Man jailed based on corrupt officer's evidence has name posthumously cleared
Errol Campbell, who died in 2004, had his convictions for theft and conspiracy to steal from a goods depot in south London quashed at the London court on Thursday.
He was found guilty in April 1977 and sentenced to a total of 18 months' imprisonment at the Old Bailey in relation to thefts from the Bricklayers Arms Goods Depot, where he was a British Rail employee.
The case against him was led by the discredited British Transport Police officer DS Derek Ridgewell.
Giving his judgment on Thursday, Lord Justice Holroyde, sitting with Mr Justice Butcher and Mr Justice Wall, said it was with 'regret' that the court could not undo Mr Campbell's suffering.
He added: 'We can however, and do, allow the appeal brought on his behalf, and quash his conviction.
'We hope that will at least bring some comfort to Mr Campbell's family who survive.'
Lord Justice Holroyde said Mr Campbell 'took the miscarriage of justice which he suffered and his wrongful convictions to his grave'.
He continued: 'Mr Campbell Sr maintained his innocence for the rest of his life.
'He regarded himself, with justification, as a victim of racism.'
The Crown Prosecution Service did not oppose the appeal.
Ridgewell led the case against Mr Campbell and several others, but along with colleagues DC Douglas Ellis and DC Alan Keeling, later pleaded guilty to stealing from the same goods depot.
Mr Campbell unsuccessfully appealed his conviction in 1978.
His son submitted an application to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) in September 2024, with the help of the charity APPEAL.
Following a review, the CCRC found there was a real possibility that, like the convictions of 11 other people that have been referred to the court, Mr Campbell's conviction would be quashed, and it referred the conviction in February 2025.
Henry Blaxland KC, representing Mr Campbell, told the court it was dealing with victims of miscarriage of justice brought about by 'state crime'.
He added the case 'throws a shadow over the administration of justice and led to loss of confidence not only in the police, but in the legal system as a whole'.
Mr Blaxland also said the effect of the convictions of Mr Campbell had been 'incalculable'.
He read a statement from his son, Errol Campbell Jr, to the court.
He said the first time his father returned from the police station, 'he had bruises on him where he said he had been hit by the police'.
Mr Campbell Jr said in his statement he remembers helping to bathe his father after this, and that is something he will 'never forget'.
He continued: 'He (Mr Campbell Snr) called it n*****-hunting by the police.'
The court heard that after Mr Campbell was released from prison he went to America to 'get away from his experience' and 'took up heavy drinking'.
Mr Campbell Jr said in his statement: 'He was a ruined man.'
Reading a statement on his behalf outside the Royal Courts of Justice, Mr Campbell Jr's solicitor, Matt Foot, said: 'The British Transport Police knew that Detective Sergeant Derek Ridgewell was corrupt and they let him carry on regardless with what he was doing.
'My dad always said he was innocent and today that's finally been confirmed, almost 50 years later.
'He came to England in the Windrush generation and worked for years for British Rail. The conviction caused absolute misery to my dad and our family.
'Due to the shame and disgrace of this conviction, he found it difficult to get employment, so much so that he fled the country.
'On his return, he became an alcoholic and couldn't hold down a lollipop man's job.'
In August 2023 the CCRC referred the convictions of Mr Campbell's co-defendants, Saliah Mehmet and Basil Peterkin, after it tracked down their family members.
The convictions were both quashed in January 2024.
In 1980, Ridgewell, Ellis and Keeling pleaded guilty to conspiracy to steal from the Bricklayers Arms Depot.
Ridgewell died in prison before he had completed his sentence.
In a previous judgment, the court found 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'.
Referring to the ruling in Mr Mehmet and Mr Peterkin's cases, Lord Justice Holroyde said fresh evidence as to the 'dishonesty' of those three British Transport Police officers has underpinned a series of CCRC references to the court.
Separately on Thursday, the Court of Appeal also quashed the conviction of Ronald De Souza, the final member of the so-called Stockwell Six.
