logo
Shady final twist has me convinced Essex Boys killers were FRAMED in cover-up as questions linger over ‘corrupt' witness

Shady final twist has me convinced Essex Boys killers were FRAMED in cover-up as questions linger over ‘corrupt' witness

The Sun5 days ago
CAGED in Category A prisons for 29 years, the man convicted of masterminding the Essex Boys triple murder has been released - but with a rigorous stipulation.
Grey-haired and in his eighth decade, Michael Steele still vehemently denies he was behind the most infamous gangland hit in British criminal history.
11
Despite efforts by the Justice Secretary to keep him under lock and key, the career criminal was released from prison on licence in May.
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said he was under 'strict conditions and intensive probation supervision' and that 'he faces an immediate return to prison if he breaks the rules".
One of those stringent conditions is that Steele does not discuss the case with journalists.
Unless the snail-paced Criminal Cases Review Commission - currently conducting its third examination of the case - grants a fresh appeal, it's a silence he's likely to take to the grave.
Steele has been unwavering in his protestations of innocence.
According to recently-released Parole Board documents, he insists 'the killing was organised by another criminal and a corrupt police officer'.
It was a shocking claim that, over the years, did little to encourage the authorities to grant him his freedom.
But Steele stuck by his word as the grim prison years ticked slowly by and the outside world moved on.
His minimum tariff of 23 years passed in May 2019, but he didn't waver in his assertion of innocence.
Finally, in February this year, the Parole Board deemed Steele was no threat and could walk.
Are 'Essex Boys killers' innocent?
But Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood disagreed and slammed the brakes on.
Her department spokesperson insisted: 'Public protection is our first priority.'
Yet, retired senior Scotland Yard detective David McKelvey - who has spent the last five years painstakingly studying the case - told me: "Steele is 82, he poses absolutely no risk.'
Not only that, but the 62-year-old retired Detective Chief Inspector believes Steele and his accomplice Jack Whomes - both now free - are innocent of the Essex Boys slaying.
After returning to the murder scene with McKelvey and other ex detectives, I too believe there has been an awful miscarriage of justice.
Steele and Whomes' convictions rest largely on the word of 'Fat Darren' - supergrass Darren Nicholls, a paid police informer and drug dealer.
Appeal Court judges would later say Nicholls had a "corrupt" relationship with his Essex police handler.
So did this star witness tell an Old Bailey jury the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What is certain is that the murders so captured the public imagination it spawned 12 feature films - including 2000's Essex Boys starring Sean Bean - and a raft of books.
I have attempted to sift through the welter of fact and fiction and discover what really happened.
Grisly scene
11
11
On a crisp February morning in 2021, I met McKelvey and another ex leading detective Albert Patrick in Workhouse Lane, Rettendon.
Set amid Essex farmland, it is immortalised as the spot where a metallic blue Range Rover containing the bodies of the three men had been discovered 26 years previously.
Using a similar SUV, the two cops skillfully recreated the crime scene for a Sun documentary.
Retired Det Chief Supt Patrick, 76, paced around the motor, describing the dead men inside and how they were murdered.
Slumped behind the wheel was violent cocaine addict Craig Rolfe, 26, who was born in Holloway Prison.
In the passenger seat was ex-soldier Tony Tucker, 38, the body-building head of a security firm that controlled the drugs trade in Essex nightclubs.
Tucker was ultimately responsible for supplying the ecstasy pill that led to the death of 18-year-old Leah Betts in November, 1995, a tragedy that had traumatised the nation.
In the back seat was Tucker's enforcer, short-fused 18-stone man-mountain Pat Tate, 36, who had heroin, cocaine, cannabis and steroids in his bloodstream when he died.
All three had been shot in the face with a pump action shotgun so swiftly that they had no time to retaliate.
Rolfe's hands were still on the steering wheel and his foot on the brake. Tucker was holding his mobile phone.
Tate took a bullet in the stomach to immobilise him before he, too, was shot in the head.
There were no witnesses. Whoever pulled the trigger left behind no fingerprints or DNA.
Patrick, who spent "31 years nicking villains" before he became a civilian homicide review officer for the Met, called the slaying 'retribution' and 'a professional hit'.
He said of the assassin: "The guy was very, very good at what he was doing and he's done it before."
Essex Police were under huge pressure to solve the most high profile gangland assassination since the Kray Twins ruled London's East End.
'Perjury'
Their inquiries stalled until petty crook and police informant Darren Nicholls was arrested in May 1996.
Ex-BT engineer Nicholls, then 30, was held after 10kg of cannabis was found in his van.
