RAPE TRIAL ‘SABOTAGED’
TORY ASSEMBLY CANDIDATE CAUSED TRIAL TO COLLAPSE THROUGH A ‘DELIBERATE’ ATTEMPT TO TELL JURY ABOUT VICTIM’S SEXUAL HISTORY, COURT TOLD
A CONSERVATIVE Assembly candidate “sabotaged” a rape trial, causing it to collapse through a “deliberate” and “stupid” attempt to tell the jury about the victim’s sexual history, a court heard.
Ross England, who will stand for the Conservatives in the Vale of Glamorgan in the 2021 Assembly election, was angrily criticised by a judge at Cardiff Crown Court for his evidence at a trial in which someone he knew was accused of rape.
The remarks were made during the trial in April 2018 but could not be reported until now because of an ongoing legal appeal.
During the trial Judge Stephen Hopkins QC told Mr England: “You have managed, singlehandedly, and I have no doubt it was deliberate on your part, to sabotage this trial.
“Mr England, as far as I am concerned, this matter so far as you are concerned isn’t ended. I shall be writing personal letters to people who are politically close to you and I hope they take appropriate action. Get out of my court.”
The case had to be ended early and a retrial took place six months later, last October, when the victim had to go through the ordeal of giving evidence for a second time. The defendant, James Hackett, was found guilty and jailed for five years.
Until now the case could not be reported as Hackett was attempting to appeal against his conviction. However his request for an appeal has now been turned down.
Despite the judge’s promise to write letters to call for “appropriate action” to be taken, Mr England was selected as an Assembly candidate that December.
He was praised by his former boss, Secretary of State for Wales Alun Cairns, in a press release welcoming his selection and describing the pair as “friends and colleagues”.
We asked Mr Cairns whether he knew of the judge’s attack and why he congratulated Mr England on his selection. Mr Cairns said he could not disclose employment records and did not go beyond that.
In response, Mr England said: “I was not told that anything had been ruled inadmissible prior to my testimony. I gave an honest answer, honouring the oath I took to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”
Mr England was a witness at the trial of Hackett, 31, from Kingston upon Thames, for rape in April last year.
Barristers for both the prosecution and defence had agreed there could be no mention of the sexual history of the victim, then aged 21.
Within minutes of taking his oath at the trial in April, Mr England told the jury he had previously had a sexual relationship with the victim and said it had been “group sex”.
The prosecution barrister Marian Lewis told the court: “He volunteered that he had had sexual intercourse with her previously, including group sex.”
The judge replied: “What on Earth did he say that for?” He told barristers he “had to assume” the jury had also heard England’s comments.
The judge continued: “The previous sexual history, which I ruled inadmissible on the very point that [defence barrister] Miss [Ruth] Smith was trying to persuade me to allow in, has now emerged as a result of the totally off-script answer by this witness.”
He said: “It’s obviously his intention to try and sabotage this trial.”
As he spoke to the barristers about what should happen next, the judge asked both if they knew “anything about this man’s political history, it doesn’t make pleasant reading”.
In front of the jury, Judge Hopkins asked Mr England why he made the comments about past sexual relations with the victim. “Why did you say that? Are you completely stupid?” he said. Mr England responded: “I apologise.”
When asked why he said it, Mr England said he was answering the question.
The judge responded: “No it wasn’t. It was quite clear what the question was. You have managed, singlehandedly, and I have no doubt it was deliberate on your part, to sabotage this trial. Mr England, as far as I am concerned, this matter so far as you are concerned isn’t ended.
“I shall be writing personal letters to people who are politically close to you and I hope they take appropriate action.
“Get out of my court.”
The judge said he did not believe the trial could go ahead, something described by prosecutor Ms Lewis as “extremely regrettable”.
Hackett was eventually convicted by majority verdict of a jury at Cardiff Crown Court.
In 2016, Mr England was suspended as an aide to Mr Cairns after tweeting that he told Remain campaigners to “f*** off”.
Earlier this year he was criticised for comments he made about people who voted Remain, and Labour said his use of language raised concerns as to whether he was a fit and proper person to be a Conservative candidate.
The Conservative Party headquarters was asked if it was contacted about the comments made by the judge in relation to Mr England and who was notified.
They were also asked if any action had been, or will be, taken against Mr England.
Mr England declined to comment to two further questions – whether he believed he was a suitable person to stand for election given the judge’s criticism and whether he had been spoken to by the party in relation to the comments.
Mr Cairns was asked a list of questions, including the dates when Mr England was employed by him, with the date of the offence, trials and sentencing specified.
He was asked if he was aware of the court proceedings and whether he was contacted directly or indirectly by the judge.
Mr Cairns was also asked whether any action was taken with regards to Mr England and whether he knew about the judge’s comments when he put out a press release in December 2018 referring to Mr England as his “colleague and friend”.
In response, Mr Cairns said that was “in the same way he does with candidates selected in Welsh constituencies”.
He said employment dates for employees cannot be released due to GDPR restrictions and that he did not receive any communication from the judge.
When asked if he was aware of the court proceedings, he responded: “The investigation and court case proceeded in the normal way, with all employees given the time, support and space as necessary.”
Asked if any action was taken against Mr England, he responded: “As I received no communication from a judge, the court case proceeded in the normal way.”