POLICE STING BREACHED MY HUMAN RIGHTS SAYS DRUG DEALER

POLICE face being sued by an Edinburgh drug dealer after judges ruled the
force had breached his human rights during a sting operation.

Law lords have declared that police denied David McGibbon's right to
privacy by secretly recording conversations about drugs between him and
undercover officers in their car.

McGibbon, 32, was jailed for 12 months in 2000 for supplying cannabis after
being caught during a major police crackdown on drugs.

Video and audio tape recordings from the sting, carried out under Operation
Foil, provided the bulk of the Crown's evidence during a 26-day trial at
Edinburgh Sheriff Court.

Co-accused Peter Corstorphine, 43, was found guilty of being concerned in
supplying an officer with cannabis and amphetamine.

Lawyers for McGibbon are bidding to have the guilty verdict overturned.

They have claimed the recordings breached the engineer's right to privacy
under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The judges have
now agreed the tapes did breach McGibbon's human rights - paving the way
for McGibbon to take civil action against the police.

They stopped short, however, of overturning the guilty verdict against him
for drug dealing.

The law applying to undercover police work was changed in 2000, giving
detectives clearer rights to stage such stings. However, it is thought
McGibbon's case could have repercussions for other cases involving
undercover police work before 2000.

Politicians today voiced anger at the move. Scottish Tory leader David
McLetchie said: "I'm sure the public will have little sympathy for a
convicted drug dealer seeking to overturn a conviction on these grounds."

Legal experts today said the ruling appeared to pave the way for a damages
claim against police chiefs.

Margaret Smillie, of leading law firm Bannatyne Kirkwood France, said: "It
does appear that the police have breached the accused's right to privacy,
which may allow him to sue the police."

McGibbon's lawyers said they would not consider suing the Lothian and
Borders force until they knew the outcome of various appeals they are still
pursuing on his behalf.

They are claiming the force were also guilty of entrapment. And they say
the length of time he has been on bail awaiting appeal is another reason
his conviction should be quashed.

Asked if the firm would be pursuing a civil action, Gillian Law, of
Beaumont & Co, said: "Not at this juncture. We are still waiting for the
outcome of the other grounds of appeal. If they fall, we may take the rare
step of going to the Privy Council."

During the trial, the men's defence counsel claimed the two were provoked
into breaking the law.

Undercover detectives referred to only as Sean, Johnny, Jav and Rob, were
working as part of Operation Foil.

Sean met Corstorphine, then of Clearburn Crescent, Edinburgh, who
voluntarily offered to arrange buying cannabis and amphetamine.

But defence advocate Neil Breadmore claimed: "The undercover officer called
Sean became impatient and tried to move things along. He put pressure on
the accused to obtain the drugs."

Stewart Ronnie, defending McGibbon, whose address at the trial was given as
Sleigh Gardens, Edinburgh, said: "The accused was poor and vulnerable. Sean
said he would make the drug arrangement worth his while financially. He was
offering him an inducement."

Corstorphine was admonished because he had been in custody 141 days
awaiting the outcome of the trial. He is also seeking to overturn his
conviction.

Article 8 stipulates that "everyone has the right to respect for his
private and family life, his home and his correspondence". But it adds that
"a public authority" can interfere with the right "for the prevention of
disorder or crime".

In an interim ruling on the case, Lord Johnston and Lord Wheatley said
prosecutors admitted the covert recordings breached McGibbon's human rights.

But they turned the appeal down, saying it was not the fault of the Lord
Advocate, who is in charge of public prosecutions in Scotland.

A police spokeswoman said: "We are aware of the case but as it's ongoing we
are unable to comment."