The group of black men were accused of trying to rob Ridgewell, and were all arrested on the London Underground while on a night out on February 18, 1972.
The CCRC referred Mr De Souza's conviction for attempted robbery to the Court of Appeal after his co-defendants, Paul Green, Courtney Harriot, Cleveland Davidson and Texo Johnson, had their names cleared in 2021.
Lord Justice Holroyde said it was 'very regrettable that none of the cases in which defendants have been convicted in reliance of the evidence was reviewed by the British Transport Police'.
Quashing Mr De Souza's convictions, he added: 'We regret that this court cannot now put right all that he has suffered.
'However, we can and do allow his appeal and quash his conviction.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
14 minutes ago
- The Independent
‘Bonnie and Clyde' couple who planned brutal rape of young children jailed
A couple who dubbed themselves Bonnie and Clyde have been jailed for planning and fantasising about the 'brutal' rape and sexual assault of young children under the age of 12. Stuart Compton, 46, and his partner, Tracy Turner, 52, sent each other thousands of messages planning the depraved abuse of two girls and a boy over a two-year period. Merthyr Crown Court heard their sick plan failed after an online dating app informed police of concerns about Compton, and the pair were arrested. Sentencing the couple on Monday, Judge Tracey Lloyd-Clarke, the Recorder of Cardiff, handed Compton a life sentence, while Turner was given 12 years in jail, with a further two years on extended licence. Compton must serve a minimum term of seven years in prison before he can apply to the parole board for release. Addressing Compton, she said: 'Unless and until the parole board considers it safe to release you, you will remain in prison.' At an earlier hearing, the couple, who referred to each other as Bonnie and Clyde in messages, both pleaded guilty to six counts of arranging sex attacks on children. Compton also pleaded guilty to six counts of making indecent images, and Turner, who is a hospital operating assistant, admitted two counts of the same offence. Bonnie and Clyde were outlaws who gained notoriety in the 1930s for a series of bank robberies in America. The judge said messages showed they had discussed 'over and over again' their desires to rape children and their conversations 'made clear that this was not fantasy'. The couple had planned to carry out the acts, with Ms Lloyd-Clarke saying they had 'carefully identified' a location for one of the rapes to take place. 'You were both sexually aroused by the idea of raping a child,' she said. She added: 'You both deny your sexual interest in children, you both minimise your offending.' The couple must also inform the police of any names or addresses they use and are barred from working with children and vulnerable groups. Compton, from Cathays, and Turner, from Roath, both Cardiff, had denied a string of other offences, including conspiracy to murder, conspiracy to rape and conspiracy to kidnap, which were ordered to lie on the file. Matthew Cobbe, prosecuting, told the court their conversations demonstrated a 'clear intent to arrange and commit sexual acts' with young children, although no child was ever abused. 'The first threads of messages suggested fantasy, they expressly talked about fantasy, but this developed into an obsession,' Mr Cobbe said. 'Their obsession drove them to discuss over and over the sexual acts that they intended to perform and the ways that they believed that they could achieve that goal.' The prosecutor said they had been arranging the 'brutal rape' of one of the children and had planned to drug the child to aid the abuse. 'They recognised the abuse for what it was, they recognised that it was rape,' he said. 'It was not a realisation that it would amount to rape, instead they were clearly stimulated by the fact that it was rape. 'Compton would press her whether she wanted to be present, she would confirm that she did and go on to confirm that she wanted to be involved. 'Compton claimed that he would accept all responsibility for the acts. 