QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
London WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE MADDISON
|HER MAJESTY'S ATTORNEY GENERAL||Claimant|
WordWave International Limited
A Merrill Communications Company
190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
Mr A Caldecott QC (instructed by MGN in-house solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Defendant
Crown Copyright ©
The newspaper article
"A SUSPECTED cop killer is refusing to co-operate with anyone white or female in jail - claiming it is an abuse of his human rights.
Mustaf Jamma 27, sparked an international manhunt after he allegedly dressed as a woman, using a full-face Nijab veil, head to toe robes and his sister's passport to flee Britain after the shooting of rookie policeman Sharon Beshenivsky.
His behaviour in Wakefield jail where he awaits trial for the murder of mum-of-five Sharon, 38, and robbery and firearms offences, has appalled prison staff. The Mirror has seen top secret prison files relating to Jamma.
He came here with his family from war-torn Somalia in 1993 and was released from a sentence for robbery and burglary six months before the 2006 Bradford robbery in which PC Beshenivsky died.
The case sparked fury after officials ruled that it would be unfair to deport him in case he was shot by a rival tribe.
Jamma used the Human Rights Act to avoid deportation from the UK - now he is using it again behind bars.
An insider told the Mirror: 'He is refusing to associate with white prisoners or staff, especially white women, claiming it is an infringement of his human rights. Given his record and the fact he is accused of getting out of the country dressed as a woman, you really could not make it up".
Jamma also moans about random drug tests, which are compulsory as he has been convicted of drug offences in the past. But he has made it difficult for staff to carry them out.
His attitude towards white people means he has been assigned his own Muslim prison officer to look after him.
Jamma, who also claimed his prayer meetings were 'bugged', has been moved from the jail's F to B wing as a result of problems with white inmates.
Insiders claim Jamma has been 'radicalised' since his return to Britain from Somalia last November.
He has been in regular contact with Muslim extremist Yassin Nassari.
He was moved to Wakefield jail from Belmarsh last year after he was found with bomb making information.
It was feared Nassari, 28, of Ealing, West London was plotting with other extremists to build a device in the jail. The source went on: 'There is a wide-spread belief Jamma has been exposed to the views of extremists behind bars.'
'He is obviously classified as high risk and posed no problems when he first arrived at Wakefield.'
'But he has been in regular touch with Nassari and his behaviour has changed markedly. He refuses basic stuff like picking up mail and gets other Muslim prisoners to do it so he does not have to associate with whites.
He has a particular dislike of white women and female members of staff.
Jamma is due to stand trial at Newcastle crown court later this year."
"1. In this Act "the strict liability rule" means the rule of law whereby conduct may be treated as a contempt of court as tending to interfere with the course of justice in particular legal proceedings regardless of intent to do so.
2-(1) The strict liability rule applies only in relation to publications, and for this purpose "publication" includes any speech, writing ... or other communication in whatever form, which is addressed to the public at large or any section of the public.
(2) The strict liability rule applies only to a publication which creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be seriously impeded or prejudiced."
The submission made by Mr Philip Havers QC on behalf of the Attorney General, and not resisted by Mr Andrew Caldecott QC on behalf of MGM, is that the prejudice or potential prejudice created by this article is self-evident. The following matters are relied on, in particular, by the Attorney General. First, the reference to Mustaf Jama's previous convictions for robbery, burglary and drug offences. It is submitted that such references may well have prejudiced a potential juror against him both generally and specifically, given that one of the charges he was facing was a charge of robbery. A further point taken is that the assertion that he had been convicted of drug offences was itself false. He has no such convictions.
"I am acutely aware that this is a case which has very significant resonances for the West Yorkshire area in particular and that therefore although the publication is in a national newspaper, it would be avidly read within that area and may stick in the mind. This is enhanced by the fact that the substance of some of the allegations do concern events within a prison within that selfsame area and for that reason it would be particularly memorable for people in that area.
It seems to me that a publication in a national newspaper nine months before a trial date in normal circumstances would have minimal impact on a jury selected from within a particular geographical area. This, however, is not a normal case. The original trial of those who are said to be jointly responsible with this defendant was moved away from Leeds and Bradford precisely for that reason.
Both Prosecution and Defence seem to be agreed that the trial judge, particularly if it were in the West Yorkshire area, would have to draw the attention of the jury to the possibility of some publicity that they may have read and that plainly would serve to bring up any memory that there may be."
Explanation for the breach
"... this man is awaiting trial which is coming up fairly soon. In those circumstances we should not refer to his record and we need to exercise care with the other bits."
It also stated:
"If we use this please make sure the lawyer sees the subbed version."
Mitigation and penalty