'Public interest' cited as Crown drops fraud case
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THREE men accused of engineering a pounds 5.5m stock market fraud walked free from court yesterday after the case was dropped amid bitterness and confusion.
The Crown Prosecution Service said the decision had been taken 'reluctantly' by high-ranking police and legal officials because disclosure of vital evidence was against the public interest.
The disclosure would have been of documents gathered by the prosecution case. Explaining the decision, counsel for the CPS cited three recent court rulings on disclosure, including the Judith Ward case.
One defendant, Peter Rumball, former managing director of Hong Kong-based stockbrokers' Mansion House Securities, said after the 30-minute hearing that the allegations had wrecked his life.
The case at Knightsbridge Crown Court against Peter Rumball, 45, William Butler, 43, and Anthony Lort-Phillips, 48, concerned an alleged fraud involving pounds 5.5m worth of shares in ICI, the chemical group.
The trio were accused of knowingly attempting to sell stolen share certificates - owned by Eagle Star Insurance - through the London Stock Exchange.
The prosecutor Brendan Finucane said no evidence was offered because of 'conflict of public policy elements' whereby disclosure of vital evidence would compromise the public interest. 'This was considered at the highest level of the City of London Police and the highest levels of those who instruct me (CPS),' he said.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments