Documents sent to the Attorney General Part 2

Below are more of the documents sent to the Attorney general in support of my case, as referred to in my earlier post.

Letter from: Harry Cohen MP
House of Commons
London SW1A OAA

16 January 2002

To: Ms Glenys Stacey
Chief Executive
Criminal Cases Review Commission
Alpha Tower
Suffolk Street
Queensway
Birmingham, B1 1TT

Dear Ms Stacey

I am supportive of a full and early review, by the CCRC, of Mr Michael John Smith’s (PR3345, E Wing, HMP Full Sutton, York YO41 1PS) case, including that of the sentence. The prison sentence imposed upon him is, in my opinion, wildly excessive.

In view of Mr Smith already having served nine and a half years, I would ask that you agree to the early review of his case.

Your reply would be appreciated.

Yours sincerely
Harry Cohen MP

Letter from Harry Cohen MP to CCRC 16 January 2002

Letter from: Harry Cohen MP
House of Commons
London SWIA OAA

25 November 1998

To: The Rt Hon George Robertson MP
Secretary of State
Ministry of Defence
Main Building
Whitehall
London SW1A 2HB

Dear Minister

I enclose self explanatory correspondence I have received from Michael John Smith, (PR3345), E Wing, HMP Full Sutton, York Y041 1PS.

I am concerned at the allegations he makes that your Department “perverted the course of justice in his case” resulting in “a miscarriage of justice”.

I have forwarded a copy of this correspondence to Jack Straw at the Home Office, but should be grateful for your response in respect of the allegations relating to your Department.

Yours sincerely
Harry Cohen MP

CC
The Rt Hon Jack Straw MP
Secretary of State for the Home Department
Home Office
50 Queen Anne’s Gate
London SW1H 9AT

Letter from Harry Cohen MP to George Robertson MP 25 November 1998

Letter from: Ministry of Defence
Main Building Whitehall London SW1 2HB
0171-21 89000 (Switchboard)

Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence
D/US of S/JS 4944/98/P

To: Harry Cohen MP

26 January 1999

Dear Harry,

Thank you for your letter of 25 November to George Robertson enclosing one from Mr Michael Smith of HMP Full Sutton. I am replying as this matter falls within my area of responsibility.

A full account of Mr Smith’s case is contained in the Report of the Security Commission, published in July 1995, Command 2935.

On 18 November 1993, Mr Smith was convicted at the Central Criminal Court of three offences under the Official Secrets Act 1911, and sentenced to 25 years imprisonment. The offences for which he was convicted were committed between I January 1990 and 8 August 1992. He applied to the Court of Appeal, and on 8 June 1995 his appeal against conviction was dismissed. His appeal against sentence was allowed, and the sentence was reduced from 25 to 20 years.

The Security Commission’s report states that:

“4.6. Despite the fact that the most serious of Smith’s known espionage activities occurred whilst he worked for EMI ..., his trial was confined to charges under the Official Secrets Act relating to the documents taken from GEC in his possession at the time of his arrest ...

4.7. It was assumed that the documents in his possession at the time of his arrest were collected for his last delivery before he was made redundant by HRC. There is no way of knowing what other information he may have passed since his reactivation by the KGB in September 1990.”

The main thrust of Mr Smith’s letter to you is that the Ministry of Defence perverted the course of justice at his trial and subsequent appeal in respect of the sensitivity of certain parts of the evidence. He also alleges that MOD witnesses lied at his trial. From enquiries made here, it appears that there is nothing new in his letter. The Crown Prosecution Service have confirmed that the nature of the sensitive material was fully assessed in the proceedings against him. Dr Weatherley and Prof Lewis, the two MOD witnesses at his trial mentioned in his letter, have been consulted and both have confirmed that Mr Smith’s accusation of witholding or suppressing evidence is unfounded, and his belief that Professor Lewis committed perjury is unwarranted and untrue.

I am sending a copy of this letter to Jack Straw.

John Spellar MP

Letter from MoD to Harry Cohen MP 26 January 1999 p.1

Letter from MoD to Harry Cohen MP 26 January 1999 p.2

Letter from: Harry Cohen MP
House of Commons
London SW1A 0AA

30 March 1999

To: John Spellar Esq MP
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence
Ministry of Defence
Main Building
Whitehall
London SW1A 2HB

Dear Minister,

Further to our correspondence regarding Michael John Smith, HMP Full Sutton, I enclose another letter from him.

