CPS News Brief

Statement in Operation Kaddie

The Crown Prosecution Service has decided that no further action should be taken against a 75 year-old man who was investigated by South Yorkshire Police for allegations of non-recent sexual abuse. 

Martin Goldman, Chief Crown Prosecutor for Yorkshire and Humberside, said: 

“The CPS has carefully reviewed evidence relating to claims of non-recent sexual offences dating between 1958 and 1983 made by four men.

“We have decided that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute.

“This decision has been made in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors and our guidance for prosecutors on cases of sexual offences.  

“The CPS worked with police during the investigation. This has helped minimise the time needed to reach a decision once we received the complete file of evidence on 10 May.

"The complainants have been informed and provided with a full explanation in writing."

Further Information 

It is not the function of the CPS to decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence, but to make fair, independent and objective assessments about whether it is appropriate to present charges for the criminal court to consider.

The CPS assessment of any case is not in any sense a finding of, or implication of, any guilt or criminal conduct.  It is not a finding of fact, which can only be made by a court, but rather an assessment of what it might be possible to prove to a court, in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

This assessment is based on the evidence available arising out of the police investigation and not on the evidence that is likely to be gathered by the defence, and likely to be used to test the prosecution evidence. The CPS charging decision is therefore necessarily an assessment on the basis of the evidence that is available to the CPS at the time the decision is made.

CPS prosecutors must also keep every case under review, so that they take account of any change in circumstances that occurs as the case develops, including what becomes known of the defence case. If appropriate, the CPS may change the charges or stop a case.

First North East prosecution for controlling or coercive behaviour

A Cleveland man has today been sentenced in what is believed to be the North East’s first prosecution for the new criminal offence of controlling or coercive behaviour.

Richard James Wilshaw, 36, of Melsonby Court, Billingham, was sentenced to a total of three and a half years, after pleading guilty to one count of engaging in controlling or coercive behaviour, one count of perverting the course of justice and two counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The charges all relate to an attack by Wilshaw on his partner in December of last year.

Gerry Wareham, Chief Crown Prosecutor for CPS North East said:

“Domestic abuse can have a devastating impact on the lives of victims and the CPS is committed to robust and effective prosecution. 

“Wilshaw alternated between menacing and loving behaviour. When the victim followed Wilshaw’s rules, he was loving and pleasant, but when the victim resisted, his behaviour changed and became harmful, including forcing her to stay in his flat against her will. This is recognisable as controlling or coercive behaviour, where one person holds more power than the other within an intimate or family relationship.

“There are a number of reasons why people may not report this abuse, including some victims not realising the full extent of the manipulation because it can be incredibly nuanced. The nature of the offence is such that it is often very difficult for victims who may feel unable to come forward or frightened of the consequences if they do. My message to victims is clear – if you feel you are subject to this kind of controlling abusive behaviour then please come forward and the CPS will do everything we can to bring offenders to justice.”

Crown Prosecution Service statement: Operation Lydd

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has considered a file of evidence from the Metropolitan Police relating to one suspect in connection with allegations made concerning the movement and alleged ill treatment of Abdel Hakim Belhadj and his wife, Fatima Boudchar, and Sami Al Saadi and his wife and children from countries in South East Asia to Libya in 2004.    

Sue Hemming, Head of the CPS’s Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division, said:

“Following a thorough investigation, the CPS has decided that there is insufficient evidence to charge the suspect with any criminal offence.

“We made our decision based upon all the available admissible evidence and after weighing up all of the information we have been provided with.”    

Assessing the evidence

On 5 January 2012, the joint Crown Prosecution Service and Metropolitan Police Service panel set up to consider complaints of ill treatment against detainees advised that further investigation was needed in respect of these allegations.

Sue Hemming, the Head of Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division, who had been appointed as the reviewing lawyer and decision maker in respect of these matters, gave some initial advice and the MPS opened the Operation Lydd investigation.

The terms of reference required the MPS ‘to investigate the treatment whilst awaiting transfer, the circumstances of transfer and also the treatment and interviewing once in Libya’ of the Belhadj and Al Saadi families.   

In what has been a thorough and painstaking investigation, evidence and information was obtained from a large number of records, individuals and organisations including the Secret Intelligence Service, the Security Service, other Government Departments and authorities in other countries.  

Evidence was also taken from alleged victims and other witnesses during the course of this four year investigation. The CPS also considered the closed report from the Gibson Inquiry.   

All those concerned have been mindful of the obligation that allegations such as these must be investigated thoroughly and in accordance with Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.   

Given the serious and highly sensitive matters involved and the complex nature of the investigation called for, it has inevitably taken some time both to investigate and review.

The investigation is now complete and the MPS requested a charging decision in respect of one suspect.

Before making the final decision, the CPS obtained detailed advice from Richard Whittam QC who at the time of instruction was First Senior Treasury Counsel.   

The CPS also worked closely with the Metropolitan Police throughout the process.

 

Possible offences and the findings on each

It is not claimed that the suspect directly committed the alleged acts but that he aided and abetted, counselled or procured the offending from the UK.

As the movement and alleged ill-treatment took place outside the UK, the CPS first had to decide if it had the ability to prosecute each offence.

A number of offences were considered:

• Aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring any offence of kidnap, false imprisonment or assault    
• Aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring any offence of torture
• Misconduct in public office

 

Aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring any offence of kidnap, false imprisonment or assault: There is no jurisdiction to consider these offences.

The alleged acts of kidnap, false imprisonment and assault happened abroad, and the law does not allow the CPS to prosecute the secondary offences of aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring for these offences unless the principal offences took place in England and Wales or jurisdiction abroad is provided by law.

Aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring any offence of torture: The law provides jurisdiction for offending abroad.  The CPS has concluded that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute because of the conclusions below.       

Misconduct in public office: This can be based upon the conduct in this country and the suspect concerned was a public official. The CPS has concluded that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute.     

Misconduct in public office requires the prosecution to prove the following four elements:

• A public officer acting as such
• Wilfully neglects to perform a duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself
• To such a degree as to amount to the abuse of the public’s trust in that office holder
• Without reasonable excuse or justification

 

Conclusions

We have considered a substantial amount of evidence.   

The security marking of the potential evidence in this case is such that we are unable to provide a public summary of the material submitted to us. Whilst the evidence is in some respects comprehensive particularly given the substantial amount of documentary material which still exists, it has been understandably difficult to piece together events from over 10 years ago with enough precision or for witnesses to recall matters in sufficient detail to prove the elements of the alleged offences.  

It is clear, though, that officials from the UK did not physically detain, transfer or ill-treat the alleged victims directly, nor did the suspect have any connection to the initial physical detention of either man or their families.   

Following careful review, the CPS has concluded that there is sufficient evidence to support the contention that the suspect had:

1. been in communication with individuals from the foreign countries responsible for the detention and transfer of the Belhadj and Al Saadi families;  
2. disclosed aspects of what was occurring to others within this country; and
3. sought political authority for some of his actions albeit not within a formal written process nor in detail which covered all his communications and conduct.

After additional investigation and careful consideration, it remains unclear what impact or influence the communications and conduct of the suspect had on the actions of decision makers abroad.   

It is also impossible to reconcile conflicting evidence about what happened at the time and shortly afterwards or to prove each element of the offences to the required criminal standard. The burden of proof in respect of any criminal matter is on the prosecution and it is important that the Crown is able to advance a coherent case.  The evidence is such that it is insufficiently clear for us to do so.    

The Code for Crown Prosecutors requires the evidential stage of the Code Test to be met before the public interest can be considered.  Therefore applying the Code Test, as it must, the CPS has concluded that there is insufficient evidence to afford a realistic prospect of conviction for any criminal offence; in other words, we are unable to say that a jury considering all the available evidence is more likely than not to convict.        

The CPS's function is not to decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence, but to make fair, independent and objective assessments about whether it is appropriate to present charges for the criminal court to consider. The CPS assessment of any case is not in any sense a finding of, or implication of, any guilt or criminal conduct. It is not a finding of fact, which can only be made by a court, but rather an assessment of what it might be possible to prove to a court, in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

This assessment is based on the evidence available arising out of the police investigation and not on the evidence that is likely to be gathered by the defence, and likely to be used to test the prosecution evidence. The CPS charging decision is therefore necessarily an assessment on the basis of the evidence that is available to the CPS at the time the decision is made. 

CPS prosecutors must also keep every case under review, so that they take account of any change in circumstances that occurs as the case develops, including what becomes known of the defence case. If appropriate, the CPS may change the charges or stop a case.

