Levitt case draws in legal chief
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.JOHN RENTOUL
Political Correspondent
Sir Derek Spencer, the Solicitor General, has been drawn into the growing row over the Government's refusal to admit that the Serious Fraud Office authorised a deal with lawyers defending Roger Levitt, the failed investment adviser.
Levitt, facing a jail sentence on fraud charges, walked free from court in 1993 after pleading guilty to a minor charge. George Staple, the director of the SFO, is to re-appear before the Treasury Select Committee of MPs next month to explain why he "did not recall" that he had discussed possible pleas by Levitt with prosecuting counsel David Cocks QC soon after the trial began.
At the time of the case, Sir Nicholas Lyell, the Attorney-General, denied that the SFO had authorised a plea bargain. Now, in answer to questions from the Labour MP, Mike O'Brien, he said his denial was "cleared by the Solicitor General", who later investigated claims that the denial was misleading.
The Solicitor General is a Queen's Counsel - a leading barrister - in the chambers of Mr Cocks, the SFO's barrister in the Levitt case. Mr O'Brien said last night: "This does raise questions about whether there was a conflict of interest. It does seem on the face of it inappropriate that the Solicitor General should be the person who investigates on behalf of the law officers whether the case was handled properly."
The Treasury Select Committee is taking evidence from the lawyers on both sides of the case before hearing "revised" evidence from Mr Staple on 11 July. The latest parliamentary answers from the Attorney General abandon all previous insistence that there was no plea bargain. He said Mr Cocks had been approached by defence lawyers "and asked whether the Crown would be prepared to accept" a lesser plea from Levitt three days before Mr Cocks discussed with Mr Staple what the SFO's attitude was.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments