ON September 15, 2020, solicitors Shearman Bowen & Co. wrote to the Crown Prosecution Service. Under the subject heading of ‘JASON MOORE: Application to the CCRC to Further Review Conviction for Murder’, they listed the following request for full disclosure:

TM-Eye senior investigators, the family of the victim Robert Darby and the family of the convicted person make a highly unusual alliance, who seek to persuade Prosecution Counsel that it is imperative for the MPS and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to reconsider this conviction, disclose further material and to direct further forensic testing. TM Eye make recommendations that further DNA forensic testing to key exhibits could help prove that Moore did not stab Darby. 

The report is detailed and seeks to raise a number of pertinent issues. We do not propose to refer you to the detail of those issues, simply to invite you to consider the report, and to respond to the following requests, based on the recommendations of TM Eye: 

Recommendation 1: 

Further DNA testing of the blue jacket and tape lifts WC1/1 (mini tapings of i/s cuffs), WC1/2 (mini tape of collar) and WC1/3 (tapings from outside & exterior of top are tapings from all over Blue Jacket of extraneous hairs and fibres. These have not been examined and need to be further LCN on profile of Martin Power) and testing to establish the wearer of the jacket and presence of blood anywhere on it.

Recommendation 2: 

(a) Disclosure of the press strategy for the investigation and whether images of Jason Moore were released to the press office at any stage prior to conviction. 

(b) The dates of the release of the images and which organisations had potential access to them. 

Recommendation 3: 

To seek the disclosure of any information or intelligence held by the MPS or any other law enforcement agency with regard to ‘Tony Baloney’ that refers to the intimidation of witnesses or jurors in respect of any Court process or potential Court process. 

Recommendation 4: 

Disclosure of intelligence held by law enforcement agencies (MPS, Serious Organised Crime Agency, National Crime Squad, National Criminal Intelligence Service and Her Majesty’s Customs and Excise): 

i. Linking Martin Power to organised criminal gangs; 

ii. The intimidation of potential prosecution witnesses, including Abdul Ahmed, Paul Hunt and Paul Butler;

 
iii. Intelligence that states he was responsible for the stabbing of Robert Darby. 

Recommendation 5:

Disclosure of all identification material relating to Warren Mitchell.

Recommendation 6: 

Disclosure of all identification material relating to Jason Moore in 2012. 

Recommendation 7: 

Disclosure of any decision log, message, document or action that refers to the showing of individual images of potential suspects to witnesses. 

Recommendation 8: 

Disclosure of material related to Detective Constable Tom Thear.

Recommendation 9: 

To seek the disclosure referred to at paragraph 176 and disclosure of any information or intelligence held by the MPS or any other law agency, with regard to Paul Hunt and/or his family that refers to threats or intimidation towards him and/or his family, for him giving evidence at court.

Recommendation 10: 

Disclosure of any documentation to show what forensic testing or otherwise was carried out on each of the knives taken from Power’s home to eliminate them as a potential murder weapon.

Recommendation 11: 

Disclosure of all material in a sanitised format that suggests that Martin Power was the person who stabbed Robert Darby.

Recommendation 12: 

Disclosure of all material in a sanitised format that suggests that Jason Moore was the person who stabbed Robert Darby.

​

​

Head of London Homicide rejects request and refuses to co-operate

On February 9, 2021, Shearman Bowen received a response from the prosecutor responsible for the Homicide Unit in London, Julius Capon. In essence, they are still refusing to disclose anything as set out in the above recommendations.

Capon wrote: “I must consider disclosure of any material 'that might cast doubt upon the safety of the conviction' and the presumption must be that any such material is disclosed to you unless there is a good reason not to. I also agree that should I have reason to believe that there was a real prospect that further enquiries will reveal something that may cast doubt upon the safety of a conviction I should ask the Metropolitan Police to make those enquiries.

The report from the ex-policeman (TM-Eye) makes several recommendations. These can be divided into:

​

Further forensic testing
Disclosure of material relating to strategy
Intelligence relating to Baloney
Other requests for disclosure of intelligence or documents 
 
My responses are in italics:

​

Further DNA testing of a jacket that neither Mr Moore nor Mr Power accept that they were wearing at the time that Mr Darby was stabbed. 

There is no reason to believe that any relevant material would be obtained from such analysis nor that it would cast doubt on the safety of Mr Moore’s conviction if it did. 

​

Disclosure of any press strategy in relation to Mr Moore following the killing of Mr Darby and prior to Mr Moore’s conviction. 

During any ID procedure a witness is asked whether they have seen images. The suggestion made in the report appears to be of a conspiracy involving organised criminals and the police. In such circumstances there is no purpose in asking what details were released. There was ample opportunity to explore all the circumstances of any identification during the trial and your client apparently accepts that he was at the scene of the murder. 

​

To seek disclosure of intelligence relating to a Mr Baloney. 

 

I note that “baloney” is a slang expression for foolish or deceitful talk. This is a joke in rather poor taste and though the report has been sent to the Police I shall not ask for enquiries to be made specifically in relation to baloney.

​

Part of this recommendation is repeated in Recommendation 11. 