 

Background

Operation Lydd began 5 January 2012. A joint CPS/ Metropolitan Police Service panel was set up to consider complaints of ill treatment against detainees.

The terms of reference required the MPS ‘to investigate the treatment whilst awaiting transfer, the circumstances of transfer and also the treatment and interviewing once in Libya’ of the Belhadj and Al Saadi families.   

The panel advised that further investigation was needed in respect of these allegations.

CPS prosecutors on call during Euro 2016

A specialist team of CPS prosecutors will be on call during the European Championships (Euro 2016) which kick off in France on 10 June.  They will act as a point of contact to the UK Football Policing Unit (UKFPU) and assist them in seeking a Civil Football Banning Order against individuals in appropriate cases. 

Ahead of Euro 2016, CPS has worked with UKFPU and Foreign and Commonwealth Office colleagues to ensure that arrangements are in place for the French courts to deal with appropriate cases.  CPS has also worked with HMCTS colleagues to agree the operation of a number of courts throughout England and Wales to deal with Euro 2016 related cases.

220,000 tickets have been sold to British fans for the tournament and all Euro 2016 matches fall under the provisions of the Football Spectators Act.  This means that public order offences and offences of violence that are committed during or following a Euro 2016 match may be considered football related and therefore Football Banning Orders may be applicable. 

John Montague, CPS National Lead Football Prosecutor said: 

“The European Championships are set to be a fantastic occasion and we want all the fans to enjoy the tournament in safety. 

“Should this safety be compromised in any way by fans from the UK, our prosecutors will be on hand to advise the police on criminal charges and where a Football Banning Order is considered appropriate. 

“We hope all travelling England and Wales fans enjoy their time in France and that it is an unforgettable experience for all the right reasons.”

Further information

• The eight specialist football prosecutors will be on call from 0500 hours – 0100 hours the following morning for the duration of the tournament.  
• Approximately 220,000 tickets have been sold to British fans, but we can expect many more to travel to France to enjoy the tournament.
• Football Banning Orders are designed to prevent football-related violence and disorder. They can be sought against an individual either on conviction for a relevant offence or by way of complaint where the police apply for an order from the court. 
• Only a court can impose a football banning order. Orders can be between 3 and 10 years in duration. 
• Breach of a banning order is a criminal offence, punishable by a maximum sentence of 6 months in prison or a fine of up to £5,000, or both. In addition a further banning order may be imposed. 
• The large majority of those who are subject to football banning orders received them because of incidents at or relating to domestic football games rather than at international fixtures.

Paedophile who targeted vulnerable communities abroad to abuse children sentenced

Richard Huckle was sentenced today to life imprisonment with a minimum term of almost 24 years for 71 counts of child sexual abuse.

The 30-year-old targeted communities abroad to carry out the abuse on young children, including multiple rapes.

Anthony Hill, International Justice and Organised Crime prosecutor at the Crown Prosecution Service, said:

“It is hard to put into words the sheer depravity of this case. For almost nine years, Richard Huckle subjected at least 23 children, some of them very young, to the most horrifying abuse imaginable.

“He deliberately targeted and groomed vulnerable communities abroad to gain their trust.

“He took photographs of the abuse to upload on the dark web to share worldwide. He created a score card where he gave himself points for different types of abuse and wrote a paedophile manual giving tips on how to abuse victims and avoid detection.

“Borders are not a barrier to justice and the CPS worked closely with the NCA to painstakingly review all of the evidence from the internet, his computers and cameras. The strength of our evidence led to him pleading guilty to 71 charges.

“Due to the determination of the CPS and investigating authorities, this dangerous man has been brought to justice and is no longer a risk to children.”

Additional information

Huckle identified and targeted an impoverished community in Malaysia with the specific intention of raping and abusing children within that community.

Richard Huckle pleaded guilty to 71 counts committed over the course of nine years. This included 13 offences of rape, nine offences involving penetrative sexual activity, 34 offences of sexual activity or assault and the taking of very many indecent photographs and videos.

Sentencing details

Richard Huckle was sentenced today to life imprisonment with a minimum tariff of 23 years and 242 days.

Dutch yacht drug smugglers sentenced

Two men have been sentenced today to a total of over 34 years for smuggling cocaine worth over £41 million in a yacht.

