Even before they left the courtroom on Friday, 28 June 2002, the Morris family was already planning an appeal. They shouted their intention to the throng of press and TV news reporters gathered below the steps of the court, anxious to record their reactions to the sensational verdict. In his small basement cell, Morris numbly awaited the arrival of his legal team. It did not take him long to figure out that David Hutchinson was responsible for his conviction. And South Wales Police had chalked up another miscarriage of justice.
Later that same afternoon Morris was taken to H.M. Prison Wakefield in Yorkshire, the largest maximum security prison in Western Europe. Within a week David Hutchinson had been ignominiously fired as Morris’ solicitor. Danny Simpson, a high-profile Yorkshire solicitor, was then instructed to act for Morris and his files were transferred from Swansea to Simpson’s law practice in Sheffield. He, together with leading criminal barrister Courtenay Griffiths QC, spent several months reviewing Morris’ case. They discovered serious failings on the part of David Hutchinson, and decided there were sufficient grounds to lodge an appeal against Morris’ conviction.
But the wheels of justice grind slowly and, even at that stage, it would take many months for Morris’ appeal to be heard. During this time, Simpson and his legal team were obliged to investigate in minute detail the huge, almost overwhelming, mountain of evidence that had accumulated in the lead-up to the trial.
While Simpson and his team were preparing the case for hearing, the relentless campaign by the Morris family, led by Dai Morris’ sister Debra Thomas, continued. An independent investigation carried out by BBC’s Panorama resulted in a documentary called Fair Cops being broadcast on national television on 21 October 2003. The programme declared: ‘For South Wales Police this was the murder from hell – not just because one of their own officers was a suspect, but because they were under intense pressure to get this case right after a series of miscarriages of justice going right back to the 1980s. Innocent people had spent years in jail while killers walked free.’ A trailer for the programme said: ‘In the summer of last year, David Morris, a labourer with a criminal record for drunkenness and violence, was jailed for life for the Clydach murders. But there was no forensic evidence linking him to the crime, and his family protest that this is the latest in a long line of miscarriages of justice in South Wales.’
Panorama accused South Wales Police of failing to investigate the case properly. Researchers discovered similarities between Morris’ case and earlier miscarriages of justice, which, according to the documentary, carried ‘disturbing echoes of past wrongdoing by South Wales Police’. The BBC’s inquiry also uncovered a number of serious failures on the part of the police, including vital witness statements that had not been acted upon.
Programme researchers discovered that in a pre-trial hearing, the trial judge had been shown a photomontage of Nicola Williams’ e-fit picture, with a photograph of Stephen Lewis next to it. But forensics expert Ashley Windsor, who was asked by Panorama to examine the two images, said that the photograph of Stephen Lewis was distorted. He remarked: ‘It’s very significant because the faces look completely different and I know this one [the photograph of Stephen Lewis] is not a true representation of how the person looked.’
Once again, the spectre of past miscarriages of justice involving wrongdoing by South Wales Police reared its head, since they appeared to have manipulated the evidence yet again to swing the trial in favour of the prosecution.
Solicitor Danny Simpson based Morris’ appeal on two grounds: first, that he did not get a fair trial; second, that his conviction was unsafe. Issues were raised supporting the Morris family’s view that David Hutchinson had contravened Law Society rules on conflict of interest. Furthermore, he had acted in a way that was detrimental to Morris’ best interests. Hutchinson had represented two parties: the Lewis twins and Dai Morris. Morris had claimed from the outset that the Lewises were responsible for the murders. Hutchinson would not, and could not, do his best for both parties given their diametrically opposed positions; it was a situation he should have avoided by ceasing to act for one or even for both parties.
The appeal hearing at Cardiff Court of Appeal began on Monday, 14 February 2005. By now, Courtenay Griffiths QC had been replaced by Michael Mansfield QC, one of the country’s leading barristers. Mr Mansfield had been involved in a number of prominent cases. These included his representation of the families of two victims shot dead in the Bloody Sunday incident in Derry in 1972, those wrongfully convicted of the IRA’s Guildford and Birmingham pub bombings, and Mohamed Al Fayed in the inquest of Diana, Princess of Wales.
During hearings in February and April, which were attended by members of the extended Power family and members of Dai Morris’s family, the three appeal court judges, headed by Lord Justice Pill, heard arguments from Michael Mansfield QC and from Patrick Harrington QC.
Michael Mansfield’s argument concerned Morris’ solicitor David Hutchinson’s failure to properly represent Morris. The grounds of appeal claimed that Hutchinson’s connection with Stephen Lewis affected the fairness of the trial and, therefore, the safety of the conviction; in addition, Hutchinson had failed to present evidence that would have been favourable to Morris’ case. Mansfield told the court that it was inexplicable why Stuart Lewis did not give evidence at the 2002 murder trial. He said it may have been because prosecuting counsel did not wish to call him. If he had, Lewis’ disciplinary report would have to be shown to the court. This would have disclosed serious disciplinary proceedings against Stuart Lewis. Hutchinson should have called Lewis to give evidence and disclose the disciplinary report to the court, but he failed to do so.
David Hutchinson denied the conflict of interest allegation, stating that he was careful to ensure that Morris was happy that he continue acting for him, even though he had already represented the Lewis brothers. He had also checked his position with the Law Society’s ethics department. By the time Morris was charged, Hutchinson said he had stopped acting for the Lewises. This claim was untrue.
Trainee solicitor Gail Evans, who worked for Hutchinson, gave a sworn statement in which she said that David Hutchinson continued to accept telephone calls from the Lewises, and entertained them in his offices long after his association with Dai Morris began. Peter Rouch QC also denied that there was a conflict of interest. He said Hutchinson had made all the evidence available to the jury.
Patrick Harrington opposed the application to appeal the case, claiming that ‘Morris’ convictions were safe’. He said: ‘[The jury] had the advantage of a comprehensive and utterly fair summing-up and they were given every assistance in defence counsel’s speech.’
Rejecting the arguments of QCs Peter Rouch and Patrick Harrington, the three judges accepted Michael Mansfield’s contention finding in favour of Dai Morris. They agreed that he had not had a fair trial because of a conflict of interest involving one of his legal team. As Lord Justice Pill declared his finding, a delighted Dai Morris mouthed a silent ‘Yes’. Morris’ convictions from 2002 were then quashed, or set aside as if it had never existed. A second trial was ordered to take place, the arraignment (plea) to be heard within two months. In October of that year, a hearing date was to be scheduled in Newport Crown Court. Morris was further remanded in custody pending the new trial.
Concluding, Lord Justice Pill awarded the prosecution its costs in the Swansea Crown Court trial and those in the Appeal Court hearing against David Hutchinson personally. As the announcement was made and the enormity of the likely amount involved dawned, Hutchinson’s mouth dropped open and his face drained of colour. The costs far exceeded one million pounds; a sum way beyond his means. The forewarnings of the two Swansea lawyers in Bristol four years earlier had finally become a reality and, by ignoring them, it had cost Hutchinson his career.
This ruling provided the Morris family with the opportunity to right the wrongs of the past, to put forward a proper defence in the next trial, and to challenge and destroy the prosecution case. Finally, the Morris family had an opportunity to engage lawyers with no hidden agenda who would be expected to fight tooth and nail for the truth, for justice, and above all, for freedom for David Morris.
While it was Round 3 to the defence, the family were guarded in their optimism. Debra Thomas, for one, had little faith in a judicial system that had already put her brother away for more than four years, and she had no faith in South Wales Police, whom, she believed, would do whatever it took to ensure that he stayed behind bars.