It was not until September /October 2005 that legal arguments finally got underway, my husband having been on remand for just over 2 years. What followed was a long complex trial the jury found my husband guilty on count one and acquitted him of count 2. On the 9th June 2oo6, he was given an 18-year prison sentence. Two of the remaining four defendants were acquitted on all counts and the remaining two were found guilty of both counts.

The count (count one) which my husband was found guilty of, was an alleged global conspiracy to import cocaine. Cocaine was not mentioned at any time. Cocaine was not identified, or even evidenced in any country or in any amount. How do you import suggested cocaine? Only by using the words suspect, believe, infer, suggest, was the crown able to present the case against all defendants. These were the damning words wholly used by the prosecution and the then NCS/SOCA. Of course words like suggest, infer, believe and suspect should have no credibility in a court of law, they are not factual statements.

This is a very complex case spanning 11 years, and quite remarkably, it is still ongoing. Given the voluminous and complex nature of these proceedings, all that can be sensibly highlighted here are the basics.

Firstly, it should be noted that, SOCA’s predecessor, the National Crime Squad (NCS) dedicated a complete NCS and CPS branch to investigate my husband and his alleged criminal associates. It is difficult to estimate the total costs of these proceedings but it is fair to say that it must run into tens of millions of pounds. This begs the first question, how can the NCS/SOCA justify the appointment of so much time, effort, resources and money on my husband when the countries’ finances are in such a state. What would the British taxpayer have to say about such a huge waste of money?

My husband and four others were charged on two counts of conspiracy to import cocaine from South America. Predominantly the evidence fell into three categories:

1) Observation – surveillance evidence (just normal meetings)

2) Probes that were secretly placed in the vehicles of my husband and his co-defendants

3) Telephone intercepts, allegedly intercepted in Colombia by the Colombian authorities

None of the above evidence was ever, accepted as authentic and genuine.