1. Daniel said: August 7, 20141:01 pm

    The date of destruction was very close to the handover of power that was announced on 10 May and which took place on 27 June.

  2. Mischief said: August 7, 20141:55 pm

    After a bout of Googling I discovered that they should actually have been destroyed 3 years after the 1982 trial date, so that’s possibly the most interesting part to this- not necessarily that they were destroyed, but why they were destroyed so late. Since they were possibly kept because they were classified as being of “Long Term Interest”, why then were they finally destroyed in 2007? Just a CPS house keeping/clear out exercise or something more?
    The criteria determining a Long Term Interest case is interesting. It can include something like unusual charges/cases (disorderly house convictions perhaps could, at a stretch, apply there, I don’t know) but it also includes, for example, security/terrorism, secret/top secret and “famous, eminent or notorious people”.
    Unrelated FOI request letter which confirms the 3 year rule
    “Following a search of the information you requested, I can confirm the CPS does not hold the information. If a case file was held by the CPS, it would have been destroyed in accordance to our case file retention policy. Please see page 32 of the CPS Records Management Manual, which stipulates cases finalised at Crown Court (which do not fall within the category of Long Term Interest criteria) are destroyed three years following the final court date or the length of sentence or order. For ease of reference please click on the link: http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/docs/rmmversion2.pdf.”
    CPS Records Manual (see page 36 for Long Term Interest information and criteria)
    https://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/docs/rmmversion2.pdf (page 36)

  3. Anne Wade said: August 7, 20144:07 pm

    Further questions:
    Who destroyed them?
    Who ordered their destruction?
    If anyone has the list, will the government give them immunity from the official secrets act so they can publish it?
    If not, please would they share it here anonymously anyway?

  4. Mischief said: August 7, 20144:35 pm

    Anne, what was asked for, or according to this letter, was a list of suspects “charged”, and not a list of suspects who were arrested.
    Those who were charged is already known. There were three of them, two of whom were the Kasirs.. The third was acquitted.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *