UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
If the original indictment featured 18 violent charges including serious assault and danger to life, why did the Crown lightly dismiss them as ‘minor matters’? During the trial, why did prosecutors fail to bring up the existence of weapons – sharpened af
PROSECUTORS dismissed charges of violence against Shaun Woodburn’s killer and his gang as “minor”.
They claimed that the charges were a tactic aimed at securing a conviction on the most serious matter – his killing.
But Shaun’s angry dad Kevin said the “flawed” strategy let a gang of vicious thugs off the hook, failed other victims and contributed to the “paltry” fouryear sentence handed down to Shaun’s teenage killer.
Nicky Patrick, the procurator fiscal for serious crime and homicide, described the other charges – including serious assault and danger to life – as “minor matters” in a letter to Kevin, who has been ceaselessly seeking answers over the murder case.
The charges were dropped several days into the trial.
Three youths were originally charged with murder after 30-year-old Shaun died.
But killer Mohammed Ibnomer, who was only 16 when he attacked Shaun, was finally convicted only of culpable homicide.
His four-year jail sentence was met with a huge public outcry and Kevin’s campaign, Justice For Shaun, has been running since the trial ended last September.
Kevin said last night: “I couldn’t believe when I saw she (Patrick) had referred to the other 17 charges on the indictment as ‘minor matters’ so they could concentrate on the most serious charge, number 16, which was Shaun’s murder.
“Yet this happened 10 days into the trial, which would imply they were indeed not that minor – especially to the members of the public that suffered.
“If I am correct, Ibnomer was convicted of Shaun’s culpable homicide, serious assault on Hugh Cullen and assault on Michael Smith.
“The Advocate Depute then accepted the other assaults – two of which include the phrase ‘and to the danger of his life’ – as a minor matter.”
In the letter, Patrick states: “There is a practical and tactical assessment to be made by the prosecuting AD who is conducting the trial, especially in a protracted and complex case, to ensure the jury is focused on the main charges.
“In the circumstances here the most serious charges were not withdrawn from the jury at an earlier stage as they were clearly more than technical or evidential charges as you say.”
She said the defence for both Ibnomer and co-accused Mohammed Zakariyah decided to plead guilty to the most serious additional charges they faced “and the AD made a decision to accept not guilty pleas to other minor matters so that the jury could focus all their attention on charge 16, the murder charge”.
Kevin added: “I cannot accept that these are minor matters, particularly when in some cases they refer to punching to the head, severe injury, permanent disfigurement and danger to life.
“To normal law-abiding citizens these are all very serious charges. This response shows the contempt in which the public, and the victims, are regarded by the Crown.”
Kevin said it was explained during the pre-trial hearing by the AD, Tim Niven-Smith, that the body of evidence and all 18 charges were put together to “build a picture” of the violence and intent by Ibnomer and his group – who rampaged through the streets of Edinburgh attacking strangers at random. He was dismayed that this was so readily dismissed during the trial. He said: “The Crown are basically saying the assaults on 18 victims never took place. It was a flawed strategy and has, in my mind, contributed to the sentences the killer and his co-accused received.” Businessman Kevin said he was stunned to read in the response letter from the Crown that sharpened afro combs used to stap victim Stephen Swanson did exist – and had DNA on them – but were not used in evidence. Patrick wrote: “Ultimately the assessment was that the very little DNA here would not have (assisted) in these circumstances.” Kevin said: “This particular statement came as a major shock to my family, as it is the first time anyone has confirmed these weapons even existed. “We had been told from the outset by the police and some in attendance that those weapons had been used. “But having not heard anything about them during the trial. we assumed that they had not been recovered. “To then be told that they had been recovered and just not used begs some major questions from us. “Given that the whole case was being tackled by the Crown on the basis of showing a picture of intent, it is inconceivable that this information not be used as evidence to the jury. “I want the Crown to justify to me why they used the other
people from the bar picking up weapons, the pool cues, as a basis for not leading with the fact the defendants themselves were armed – and indeed used them on people long before they picked up a pool cue or any other weapon.
“The weapons used by anyone from Gladstones Bar were used after they had been attacked by these individuals, and you could say were used in self-defence after the defendants had produced their own weapons initially.
“The defence spent almost 2.5 days on the weapons that were used from Gladstones. The media reported on them extensively during the trial and certain witnesses were portrayed as the culprits in this case, not only by the defence, but indeed by the AD in his summing up of the case.
“And in that entire time during the trial it was decided that the evidence of the defendants carrying and using those weapons was not to be disclosed to the jury. I find this to be ludicrous and unbelievable to any normal-thinking person.”
He added: “Stephen Swanson received four puncture wounds to the top of his head from those weapons. Kenneth Little had a stab wound which just missed his eye from those weapons. Yet they were not used as evidence during the trial. This was a preposterous and mistaken decision by the Crown.”
Kevin said the Crown’s response has thrown up more questions than answers and he has replied to them with a 17-page letter demanding further clarification.
He added: “I cannot and will not stop seeking answers until I’m satisfied this trial and the result was prosecuted to the best of their ability. At the moment it doesn’t feel like it.”