'The exchanges lasted months, they began as a fantasy but they became an obsession and an intended goal.' The court heard that messages recovered by the police took weeks to go through because there was so many, and showed Compton was interested in children 'aged one to six'. Examination of Compton's device showed that he discussed his fantasies with others, and would develop his own character in these conversations, 'creating depraved sexual stories involving children'. Referring to Turner, Mr Cobbe said: 'They exchange messages where they discuss the possibility of going to a festival or camping, so that they can be 'around' families with young children. 'Turner suggests a family festival, not too expensive. 'Compton thinks that is a 'great idea', commenting he'd like to go to a 'hippy one, where lots of drugs consumed leaving unattended girls, great f****** idea that's genius babe'.' Some of the messages the couple sent each other were read out in court, with each of them describing what they wanted to do to the young children and each other. In one message, Compton asked if she was serious about getting involved, and Turner responded: 'I'm not f****** about, babe.' The mother of one of the young girls described in a victim impact statement how they had stopped trusting people after learning of Compton and Turner's crimes. 'The decisions we make as parents are now different and lead to paranoia,' she said. 'Some days it is very real and other days it is like a dream. We do not want this to define our family. We cannot undo this.' The father of another girl described the defendants' crimes as 'incomprehensible'. 'I hope what they have done to me and my family stays with them for the rest of their lives,' he said. His partner added: 'Finding out about their crimes turned our world upside down. 'I have always had an open and honest relationship with my daughter. 'I am furious that I have had to lie to my child to protect her from these offences.' Kevin Seal, representing Compton, insisted his client had expressed remorse for his actions in a pre-sentence report. Mr Seal said: 'It was clear to the author of the report that these were genuine comments from the defendant himself – 'I have let everybody down'. 'He wished to apologise to anyone who has been let down by his actions.' A doctor diagnosed Compton with a compulsive sexualised behaviour disorder, which involves intense preoccupation with sexual fantasies and behaviours. 'It is not to be confused with sex addiction,' he said. He said the disorder did not provide 'any form of defence' but wished the judge to understand what Compton suffered from. He said the Compton had used a mixture of proscribed medication for his back and illegal drugs, including cocaine and cannabis, as well as alcohol. Mr Seal said the defendant had recognised he had a problem and reached out for support for the drugs and there had been a 'marked de-escalation' of messages regarding children. Nicola Powell, representing Turner, told the court she had ended the relationship with Compton as soon as she was arrested and had no contact with him since. 'She was a lady who, until these allegations were made and pleas entered, was without previous convictions,' she said. 'She had worked as a senior theatre assistant in the NHS for over 30 years without a blemish on her character.' Miss Powell said Turner had a long-standing issue with depression and anxiety, which led her in later years to abuse alcohol and cocaine. 'She accepts that she had an extremely unhealthy relationship with him, she abused alcohol and he introduced her to cocaine,' she said. 'This was not the support she needed and quite simply, it led her to spiral downwards and out of emotional control. 'By the time of her arrest, she was taking cocaine every day. She thought she loved Mr Compton and he loved her.' Miss Powell said that Turner told the author of a pre-sentence report: 'I am very sorry and ashamed. I'll never forgive myself for the rest of my life.' The barrister added: 'I would ask you to accept that her remorse in this case is genuine.' A spokeswoman for the Cardiff and Vale University Health Board said it would be inappropriate for them to comment on the case but confirmed that Turner was dismissed from her position in March 2025. She insisted that the safety and wellbeing of patients is the Board's highest priority. She added: 'We would like to take this opportunity to reassure patients that the criminal case is entirely unconnected with the individual's employment within Cardiff and Vale University Health Board.'
