15 July 2007

Disinformation about Daniel James

It was refreshing on 13th July to see Daniel James stand up before an Old Bailey judge, and at that hearing demand his right to face a Court Martial. The offences Daniel is alleged to have committed relate back to his Army service in Afghanistan during 2006, and so he should have been given the choice of trial by military justice. Instead a Crown Court trial is being forced onto Daniel against his wishes.

Daniel James in Afghanistan

Rather than reveal the true allegations against Daniel, the Criminal Prosecution Service decided to confuse the public by focusing attention on the information contained in a “USB computer device”. This is nothing but a diversion, because the Prosecution know full well that there is nothing damaging to national interests on that device. No doubt the release of this “evidence” was designed to give the impression that Daniel was found in possession of military secrets - nothing could be further from the truth. Why do they not disclose the true details explaining what Daniel’s case is all about?

The other lie being put out by British intelligence is that Daniel James ‘is the first person for more than 20 years to be tried for spying’ (Matthew Moore, Daily Telegraph), and that this is ‘Britain’s first spy trial since the Cold War’ (Peter Graff, Reuters). It has also been widely publicised that there has not been an Official Secrets Act trial in Britain since that of Michael Bettany in 1984.

This is clearly disinformation, and it is not hard to understand for whose benefit it is intended. Anybody who has followed history will know that there have been several Official Secrets Act cases since 1984. Notably, AFTER the Cold War ended I went through an OSA trial in 1993, followed by Rafael Juan Bravo in 2001 and Ian Parr in 2003. Is the public meant to simply forget about our cases! No, what the Prosecution want you to forget is that I was found “guilty” based on false evidence and tricks, and Bravo and Parr were convicted due to MI5 entrapment operations.

So, for what purpose could it be that you are expected to believe Daniel James’ trial will be the first spy trial since 1984? It would not be a good idea to compare Daniel’s trial with the false evidence and frame-up used in my trial and those of Bravo and Parr, so what better way to cover up the dirt than to pretend that our trials never took place? Write us out of history by a process of judicial cleansing. This then leaves the way open for the media to play up and exaggerate the importance of the Daniel James’ trial, and if the Prosecution manage to convict him he will be given a sentence out of all proportion to the trivial nature of his alleged offences. I’ve seen it all before, it happened to me, and poor Daniel is being prepared for the same fate.

Another of the errors published in the past couple of days was the claim that Daniel James was in Woodhill prison (Matthew Moore and BBC report). Daniel has never been in Woodhill; he is currently at Wandsworth prison.

These errors in the reports about Daniel’s case could be seen as mistakes or oversights by journalists. However, these false details then get copied throughout the media, and become a permanent record for future readers to be misled by. If so blatant and easily disprovable fabrications are circulated, then what other lies have been told about the Daniel James case?

Daniel now has a long wait until February 5, when his trial is scheduled to start. Don’t be fooled by the false stories you read about this case.