TWO Lancashire brothers have been cleared of evading duty on large quantities of beer, wine, tobacco and cigarettes after a judge ruled that a jury could not be told of alleged admissions they made in interviews with customs officers.
And two further charges which had led to the arrest of brothers Bernard and Paul Rymes were allowed to lie on the file at Warwick Crown Court after the prosecutor said he would not seek a trial on those matters.
Bernard, 37, of Three Nooks, Bamber Bridge, and Paul, 39, of Fielden Street, Chorley, had each denied two charges of carrying goods and one of dealing in goods on which duty was chargeable with intent to defraud the revenue.
On the day they were to stand trial their barristers argued that alleged admissions made to customs officers should not go before the jury because their interviews were conducted in breach of the code of practice dealing with such matters.
The court heard the brothers were stopped on the M6 in Warwickshire in March last year in a joint police and customs operation because their van appeared to be overloaded.
They were escorted to a service station where the van was found to contain 14 kilos of tobacco, 500 cigarettes, a number of cigars, 480 litres of beer and 98 litres of wine.
When they were interviewed after a delay of more than an hour both brothers admitted making previous trips to the continent between June 1998 and March last year and bringing back alcohol and tobacco for commercial purposes. Their barristers argued that the interviews had been conducted in breach of the code of practice -- and Judge John Wilson ruled that parts of the interviews were inadmissible.
The judge pointed out that the brothers were not properly informed about their entitlement to legal advice. He said: "They were told they could obtain legal advice, but they were certainly not told that advice would be free or that it would be independent, or that the right included the right to speak to a solicitor on the telephone -- and they were not asked if they wished to do that. So there was a substantial breach of the code."
Judge Wilson said that although they were properly cautioned when they were told they were being questioned about the load found in the van that day, the customs officers then went on to ask them about previous trips to the continent.
"In my view it was incumbent on the officers to further caution the defendants when they began investigating their suspicions about earlier trips. In my view it would be unfair for the evidence in the interviews to go before the jury, particularly in relation to earlier trips," Judge Wilson ruled.
During the legal arguments the court heard that Paul Ryme's explanation for the trip in March was that the load was for a family party to celebrate a substantial lottery win.
After offering no evidence on the charges relating to the alleged earlier trips, prosecutor John Attwood said he would not seek a trial on the charges arising out of the March trip and asked for them to lie on the court file.
He observed: "The men have lost all the goods, which have been seized, they have had to pay money to get the vehicle back, and if it had been just this sole load customs would not have prosecuted them."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article