by the commission and said: 'We are pleased Lucas has been cleared. He has maintained his innocence from the outset and as a club we have resolutely stood by him and supported him throughout the process. 'Despite the incredible pressure on him, Lucas has performed week in and week out for the club, always giving everything. 'It has been a difficult time for Lucas and his family, but he has remained absolutely professional throughout and he is now looking forward to drawing a line under this episode, as is everyone at West Ham.' The matches the spot-fixing charges related to were the Hammers' top-flight games against Leicester on November 12, 2022, Aston Villa on March 12, 2023, Leeds on May 21, 2023 and Bournemouth on August 12, 2023.