Hendrik Brugmans and Raymond Aalders smuggled the cocaine hidden in a yacht, known as ‘Golem’. Both pleaded guilty and were sentenced at Maidstone Crown Court.

Lorna Vincent, reviewing lawyer in the International Justice and Organised Crime Division at the CPS, said:

“Hendrik Brugmans and Raymond Aalders smuggled nearly a tonne of cocaine, which has an estimated wholesale value of over £41 million. They hid the cocaine inside the yacht in a workbench, seat floors, a wardrobe and a fresh water tank.

“The yacht was found seven miles off the South East of Rye within British territorial waters, where Hendrik Brugmans was found as the owner of the yacht and Raymond Aalders was aboard.

“The strength of our evidence left the two men, who were in pursuit of enormous profits, with no choice but to plead guilty. This case shows no matter how sophisticated the drugs importation, the CPS will work hard to bring offenders to justice.”

Sentencing details

Hendrik Brugmans: 20 years 9 months

Raymond Aalders: 14 years

Man sentenced after pleading guilty to murdering woman he met on an online dating site

Carl Langdell has today, 3 June, been sentenced to life imprisonment at St. Albans Crown Court after pleading guilty to the murder of Katie Locke. 

Adrian Foster, Chief Crown Prosecutor for Thames and Chiltern Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said: “This case involved the tragic murder of 23-year-old Katie Locke by Carl Langdell in Waltham Cross last December.  

"We know that nothing will bring Katie back to her family and friends, but we hope that the conviction and today’s sentence bring them at least a small sense that justice has been done. Our thoughts are very much with them all at this time.  We have worked closely with Hertfordshire Constabulary since this investigation was launched and as a result of the hard work and diligence of the prosecution team, a just outcome has been achieved."

Background

After chatting on the dating site ‘Plenty of Fish,’ for about two weeks, Katie agreed to meet Langdell on Wednesday, 23 December 2015, in London for their first date of dinner and drinks.  Langdell had told Katie that he was a lawyer and had his own firm, which were lies.  The truth was that over the previous two years he had increasingly suffered from mental illness and had spent time in psychiatric hospitals.  At the end of this first date and in the early hours of 24 December, Katie agreed to go back to a hotel in Waltham Cross with him.  At the hotel, Langdell strangled her in the hotel room before disposing of her body in the hotel grounds.

 

On the morning of Christmas Eve, realising that Katie had not returned home, her family and friends made a concerted effort to identify Langdell.  Through internet searches they identified him and contacted him through Facebook.  Langdell replied saying Katie had left in a taxi and he did not know where she was.  They established an address in Waltham Cross he was associated with and Katie’s Father travelled there desperate to locate his daughter.  On arrival, he was shocked to learn that Langdell had just admitted to his Mother that he had killed Katie, so he called the police and Langdell was located and arrested.

Despite telling the police where to locate Katie’s body when he was arrested, Langdell answered ‘no comment’ during police interviews, but was evidentially linked to the murder.  On 18 March 2016, at St Albans Crown Court, due to the strength of evidence against him, and recognising that justice had caught up with him, he pleaded guilty to murdering Katie. 

Ryan Kennedy convicted of three counts of rape against three women

Ryan Kennedy convicted of three counts of rape against three women

 

Ryan Kennedy has today been convicted of three counts of rape. He was found guilty at Gloucester Crown Court. The jury acquitted him of two other counts of rape and one count of attempted rape. They could not decide on the remaining eight counts alleging similar offences.

The case involved victims who had all been in relationships with Ryan Kennedy, which very quickly became controlling and abusive.

Ben Samples, senior prosecutor at the CPS said:

“Ryan Kennedy convinced his victims that they had no choice but to do as they were told. He was emotionally, sexually and physically abusive, putting his needs above all else.

“Kennedy controlled his victims by emotional manipulation and, in one case, raped his victim as a punishment.

“Consent must be freely given and can be taken back at any point. In this case the victims’ protests were ignored, and they then felt it would be futile or dangerous to do anything but submit to all that Kennedy demanded. I would like to thank the victims for their bravery in coming forward, which can often be difficult and daunting.”

Details of the convicted charges:

Three counts of rape, contrary to section 1 (1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003

Restaurant owner guilty of manslaughter

A restaurant owner has been convicted of manslaughter when a customer with a peanut allergy died after eating a meal containing peanut powder.

