POUNDS 12M DRUGS CASE FAILS AFTER INFORMER ROW

A case involving allegations of a pounds 12-million drug ring and police
corruption has collapsed after the prosecution failed to disclose 2,000
pages of extra evidence to defence lawyers. After 11 weeks of legal argument
and submissions, Judge Harvey Crush halted the case at Maidstone Crown Court
in Kent. Lawyers had claimed that the delay over the papers and criticism
concerning a supergrass witness meant that the defendants could not get a
fair trial because of an "abuse of process".

When the Crown Prosecution Service finally delivered the papers, defence
lawyers claimed that they revealed that police had given "sweeteners" to the
supergrass, who was involved in the alleged cannabis ring.

On Monday the judge, a former solicitor, will give his reasons for halting
the trial of Detective Sergeant John Bull, a London police officer working
for the National Crime Squad, Paul Humphreys, a Kent businessman, and six
others, including Mr Bull's brother Peter.

The proceedings, which involved 18 counsel, has already cost up to pounds 5
million. A jury was sworn in but then discharged without hearing a word of
the trial. The case involved Kent Police's serious crimes unit, Scotland
Yard's anti-corruption team, CIB3, and the National Crime Squad and took
more than two years to bring to trial. Detective Sgt Bull, 43, a former
member of the South East Regional Crime Squad in West Sussex, is still
suspended.

Police had alleged that between 1996 and 1998, the men smuggled cannabis
into Britain from mainland Europe. During investigations led by the Kent
force, 800kg of cannabis worth pounds 1.5 million were recovered and a
series of arrests made throughout 1998. Three suspects were never caught.
Defence lawyers were suspicious about the role of the supergrass, Richard
Price, a roofer and professional wrestler who was said to have been the
right-hand man of Mr Humphreys, alleged to be the central figure in the
cannabis ring. He admitted a series of charges, including involvement in the
drugs ring and other offences, and was to have given evidence.

Under the Criminal Procedure and Investigation Act, 1996, the Crown
Prosecution Service has to certify to defence lawyers that they have
received all the material on the case which might undermine the Crown's
case. In March last year, a Kent CPS official issued the certificate and the
CPS stuck to its position when questioned by defence lawyers at a series of
pretrial hearings.

When the trial started, defence lawyers requested more papers so that they
could test the credibility of the informant. During legal submissions, the
CPS is reported to have maintained that it had more than met the
requirements on disclosing material. But when challenged, it started to
release more papers. In submissions to the judge, defence lawyers also
claimed that excessive pressure was put on Mr Price to become an informant.
The papers they finally obtained showed that he had spoken in more detail
than they had been told. It also allowed the defence to allege that indirect
inducements were being used. In drugs cases, courts order assets to be
seized. However, Mr Price's wife had been allowed to keep one of the
family's two Volvo cars. Later, a High Court judge had agreed to allow her
to keep pounds 35,000 from the sale of the family home.

Philip Kelly, solicitor for Mr Humphreys, said that there had been
"non-disclosure of key information". He added: "The 2,000 pages enabled us
to have information on which we could test Richard Price and his
credibility, which was the key issue of the case."