COURT OF APPEAL 16th June 2003 Joseph Peter Hopkins

Please note that victims of abuse may be triggered by reading this information. The Sanctuary for the Abused [A] has advice on how to prevent triggers.  National Association for People Abused in Childhood [B] has a freephone helpline and has links to local support groups. Other useful sites are One in Four [C]  and Havoca [D]. Useful post on Triggers [E]  from SurvivorsJustice [F] blog. Jim Hoppers pages on Mindfulness [G]  and Meditation [H] may be useful.

Redaction

Some reports have had victims names redacted and some assault details redacted.

This is a difficult balance-  normally I would think that  I should not “censor” details but on consultation with various people I have taken the decision to redact. This is mainly to protect victims, their friends and relatives from unnecessary detail and to stop the gratification of those who seek salacious details.

In addition to the obvious “victims redaction” I have thus “assault redacted” across most of the spectrum of abuse. This may obscure sometimes the legal reason for the appeal, but should make no large difference to the vital information for researchers that these documents contain. That information is mainly names of the perpetrators, past addresses, the actual charges the perpetrators faced – on which newspapers are pathetically inaccurate and this information enables the links between people and places and abuse at various times to be ascertained.

If you think that the balance is not correct or that a particular redaction needs reconsideration, please say.

For an Index / Timeline of Court Appeal Documents on Cathy Fox Blog see [1]

This post is relevant to my Staffordshire Pindown Operation Thor post [2]

[2003] EWCA Crim 1812

No: 200200077/Y3

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand

London, WC2

Monday, 16th June 2003
Before:

Lord Justice Latham

Mr Justice Richards

His Honour Judge Fabian Evans

(sitting As A Judge Of The Court Of Appeal Criminal Division)

Regina
v.

Joseph Peter Hopkins

Computer Aided Transcript of the Stenograph Notes of Smith Bernal Wordwave
Limited 190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020
7831 8838 (Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)

MR R WIGGLESWORTH QC appeared on behalf of the APPLICANT

JUDGMENT

(As approved by the Court)

16th June 2003

1. LORD JUSTICE LATHAM : On 30th November 2001 in the Crown Court Worcester
before His Honour Judge Mott this appellant was convicted of 13 counts in
an indictment which charged the appellant with offences of indecent assault
against seven females and one male and two counts of rape against two
females. He was sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment.

2. He renews his application for leave to appeal against conviction after
refusal by the single judge. He was granted leave to appeal against
sentence, but, in the light of the course we intend to adopt in relation to
the appeal against conviction, that application will be adjourned from
today to be heard, if appropriate, at the end of the appeal against
conviction.

3. The facts need only be shortly stated for the purposes of today. The
appellant was a residential care officer at two particular homes, Chadswell
Remand Home and the Riverside Community Home, employed by the Staffordshire
County Council over a substantial period of time.

4. The allegations against the appellant related to a period between July
1981 and March 1987. In March 1987 two girls had made allegations of
indecent assault and rape against him as a result of which he was
suspended. There was an investigation between March and July of that year
at the end of which the police decided not to prosecute. He was thereafter
reinstated as a childcare officer.

5. Thereafter, as a result of further enquiries that were made of those at
the two homes in question, further allegations came to light which resulted
ultimately in the indictment of which he was convicted. That indictment
included the allegations of indecent assault and rape which had been dealt
with by the police in 1987.

6. At the commencement of the trial the appellant’s counsel submitted that
the indictment should be stayed on the grounds that it was an abuse of
process, bearing in mind the delay that had been occasioned since the
incidents and, in particular, the circumstances surrounding the complaints
that had been made in 1987. Essentially it was argued that the appellant
was in an impossible position in relation to the counts relating to those
complaints by reason of the fact that there must have been material which
was created during the course of those enquiries which was no longer
available which could be used to test the veracity and reliability of the
girls in question. There were other material events which had taken place
since, which, it is said, rendered it unfair for the matter in relation to
those two girls to proceed. It was further submitted that as a result it
would be inappropriate for the rest of the indictment to be dealt with.

7. The judge ruled against the appellant’s counsel’s submissions and the
matter proceeded on all counts contained in the indictment. The judge
directed in the course of the trial that the evidence of each of the
witnesses making complaints was capable of being relevant to support the
allegations made by other complainants, that was despite counsel for the
appellant’s objections.

8. The appeal against conviction is based upon the submission that the
judge was wrong to have permitted the trial to proceed, or at least to have
permitted the trial to proceed on the basis that the allegations of the two
girls who made the complaints in 1987 formed part of the indictment, and,
secondly, the judge was wrong to have directed the jury as to the relevance
of the evidence of each of the complainants in relation to the complaints
of others.

9. It seems to us that there is just sufficient in the arguments put
forward on behalf of the appellant to justify the conclusion that this case
merits full argument in front of the Full Court. Accordingly we give leave
to appeal against conviction. We make a consequential representation order
for leading counsel only. That is to encompass the hearing today as well as
the hearing of the appeal.

Please note that victims of abuse may be triggered by reading this information. The Sanctuary for the Abused [A] has advice on how to prevent triggers.  National Association for People Abused in Childhood [B] has a freephone helpline and has links to local support groups. Other useful sites are One in Four [C]  and Havoca [D]. Useful post on Triggers [E]  from SurvivorsJustice [F] blog. Jim Hoppers pages on Mindfulness [G]  and Meditation [H] may be useful.

Links

[1] Cathy Fox Blog 2015 May 8 [constantly updated] An Index / Timeline of Court Appeal Documents on Cathy Fox Blog https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2015/05/08/a-timeline-of-court-and-ewca-documentation-on-cathy-fox-blog/

[2] Cathy Fox blog 2015 Apr 14 Pindown, Operation Thor and the Cover up of Child Sexual Abuse in Staffordshires Childrens Homes https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2015/05/14/pindown-operation-thor-and-the-cover-up-of-child-sexual-abuse-in-staffordshires-childrens-homes/

[A] Sanctuary for the Abused http://abusesanctuary.blogspot.co.uk/2006/07/for-survivors-coping-with-triggers-if.html

[B] NAPAC http://www.napac.org.uk/

[C] One in Four http://www.oneinfour.org.uk/

[D] Havoca http://www.havoca.org/HAVOCA_home.htm

[E] SurvivorsJustice Triggers post http://survivorsjustice.com/2014/02/26/triggers-what-are-they-and-how-do-we-work-through-them/

[F] SurvivorsJustice Blog http://survivorsjustice.com/

[G] Jim Hopper Mindfulness http://www.jimhopper.com/mindfulness/

[H] Jim Hopper Meditation http://www.jimhopper.com/mindfulness/#cultivate

This is all written in good faith but if there is anything that needs to be corrected please email cathyfox@bigfoot.com

cathyfox the truth will out, the truth will shout, the truth will set us free

Advertisements

About cathy fox blog on Child Abuse

the truth will out, the truth will shout, the truth will set us free...
This entry was posted in #OpPaedoHunt, Child sexual abuse and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to COURT OF APPEAL 16th June 2003 Joseph Peter Hopkins

  1. Pingback: Timeline of Court and Court of Appeal Documentation on Cathy Fox blog | cathyfox blog

  2. Pingback: Pindown, Operation Thor and the cover up of Child Sexual Abuse in Staffordshire’s Childrens Homes | cathyfox blog

  3. Pingback: An Index and Timeline of Court & Court of Appeal, EWCA Documents on Cathy Fox Blog | cathyfox blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s