He had worked with Whomes, Steele and the dead men. But when accused of being in the murder gang, he turned grass.
His testimony was that his friend Steele had lured the murdered trio to Rettendon as a passenger in the Range Rover.
Whomes, he insisted, then jumped out of the bushes, handed Steele a shotgun and between them they blasted the trio to death.
The motive, he said, was a cannabis deal that had gone wrong.
Nicholls, who said he was the getaway driver, claimed that Steele had boasted: "They won't f*** with us again."
Whomes admits he was in Rettendon on the night of the murder, saying Nicholls had asked him to pick up a broken-down car.
In January 1998, Steele, of Great Bentley, Essex, and Whomes, then from Brockford, Suffolk, were convicted of the murders and were sentenced to life.
Trial judge Mr Justice Hidden had told the jury of Nicholls in his summing up: "You must bear in mind it was in his own interest to become a prosecution witness - he hopes to get less time to serve."
Nicholls pleaded guilty to drug-running and was given a lenient sentence, gifted a new identity and rehoused at a secret location.
In 2000 he broke cover. Lubricated with Jack Daniels, he revealed: 'My little boy keeps saying, 'Why can't we have our old name back? Why can't I call my friends? Why can't we go back to Essex?'
'One day he's going to want to get married. One day he's going to want to know why he doesn't have a birth certificate.
'And when it all comes out and he finds out his dad's a grass, he'll probably end up hating me too.'
The same year another supergrass - held in the same secure unit as Nicholls back in 1997 - claimed the Essex man had told him before Whomes and Steele's trial that his testimony was untrue.
'He said the story he was supposed to tell in court was a pack of lies,' the grass revealed. "I thought there were forensics, witnesses. I could ignore Darren's perjury because I thought it was just the cherry on the cake.
'Now I realise Darren wasn't the cherry on the cake - he was the cake.'
At Steele and Whomes's failed 2006 appeal, judges found that Nicholls may have received up to £15,000 in a book deal relating to the case, signed before the pair's trial.
The supergrass also agreed to take part in a TV documentary - again before Whomes and Steele were tried.
Jurors at the 1998 trial were not told of the lucrative media deals but when the evidence was put before Appeal Court judges eight years later, they ruled the convictions should stand.
Cold-blooded execution
11
In 2021, Whomes, now 63, was released after 23 years in jail.
In all those long years he'd never wavered in his insistence that he was innocent of the Rettendon murder.
His brother John told me: 'Jack's free but he hasn't got justice yet.'
In his summing-up at the 1998 Steel and Whomes Old Bailey trial, the judge pointed out that whoever committed the murders must have been an expert marksman.
John insists his brother wasn't capable of such a cold-blooded execution.
Growing up on a Suffolk farm, John said there were guns around, but that Jack was never interested in them.
'He's a mechanic. He's interested in how things work," his retired builder brother said.
'When we was kids, my dad bought a clay pigeon trap. Jack was fascinated.
'He was pulling the arm around when it swung full circle, hit him on the neck and knocked him out cold.
'He's still got the scar. He never went near guns or clay pigeons after that."
So if Steele and Whomes didn't kill the Essex Boys, who did?
'Alternative scenario'
11
11
McKelvey and Patrick have pieced together an alternative scenario which I believe holds credence.
On January 14, 1996, the Met Police arrested a "mid-tier" East End villain called "Billy" for armed robbery.
The crook claimed he had been paid £5,000 to be the getaway driver in the Essex Boys hit.
Billy said the order for the killings was placed by a major South London criminal - who had fallen out with Tucker over a drugs debt - and organised by an East London firm.
Later Billy testified at Whomes and Steele's trial that he had been an unwitting getaway driver.
Former cop Patrick - who reviewed the murders of Damilola Taylor and Rachel Nickell for the Met - told me: "There's been a total miscarriage of justice.
'If you're going to trust the word of a supergrass then you need corroboration."
McKelvey says of Steele and Whomes: 'When you've completed your sentence, why would you continue to protest your innocence?'
These two hard-bitten ex cops have diligently reviewed the case, not for money, but because they want to see justice done.
I too believe the evidence against Steele and Whomes isn't close to passing the 'beyond reasonable doubt' threshold.
Essex Police point out there was "an exhaustive police investigation" into the murders and that the Court of Appeal twice rejected miscarriage of justice claims.
Meanwhile, the notoriously slow-moving Criminal Cases Review Commission continues its deliberations.
For my part, I would relish the opportunity to interview Steele. But his lips have been sealed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trans teachers can now ask pupils to call them Mx instead of Mr or Mrs, says Bridget Phillipson
Trans teachers can now ask pupils to call them Mx instead of Mr or Mrs, says Bridget Phillipson

