Yet another name ... add Enrico Mariotti to Andrew Symeou and others

Enrico Mariotti
The week just gone was Constitution Week in the USA. I love the preamble, especially for its focus on liberty. (The Constitution of the United States was signed by 39 delegates at Philadelphia's Independence Hall on September 17, 1787.)

 

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

As Andrew Symeou awaits his new ordeal at Westminster Magistrates ...


Court, 10AM, 30th September, it is all the more poignant to read this in the letters page of The Telegraph, about Britain's attitude to extradition as in the case of Enrico Mariotti and compare British attitudes with those fighting to maintain liberty in the USA.

Letters to the Telegraph

21 September 2008

Alasdair Palmer is right to be worried about the EU extradition provisions.

There may be strong reasons for not attending one's trial. For example, the length of time spent in prison during investigation and before a final verdict, or the refusal of bail in so many continental jurisdictions where habeas corpus is unknown.

Enrico Mariotti, an Italian living in England for 14 years, was tried in his absence and convicted to 26 years for allegedly taking part in the kidnap and murder of an Italian duke in 1977.

The only evidence against him was by a multiple murderer who reported what another dead gangster had supposedly said.

This would have been inadmissable in Britain, yet last year John Reid, when Home Secretary, extradited him.

Mr Mariotti's trial in Italy took six years, and if he had returned to stand trial he would probably have had to spend those years waiting in prison.

He has now served one year of his conviction and, under Italian law, he has been judged and his case is closed. Is this fair?

Torquil Dick-Erikson, London W2

The coupling of corpus juris - the presumption of guilt under Napoleonic Law - with trial in absentia, followed by extradition with no appeal, is the stuff of nightmares.

We need a referendum on our continued EU membership.

Roger Smith, Shefford, Bedfordshire

Why did the Government agree to this injustice against its own citizens? And what do the Tories intend to do about it? My vote for them will only be regained by their standing up for the British people.

Mark Taha, London SE26

 The following is from the "REVISED SKELETON ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF MR. SYMEOU" as prepared by his lawyers.

II. ALLEGATIONS IN THE EAW
2. The alleged offence occurred in a nightclub, "Rescue", in Zante, Greece, in the early hours of 20 July 2007. Mr. Symeou is accused of striking the victim, Jonathan Hiles - also a British citizen - causing him to fall and to sustain a head injury, rendering him unconscious. Mr. Hiles subsequently died from his head injuries in a hospital in Athens on 22 July 2007.
3. It should be said at the outset is that the allegation is utterly and strenuously denied. Mr. Symeou was not even in the nightclub at the relevant time, as several witnesses can confirm. Moreover, he will contend that the extradition proceedings are an abuse of process by the Greek Requesting Authority, which has deliberately manufactured a case against him, not followed the correct legal procedures under Greek law and obtained evidence by torture.

Whilst some are unhappy that the arguments are being aired in public, it seems that most people who have taken even a cursory interest in this case, realise that maximum publicity is required, through any means, to expose the injustices of the European Arrest Warrant procedures. Do go to the Justice for Symeou web site and scroll to the bottom of the first page, to read the whole ARGUMENT.

 

Just remember what a fuss was made by the UK Minister of Justice when he appeared in front of Parliament to ask for an increase in detention without charge to 42 days. Yet, shortly afterwards he agreed to handing over yet more power to the European Arrest Warrant scheme, whereby British Subjects can be held in countries such as Italy, Greece and others, without charge, for more than a year or in the case of Enrico, found guilty in his absence, in a 'justice' system almost unrecognisable as such, in Britain. Does this seem just a little like hypocracy to you?

 

From "MARIOTTI EXTRADITION CASE BRIEF SUMMARY by Torquil Dick-Erikson"

  The only prosecution evidence against Mr Mariotti was hearsay evidence,
• from a dead man, reported 15 years after the event. This was uncorroborated hearsay evidence, reported by a supergrass, who
• is a multiple murderer, and who has been rewarded for his testimony. This supergrass was believed by this court that convicted Mariotti, but was
• considered unreliable by another court in another trial in Italy. The guilty verdict was given by case-hardened professional career judges,
• instead of by an independent jury, which is never used in Italy. These professional career judges also direct the whole trial process and are
• colleagues of the prosecutor, but not of the defender. The system thus has a built-in bias in favour of the prosecution. The trial was conducted entirely in the defendant's absence.
• There is no Habeas Corpus in Italy, so there is a real likelihood of waiting
• for years in a prison cell without bail for the final verdict, and no apology or compensation then after an acquittal. (This explains why Mr Mariotti cannot be blamed for having preferred to await the outcome in England.)

 

Posted on 25 Sep, 2008 by ethelred

Filed under Law


« Prev item • Next item »

Comments

No comments yet. You can be the first!

Leave comment