Martin Goldman, Chief Crown Prosecutor, CPS Yorkshire and Humberside said:

“This is a truly tragic case in which Paul Wilson lost his life entirely needlessly. Mohammed Zaman directly caused the death of Mr Wilson by causing him to be served a meal that he knew contained potentially lethal peanut powder.

“Zaman substituted almond powder with a cheaper ground nut mix, which contained peanuts. He failed to warn customers, failed to properly train his employees and failed to take any action following a previous serious allergic reaction. These failures led to Mr Wilson’ death.

“In this conviction, the CPS has sent a very clear message to the catering industry: there is a duty of care to your customers. If you ignore your responsibilities and regulations and put lives at real risk then we will not hesitate to prosecute.”

Company charged with corporate manslaughter after the death of two employees

The Director of Martinisation (London) Ltd, Martin Gutaj, has been charged with health and safety offences and the company has been charged with corporate manslaughter and health and safety offences after two men died whilst working for the company.  In November 2014, Tomasz Procko and Karol Symanski fell from a first floor balcony as they tried to hoist a sofa up from the pavement in Cadogan Square, SW1. 

Zoe Martin, Special Crime & Counter Terrorism Division, said: “I have today issued a written charge and requisition to Martinisation (London) Ltd in respect of two health and safety offences and offences of corporate manslaughter. I have also issued a written charge and requisition to company director Martin Gutaj in respect of two health and safety offences.

“The next hearing will take place on 6 June at Westminster Magistrates Court.

"Criminal proceedings against Mr Gutaj and the company will now begin and they have a right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings."

Man sentenced for 1990 attack on three young girls

William McMahon, 60, was sentenced today at Snaresbrook Crown Court to a total of 18 years and two months imprisonment for sexual offences committed on 29 June 1990. The victims were three girls, two aged 13 and one aged 12. McMahon pleaded guilty on 25^th April 2016, the first day of trial, to three counts of false imprisonment, three counts of indecent assault and one count of buggery.

Catherine Wear, CPS London reviewing lawyer, said:

“More than 25 years after this horrific attack on three young girls William McMahon has now been sentenced for his crimes.

“On 29^th June 1990 three girls had been innocently playing in an area known as Devil’s Canyon in Plaistow, a disused mortuary where young people would often meet up and play.

“The defendant trapped the girls in the abandoned building, telling them to face the wall. He did everything he could to disguise his identity, including making the girls put their clothes over their heads and giving them false information about himself. This made it very difficult for the police to identify him at the time of the attack.

“McMahon was identified as the perpetrator of this offence in 2015 when a DNA sample was taken from him for unrelated matters. Through painstaking police work and a strong prosecution case justice has at last been done.

“Sadly one of the victims died in 2004 from an unrelated illness. I would like to thank the other two women for their support of this prosecution and we would like to recognise the courage shown by all the victims in coming forward to report these offences.

“The overwhelming evidence in this case left McMahon no choice but to plead guilty and accept responsibility for his crimes.”

Six people sentenced for £10 million money laundering enterprise

Six people have been sentenced to a total of over 28 years for their involvement in a money laundering enterprise.

Razwan Munir, Mohammed Kamran Chaudhry, Nokhaz Haider, Imran Sarwar, Umar Haq and Waqar Afzal were sentenced at Manchester Crown Court after pleading guilty to their involvement.

Nigel James, Specialist Prosecutor at the International Justice and Organised Crime Division of the Crown Prosecution Service, said:

“These individuals were part of a sophisticated money laundering enterprise involving around £10 million. They received cash from crimes like drug dealing and paid it into bank accounts. They then transferred the money abroad to hide its criminal origin from authorities.

“The CPS worked with the police to build a strong case which led to them pleading guilty. The evidence included telephone records, such as the number of calls made and at what times. We also looked at messages between the individuals, including Imran Sarwar joking in October 2014 that the target for laundering cash was £9 million by Christmas.

“There was clear evidence the individuals were living lavish lifestyles beyond their declared incomes, shown by their frequent holidays abroad, expensive cars and receipts for designer clothes.

“The CPS will now take steps to recover the criminal assets of these individuals under the Proceeds of Crime Act.”

Additional information:

At first the defendants went to the Post Office depositing £5,000 in cash, which then increased to £10,000 a day.