The Sun

time5 minutes ago

  • The Sun

Trans teachers can now ask pupils to call them Mx instead of Mr or Mrs, says Bridget Phillipson

TRANS teachers can ask their pupils to call them Mx instead of Mr or Mrs, the Education Secretary has said. Bridget Phillipson said they have the right to 'make that request' of them. She told LBC: 'But of course, what we'll be looking at is making sure that people are able to exercise their views on this topic too. "This has been the subject of various legal cases as well about people's rights in terms of how they approach questions of gender identity.' The prefix Mx is used by some trans people as a gender-neutral way of saying Mr or Mrs. Ms Phillipson has also been criticised for failing to publish long-awaited trans guidance for schools after more than a year in power. She inherited draft guidance from the Tories that said that teachers should adopt a 'cautious approach' to children wanting to socially transition by living like the opposite sex. Ms Phillipson said she wanted to take time to review the policies — but has still not produced them 13 months into the job. Yesterday she could not say when the guidance would finally be released, despite concerned parents asking for it. Tory Shadow Education Secretary Laura Trott said last night: 'The guidance for schools on gender-questioning children is ready to go. 'It will give schools the clarity they need, end the confusion and help safeguard children. 'No more excuses from the Education Secretary, she just needs to get on with it.' 1

Kate Forbes may be banned from arts venue because of her views on trans issues
Kate Forbes may be banned from arts venue because of her views on trans issues

Daily Mail​

time7 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Kate Forbes may be banned from arts venue because of her views on trans issues