I have sent a copy of his main letter (not the restricted document) to the Home Office Minister regarding the alleged perjury and misinformation at his trial to which he refers.
Please will you respond further to the new points in his letter. He asks that you confirm that your earlier reference to Dr Lewis related to Dr Merion Francis Lewis and if you would indicate the true use of the restricted document.

Yours sincerely
Harry Cohen MP

Letter from Harry Cohen MP to John Spellar MP 30 March 1999

Letter from: Ministry of Defence
Main Building Whitehall London SW1A 2HB

0171-21 89000 (Switchboard)
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence

D/US of S/JS 1508/99/P

To: Harry Cohen MP

23 April 1999

Dear Harry,

Thank you for your letter dated 30 March enclosing further correspondence from your constituent, Mr Michael Smith of HMP Full Sutton.

Mr Smith’s latest letter is again concerned with the evidence used against him at his trial and subsequent appeal, and merely repeats, in more detail, his previous comments and accusations. His letter contains no new factors, and I therefore have nothing further to add to my previous letter to you in this respect.

I can however, confirm as requested, that the former Dr Meiron Francis Lewis is indeed now Professor Meiron Francis Lewis.

I am sending a copy of your correspondence and my reply to Jack Straw.

John Spellar MP

Letter from MoD to Harry Cohen MP 23 April 1999

Letter from: Harry Cohen MP
House of Commons
London SW1A 0AA

07 July 1999

To: John Spellar Esq MP
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State
Ministry of Defence
Main Building
Whitehall
London SW1A 2HB

Dear Minister,

Further to our previous correspondence regarding Mr Michael John Smith, currently detained at HMP Full Sutton, I enclose a copy of a further self explanatory letter received from him.

I know that in recent correspondence you maintain that you have little new to add, however in view of the seriousness of this matter and Mr Smith’s absolute insistence of malpractice by officials associated with Government, I do think some more answers should be forthcoming.

In particular, I would like you to address his question in paragraph (3) –“i.e. what was the true use of the restricted document”. This does seem to be significant and, in view of the seriousness of the alleged miscarriage of justice, the ‘restricted’ nature of the document should be lifted.

Please respond to this, and other aspects of Mr Smith’s letter.

Yours sincerely
Harry Cohen MP

Letter from Harry Cohen MP to John Spellar MP 7 July 1999

Letter from: Ministry of Defence
Main Building Whitehall London SW1A 2HB

0171-21 89000 (Switchboard)

Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence

D/US of S/PK 3095/99/M

To: Harry Cohen MP

9 September 1999

Dear Harry,

John Spellar in his letter to you of 22 July, undertook to write again once the matters raised by Mr Smith of HMP Full Button had been investigated. I am now in a position to reply. You will also wish to be aware that he has also written to Dr Jenny Tongue raising exactly the same point.

The “true use of the RESTRICTED document” was addressed in considerable detail during Mr Smith’s trial, during his appeal, and in the Report of the Security Commission. The evidence in question concerning this document and the name of the missile system with which it was associated was given by Professor Lewis “in camera”. The Security Commission have however, confirmed that the document should have been classified at least CONFIDENTIAL when on its own, and when linked with the Weapon System concerned should have been classified SECRET. That remains the position, and in consequence, I regret that I am unable to lift restrictions on it, as you request.

In previous correspondence we have refuted Mr Smith’s allegations that Professor Lewis lied at the Trial, and have nothing further to add. Mr Smith continues to raise matters which have been fully addressed through the Legal System and I can see little point in any further correspondence with the Ministry of Defence on this matter.

I note that you are holding a number of protectively marked documents about this case, forwarded to you in Mr Smith’s earlier letters. I would be grateful if you could pass these to HCDC staff at the House for secure storage. I am concerned that Mr Smith is widely copying and circulating these highly classified documents, in clear breach of the conditions under which they were released by the CPS to his Solicitors. He is also quoting from and circulating, evidence given “in camera”. Mr Smith should not even have these documents in his possession. My officials are raising this with the Prison Authorities and with his Solicitors.

I am sending a copy of your correspondence and my reply to Jack Straw.

Peter Kilfoyle MP

Letter from MoD to Harry Cohen MP 9 September 1999 p.1

Letter from MoD to Harry Cohen MP 9 September 1999 p.2