At one point, they took in holdalls carrying £100,000 cash. One Post Office estimated that about £2 million was paid in at a branch. This cash was paid into bank accounts which were held in the names of dormant limited companies to give the appearance of legitimate trading.

Charge:

Entering into or becoming concerned in a money laundering arrangement, contrary to section 328(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Sentencing details:

Razwan Munir – Nine years imprisonment

Mohammed Kamran Chaudhry – Four years, seven months imprisonment

Nokhaz Haider – Four years, six months imprisonment

Imran Sarwar – Four years, six months imprisonment

Umar Haq – Three years imprisonment

Waqar Afzal – Three years imprisonment

Man sentenced for controlling or coercive behaviour

Sam Williams has been sentenced at Newcastle Upon Tyne Magistrates Court for offences including controlling or coercive behaviour.

Sam Williams, 28, pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate relationship. He also pleaded guilty to assault by beating and two counts of criminal damage to property valued under £5,000.

Lorraine Anson, reviewing lawyer at the Crown Prosecution Service, said:

“Sam Williams subjected his victim to controlling and coercive behaviour. He rarely allowed the victim to go out alone but when she did he would keep track of where she had gone, including making her keep parking receipts.

“He continuously belittled the victim and made her believe she needed only him, pushing her family and friends away. He checked her social media accounts and phone messages, and controlled her appearance by telling her what to wear and changing her hairstyle. After one argument Sam Williams physically assaulted the victim who escaped and called the police.

“This behaviour is sadly recognisable as being controlling and coercive. When one person holds more power than the other and creates fear around breaking someone else’s rules, it can strip people of their independence. This is exactly the behaviour that the offence of controlling and coercive behaviour aims to target and eradicate”.

 

Sentencing details:

Controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate relationship - 18 weeks imprisonment, suspended for 18 months, with a Community Order for 18 months.

Assault by beating - 18 weeks imprisonment concurrent, suspended for 18 months.

Two counts of criminal damage to property valued under £5,000 – ordered to pay costs

Man who “controlled every aspect of victim’s life” convicted for controlling or coercive behaviour

Adrian Lee has been convicted today for controlling or coercive behaviour.

Adrian Lee, 21, was convicted at Liverpool Magistrates’ Court for engaging in controlling/coercive behaviour in an intimate/family relationship.

Karen Renshall, reviewing lawyer at the Crown Prosecution Service, said:

“Controlling or coercive behaviour can have an extreme psychological and emotional impact on victims. Today’s conviction shows that this behaviour will simply not be tolerated.

“No-one has the right to restrict someone else’s freedom. Adrian Lee controlled every aspect of his victim’s life. He prevented her from seeing her friends and questioned where she had been if she came in late.

“He stopped the victim from using her mobile phone and controlled her social media, such as making her delete friends on Facebook.”

He has been sentenced to six months imprisonment and a Restraining Order was imposed for two years.

Additional information

Charge:

Engaging in controlling/coercive behaviour in an intimate/family relationship.

Teenager convicted of two murders in Colchester‏

A teenager who was only 15 when he stabbed two strangers to death in Colchester in 2014 has been convicted today at Guildford Crown Court of their murder. James Fairweather had previously admitted manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility.

Paul Scothern, head of CPS East of England’s Complex Casework Unit said: “This was a shocking case, particularly because of the young age of the defendant at the time and because the brutal attacks he carried out were entirely random.

“He did not know either James Attfield or Nahid Almanea, the victims did not know each other and the defendant had absolutely no reason to attack them.”

Mr Attfield was found about 6am on 29 March 2014 in a park in Colchester; he had received more than 100 stab wounds during a savage assault and died shortly after being found.

In Ms Almanea’s case the attack was in broad daylight in June 2014 about 10.30am near the University of Essex where she was a student.

Mr Scothern said: “James Fairweather claimed voices and hallucinations compelled him to carry out attacks and he admitted manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility but denied murder. His claims were at the heart of the trial as the prosecution did not accept this was the case.

“We presented expert medical evidence to the jury that his claims were an attempt to deceive those who examined him, to literally get away with murder.

“Our evidence was that he was in control at the time, he knew what he was doing, he prepared for the killings by arming himself with a knife and gloves, and he took steps afterwards to conceal what he had done.

“Our thoughts are with the families of the victims at this time.”