The Independent
14 minutes ago
- The Independent
Police officers detained after smacking son win appeal after ‘unlawful' arrests
Two married police officers who were arrested after one of them smacked their teenage son have won a High Court battle over claims they were unlawfully detained. The officers, who both serve with the Metropolitan Police, were arrested by Surrey Police in March 2019 after the wife gave her son what she described as a 'light smack on the left cheek' after he misbehaved. They sued Surrey Police after being told they would face no further action, claiming their detention was unlawful as it was unnecessary. The couple, who have three children, had their claims dismissed following a trial last year and appealed against the decision at the High Court earlier this month. In a ruling on Monday, Mr Justice Bourne overturned the decision. He said: 'In my judgment, on a proper analysis of the evidence at trial, the police did not show that there was an objective basis for the belief that it was necessary to arrest either claimant.' The judge said in a 30-page ruling that at the time of the incident, the couple's son, referred to as ABD, had 'an unfortunate history of challenging behaviour' and had begun attending a youth centre to access mental health services. The couple cancelled ABD's birthday party in March 2019 after he misbehaved, causing him to go to his room, where he 'kicked things around'. This led his mother to smack her son while his father was asleep, which she said 'was not hard and did not cause any injury or leave any mark'. ABD attended the youth centre the following day and told staff that he had been assaulted by his mother and that his father had done nothing to stop it. Despite offering to be interviewed voluntarily, both parents were arrested and detained for more than seven hours. ABD returned to the family home the following day, with police deeming that the children were not at risk of harm and telling the couple that they would face no further action three days after their arrest. Following a five-day trial at Guildford County Court, a judge dismissed their legal claims, finding that police 'reasonably believed' that their arrests were necessary 'to protect a child or children from the person in question and to enable a prompt and effective investigation'. The judge also ordered the couple to pay 70 per cent of the force's legal costs. At a hearing in London on July 2, barristers for the couple told the High Court that the judge 'erred' by finding that the arrests were 'objectively reasonable' as both parents had offered to give voluntary interviews. In his ruling, Mr Justice Bourne said he was 'unable to agree' with the trial judge's finding that there was a 'rational basis' for officers to conclude that voluntary interviews were not an option. He said: 'In the present case, no reason has been identified which actually explains why voluntary interviews were not a viable alternative.' He continued: 'None of this means that police officers are entitled to special treatment when they find themselves suspected of an offence. 'But the police must assess the circumstances and make rational decisions as to whether coercive measures are needed or not.' He added: 'Merely referring to the need to protect children and to protect the integrity of the investigation was not and is not enough. 'It follows that the arrests were unlawful and the claims should have succeeded.'
Daily Mail
15 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
'Reckless' woman, 32, who let girl under 10 DRIVE car through village is ordered to do community service
A 'reckless' woman who let a child drive a car through a village during a rainstorm has been ordered to do 134 hours of community service. Sophie-Leigh Gemmell, 32, previously admitted culpable and reckless conduct after allowing the girl, who was under 10 at the time, to take to the wheel in July last year. Video footage posted on social media app Snapchat showed the child driving in the dark through Crimond, Aberdeenshire. She could be seen peering over the steeling wheel as music plays and Gemmell mother cheers. At Peterhead Sheriff Court on Monday, Gemmell was given a 134-hour community payback order - reduced from 200 due to her plea. Sheriff Alan Sinclair said said her actions were 'reckless in the extreme'. But he said a custodial sentence would have been 'disproportionate'. The court heard she had no previous criminal record. In Scotland, a child can apply for a provisional driving licence at 15 years and 9 months old, but they cannot drive a car on public roads until they are 17. Children must use a car seat until they are 12 years old or 135cm tall (4ft 4in), whichever comes first. Sheriff Sinclair told Gemmell that she and the girl were 'very fortunate' not to have suffered more serious consequences and added that allowing a child to operate machinery could have caused injury to both the occupants of the car and the wider public. He added that filming the incident 'defies any reasonable explanation'. Gemmell's defence agent said the 32-year-old had difficult family circumstances and was the victim of domestic abuse. He said her behaviour was an attempt at 'levity' during a 'dire' time for the family. The defence agent said Gemmell admitted her 'behaviour was completely foolish' and a result of 'poor decision-making'. He said she wished to apologise to the court and showed 'genuine remorse' for her actions and an 'acceptance' that 'the behaviour was wrong and a willingness to accept that'. He added that a social work report found she was 'of no risk of further offending' and 'does not need supervision'. The defence said Gemmell 'appreciates and understands this is a serious matter' that 'could have had serious consequences' and that she recognised she deserves to be punished for her actions. Gemmell must complete her unpaid work within 12 months.
