UK: Sylvester family judicial review put on hold
01 May 2001
The family of Roger Sylvester suffered another blow in May when the outcome of their judicial review, challenging the Crown Prosecution Service's (CPS) decision not to bring criminal charges against the police officers involved in Roger's death, was postponed until after an inquest. Roger Sylvester died in hospital after being restrained by eight police officers outside his home in January 1999. Last November the CPS, in a decision described at the time as "shocking", ruled that there was "insufficient evidence for any criminal charges against any police officer." On 6 April a judge at the High Court in London granted the family a judicial review of the proceedings, but this will now have to await the outcome of an inquest later this year. (see Statewatch vol 9 no 1, vol 10 no 5 & 6).
On May 21 the Sylvesters went to the High Court to challenge the decision not to bring criminal charges against the police officers involved in Roger's death. When they left court they had learnt that their judicial review would be postponed until after an inquest. The family's legal representatives argued that holding an inquest first "would not be in accordance with public policy". Ian MacDonald QC explained that: "If there's an inquest beforehand, it allows the person who may be prosecuted to see all the evidence tested and actually have a kind of rehearsal." The High court decided that the limited scope of an inquest would be adequate to allow a public investigation. It would also, in the light of any fresh evidence, allow the Director of Public Prosecutions to reconsider his decision not to prosecute the police officers. Lord Woolf added that it would be unfair for the officers to "have the matter hanging over them without having the opportunity of publicly giving their version [of events]".
The judges also ruled that an inquest would provide an opportunity to make available information requested by the family. They had sought disclosure of an Essex police report into the operation that the Metropolitan police, owners of the document, had refused to hand over as well as post mortem reports and other material essential to their case. Deborah Coles co-director of INQUEST has pointed out that a key recommendation of the Macpherson inquiry was for information to be disclosed to a family in these circumstances. In refusing disclosure for so long the Metropolitan police has not only shrouded the case in "obsessive secrecy" say INQUEST but also "exacerbated the family's suffering in the search for the truth about how Roger Sylvester died."
The limitations of the inquest are likely to be exposed, the family fear, when police officers come to give evidence. The officers remained silent throughout the Essex police investigation and it is thought likely that, rather than taking the "opportunity of publicly giving their version", they will continue to remain silent. Roger's brother, Bernard Renwick, said: "We fear that the officers may use the rules to continue to give no-comment answers." In July one of the police officers pleaded guilty, at a disciplinary hearing, to destroying his contemporaneous notes of the events. The officer, who has not been named, indicated that he would plead guilty beforehand, thereby allowing the Metropolitan police to refuse the Sylvester family permission to attend the hearing. The family condemned the decision to keep the officer's punishment secret and, in an unprecedented move, they were joined by the Police Complaints Authority. The mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, also criticised the Metropolitan police's unwarranted secrecy.
In April the CPS informed the family of another black man, Christopher Alder, who was unlawfully killed in police custody in Hull in 1998, that the officers involved will not face manslaughter charges. Christopher died after being left handcuffed and clearly disturbed, face down on the floor of the police station custody suite for over 10 minutes while police officers made no attemp