Law Assignment: Conspiracy of Terrorism

Submitted By

Law Assignment: Conspiracy of Terrorism

Introduction

This study is going to analyze and assess the case of a criminal offense against William and Constance charged with conspiracy to possess articles for a purpose connected with an act of terrorism. The study in accordance with the charges will identify potential items of evidence and will arrange them in orderly manner. The paper will also highlight some potential inferences and will analyze if any legal questions may arise about the use of such evidence, such as admissibility. These charges of conspiracy and possession of articles with the purpose of criminal act are trailed against the Criminal Law Act 1977 section one, and Terrorism Act 2000 section 57.

Background of the Case

William and Constance's father has been convicted of the murder of a neighbour in a small town in Wiltshire. This was the conviction which both William and Constance fervently believe was a miscarriage of justice. A detective inspector in charge of the original investigation, Jack Whicher, received information from an informant that William and Constance were planning a campaign of violence to publicise their father's conviction. Whicher, acting without any authorisation, travels to London and enters the flat where William and Constance live. He conceals a microphone in the living room. Whicher tapes a telephone conversation between a person he believes to be Constance and an unknown caller in which Constance says, 'We can't wait any longer. Dad's health is getting worse. It is imperative we act decisively and we act now. Both of us agree.' Whicher is told by his informant that William and Constance rent a lock-up garage in a different part of London.

Whicher obtains a search warrant and searches the garage where he discovers several sacks of ammonium nitrate. This is a commonly used garden fertiliser but which can be used to make an explosive if mixed with diesel oil. William and Constance are arrested and interviewed. They both explain that they are taking the fertiliser to their house in Wiltshire as it is cheaper to buy fertiliser in London.

After caution, Constance is interviewed. She denies that she took part in the telephone conversation and suggests that it must be another person living in the flat. Whicher calls in Savill, a phoneticist, who compares the telephone conversation with recordings of Constance's voice. Savill's conclusion is that Constance's voice and the voice on recordings were one and the same person. Savill has developed a system of comparing voices by meticulous listening to recordings of the suspect and the recordings of the event itself. His article on the technique in the journal, International and Comparative Phonetics, was criticised by other phoneticists for its overly subjective approach and its lack of methodological rigour. The technique has not become generally accepted in the field of phonetics.

William has a morbid fear of enclosed spaces and reacts badly to detention in a police cell. Whicher explained to William that the police have the power to detain him for several weeks under ...