A venue at the Edinburgh Fringe festival has triggered a freedom of speech row after indicating that Kate Forbes won't be allowed back because of her views on trans issues. Summerhall Arts issued an apology to other performers for the 'oversight' of allowing the Deputy First Minister, who has spoken up against gender reforms and backs single-sex spaces for biological women, being interviewed onstage last week. Several of the performances at the venue during this year's Fringe run feature gay or transgender themes, and some of the artists set up a 'safe room' because they were said to have been 'terrified' while 5ft 2in Ms Forbes was in the building. Now bosses at the venue have indicated that they will develop 'robust, proactive inclusion and wellbeing policies that would prevent this oversight in our bookings process happening again'. Women's rights campaigners claimed that banning critics of self-ID would be against the law. It comes after the Stand comedy club was forced to reinstate a show featuring Joanna Cherry at the Fringe two years ago after she threatened legal action for discrimination when the venue initially planned to cancel the event because of her views on trans issues. Marion Calder, a director at For Women Scotland, said any refusal to allow Ms Forbes and others who share her views to appear at the venue would be 'against the law' for the same reasons as in the battle between Ms Cherry and the Stand two years ago. She said: 'They clearly haven't taken legal opinion on this. Why on earth would members of staff and other performers be scared of a young woman having 'dangerous' thoughts? 'Summerhall is renowned as being one of the largest Fringe venues: what is this saying about the Edinburgh Fringe if free speech doesn't exist and this appearance is intolerable? And who are these arbiters who think some people are not allowed to have thoughts?' She also highlighted that Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar, who has indicated that his party would no longer support gender reform legislation, was among the other speakers with no similar backlash. Ms Calder said: 'Why were they not up in arms about Anas? Why burn the witch? At a time when people are crying out for edgy and different Summerhall is doing the opposite of what it should be doing. 'People are fed up of the same woke shows that are appearing.' Ms Forbes had appeared at Summerhall on August 7 as part of the Herald's Unspun Live at the Fringe series of political interviews. Artists were said to have been so 'terrified' that they set up a 'safe room' while she was at the venue, while bosses at the venue issued an apology. A source at Sumerhall Arts, which was awarded £608,302 of public cash from Scottish Government quango Creative Scotland in January, said: 'This event was booked as a series of longform interviews prior to the guest list being confirmed. 'Summerhall Arts' primary concern is the safety and wellbeing of the artists and performers we work with, and going forward we will be developing robust, proactive inclusion and wellbeing policies that would prevent this oversight in our bookings process happening again. 'Summerhall Arts issued a communication to all artists making them aware of the event.' Scottish Conservative equalities spokesman Tess White said: 'This is an outrageous and unacceptable statement from a venue that is clearly detached from reality. 'Not only is this a scandalous attempt to curtail free speech, it is seemingly oblivious to the Supreme Court ruling which fully vindicated in law those whom Summerhall wishes to silence. 'As for its concern for 'the safety and wellbeing' of artists, this clearly doesn't extend to female artists. 'While Kate Forbes has been disgracefully treated, she might reflect that it's the SNP which imposed this toxic gender ideology across Scottish public life, and it's her current party leader who refuses to disown it.' During the interview, presenter Andrew Learmonth highlighted that there were people in the building 'who didn't want this show to go ahead', complained to management and wanted it to be cancelled because they 'didn't like what they think of your views, particularly around gender, sex and trans issues'. Ms Forbes said: 'These issues have been well documented and can I just say how brilliant it is for us to have freedom of speech in this country.' She said there needs to be spaces where people can have discussion and debate, and added: 'My approach is to respect the fact and to appreciate the fact that a lot of people disagree with me. 'I think it is a reflection on a healthy democracy that people both agree with me and disagree with me. 'I am not anti any human being. I am taught to love my neighbour as myself, which is to give them greater respect, greater honour and greater appreciation than I would expect myself.' In 2023, The Stand announced it had cancelled Ms Cherry's appearance because staff were not comfortable with her views on transgender issues. The appearance eventually went ahead after the threat of legal action, with the venue saying it took legal advice and accepted the decision was 'unfair and constituted unlawful discrimination against Ms Cherry'. Responding to the freedom of speech row, Ms Forbes said: 'As I stated at the event, I fervently believe in freedom of speech. Any effort to 'cancel' people, especially politicians, undermines democracy. 'Many people attended the Herald event and it is important that we could freely discuss and debate matters in a respectful manner. 'I respect and acknowledge the fact that in a liberal democracy there are people who will agree with me and others who will disagree with me. 'That is all the more reason to create events where the audience and journalists can question politicians openly, as the Herald did.'

The police must work harder to regain public trust
The police must work harder to regain public trust

Telegraph

time7 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

The police must work harder to regain public trust

At times, it feels as if the British state is more concerned with the welfare of shoplifters than shopkeepers. It is perhaps unsurprising, given the row over the epithet 'scumbags' and the Information Commissioner's Office warning that showing pictures of thieves may breach data protection laws, that owners feel the police have 'abandoned' treating shoplifting as a crime. This sense will not be helped by police chiefs appealing to the public to do their jobs for them. Matthew Barber, Police and Crime Commissioner for Thames Valley, insists that 'there's a bigger problem with society' and that those unwilling to 'try and stop' thieves are themselves 'part of the problem'. This stance sits poorly next to the treatment meted out by the criminal justice system to those who do attempt to intervene. Public-spirited citizens who intervene and attempt to detain thieves and worse can find themselves raked through the coals, with the state using the tools at its disposal to emphasise that enforcing the law – or choosing not to – is a matter of its discretion, not yours. This has rendered the population powerless to protect itself, while the police refuse to protect us. People do respond to incentives and the incentives this offers are straightforward. As a result, figures from the Office for National Statistics showed last month that shoplifting offences were at their highest since current figures began in 2003. Correcting this sorry state of affairs does not begin with more members of the public putting themselves at physical risk. It begins with the police doing the work we pay them to do.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store