In respect of recommendations 4-12 I can confirm that I am satisfied that the Crown have complied with our duties of disclosure. As I have indicated I have sent the report to the Police and if they have any other material that casts doubt upon the safety of Mr Moore’s conviction, I am sure they will send it to me.

​

Putting aside any correspondence with the Appeals and Review Unit relating to Mr Moore’s failed appeal, I see that since Mr Moore’s conviction you have written to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) six times making various requests. These have ranged from duplicate copies of jury bundles to material relating to enquiries into corrupt ex-policemen. Those letters have been answered by Ms Sapanoglu with courtesy and patience. It is unfortunate that your client does not have confidence in the reviewing lawyer responsible for prosecuting the case that lead to his murder conviction, but she has plainly worked diligently to ensure that justice was done, and I do not share his view.

​

In refusing leave to appeal out of time and rejecting the application to hear fresh evidence I note that Sharp LJ commented on the “pervasive smell” of the supposed new material from the defence. That pervasive smell lingers. The CPS has been generous with time and resources to assist you but that must end. Unless, there are any new points that you need to raise we will not answer further correspondence from you in relation to this case.”
 

 

Other exhibits of interest

Although not included in the solicitor’s list of items (left), there are other exhibits that arouse interest and are possibly also worthy of closer scrutiny and re-examination . . .

* Exhibit TRB/503 in sealed bag no. D6120685

Power's clothing police found hidden in a black suitcase at the Cranbrook Road, Ilford office he shared with his friend Warren Mitchell. This in itself seems very odd.

Crime Scene Manager Suzanne Wright carried out a 'visual examination' but when she found no obvious traces of blood, she handed the clothes to DC William Cline-Bailey.

Point of Interest: Would forensic analysis reveal any traces of Rob Darby’s DNA on Power’s clothing?

* Exhibit KFS/14

Yellow & black retractable Stanley knife (above) used by Rob Darby to attack Martin Power.

Question: Would further forensic analysis find any traces of Power's DNA on the knife, which was also handled at the scene by Darby’s friend Paul Hunt?

* Rob Darby's white shirt and dark trousers

Point of Interest: Would a forensic test discover fibres that may have been passed from Power to Darby during their physical altercation? If there is DNA evidence linking Power (but not Jason) to Darby, it strongly suggests that Jason could not have stabbed the victim.

(DNA report on Darby's knife and clothing was compiled by Louise Elizabeth Constance (WS dated November 24, 2005, pages 93-101.)

* Exhibit STW/37 in sealed bag no. C 3117793 (see left Recommendation 10)

Black-handled knife found by PC Ben Smith of the police’s Viking 101 search team three days after the incident (27/8/05). Constable Smith said the knife was "buried up to the hilt at the foot of a tree behind the dog kennel in the garden" at Martin Power's family home in Hyatts Green, near Brentwood, Essex.

Point of Interest: Was it ever forensically tested for the presence of Darby's blood? This could be the weapon that inflicted the fatal wound, and would have cast serious doubts on Power's innocence had it been mentioned in court.

* Exhibit KER/0984557/05

Four photos of Paul Hunt, the third man in the street, taken at Ilford police station (24/8/05) that were logged by Assistant Forensic Practitioner Karen Elizabeth Roberts (5/10/05).

Point of Interest: To compare strong similarities in facial/hair appearance between Hunt and Jason at the time of the incident.

* Police 'Decision Log' in respect of their reconstruction of the crime scene

Point of Interest: To find out WHY police abandoned their reconstruction.

* Pocket books, Action books and Policy books of investigating police officers early on in the case, particularly those of DCI John MacDonald, Tony Taylor and the scenes of crime police who first spoke to Abdul Ahmed, Paul Hunt and Sally Palmer – BEFORE all three were transported to and interviewed at Ilford police station on 24/8/05.

Exhibit CAT/1 - DI Carl Tipping's initial advice/guidance notice, emailed to DI Gary Fermor (at 7.00pm on 24/8/05).

Point of Interest: To find out exactly what was said by witnesses, to others and each other, in the immediate aftermath.

* Seal bag 42514512 & LM/2 Seal bag 42514522 Exhibits LM/1 

Action note by police regarding the unknown 999 caller.

Point of Interest: To discover why police didn't trace and interview the 'mystery' caller who apparently saw some "pushing and shoving" going on in Perth Road.
 

* Driver's seatbelt in Power's car

In a letter from CPS lawyer O. Sapanoglu to Jason's solicitor Mark Bowen (29/4/15), he said that Crime Scene Manager Suzanne Wright had stated that there was "no requirement to take the seatbelts because the clips were seized. The seatbelt itself is not an item good for fingerprints/DNA and are not routinely taken unless specified by the SIO. They were not requested and the clips were believed to be the best option for possible prints/DNA. Please note that this is from Ms Wright's distant recollection of the examination; there is no written document that can be found to document this rationale".

Point of Interest: Any trace of Darby's blood on Power's seatbelt would suggest that Power was in physical contact with the deceased at the moment he was stabbed – not just seconds earlier, when he claimed he was supposedly struck on the head by the butt end of Darby's knife.