• Table of Contents

  • Did Raphael Rowe Sue for Wrongful Conviction? Exploring the M25 Three Legal Battle
  • The M25 Three Case: A Brief Overview
  • The Wrongful Conviction
  • The Legal Battle for Justice
  • The Struggle for Compensation
  • Suing for Wrongful Conviction
  • The Outcome of the Legal Battle
  • Key Takeaways
  • Conclusion

Did Raphael Rowe Sue for Wrongful Conviction? Exploring the M25 Three Legal Battle

In the world of criminal justice, wrongful convictions are a haunting reality. Innocent individuals can find themselves behind bars, their lives forever altered by a flawed system. One such case that captured public attention is that of Raphael Rowe, one of the M25 Three. In this article, we will delve into the legal battle surrounding Rowe’s wrongful conviction, exploring the question of whether he sued for justice.

The M25 Three Case: A Brief Overview

The M25 Three case refers to a series of robberies that occurred in the late 1980s, targeting security vans transporting cash on the M25 motorway in England. Raphael Rowe, along with Michael Davis and Randolph Johnson, were convicted for their alleged involvement in these crimes. The trio became known as the M25 Three, and their case garnered significant media attention.

The Wrongful Conviction

Rowe and his co-defendants maintained their innocence throughout the trial, but the jury found them guilty based on circumstantial evidence. They were sentenced to life imprisonment, with Rowe serving 12 years before his release in 2000.

However, doubts about the validity of their convictions began to emerge. In 2000, the BBC’s “Rough Justice” program aired an episode titled “M25 Three: Rough Justice,” which highlighted potential flaws in the case against Rowe and his co-defendants. The program raised questions about the reliability of witness testimonies and the lack of physical evidence linking them to the crimes.

The Legal Battle for Justice

Following his release, Rowe embarked on a tireless quest for justice. He sought to clear his name and hold those responsible for his wrongful conviction accountable. However, the road to justice was not an easy one.

The Struggle for Compensation

One avenue available to individuals wrongfully convicted in the UK is to seek compensation for the years of their lives lost behind bars. The Criminal Justice Act 1988 allows for compensation to be awarded to those who have suffered a miscarriage of justice.

Rowe applied for compensation, but his initial claim was rejected in 2005. The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) referred his case back to the Court of Appeal, stating that new evidence had emerged that undermined the safety of his conviction. However, the Court of Appeal upheld his conviction, leading to the rejection of his compensation claim.

Undeterred, Rowe continued his fight for justice. In 2011, the CCRC referred his case back to the Court of Appeal for a second time, citing further concerns about the reliability of witness testimonies. This time, the Court of Appeal quashed his conviction, declaring it unsafe.

Suing for Wrongful Conviction

With his conviction overturned, Rowe had the opportunity to sue for wrongful conviction. However, the path to justice was not straightforward. In the UK, suing for wrongful conviction is a complex and challenging process.

One of the main hurdles is the requirement to prove “malicious prosecution.” In other words, the individual must demonstrate that the prosecution acted with malice or improper motive in pursuing the case against them. This can be a difficult burden to meet, as proving malice is often a subjective matter.

Additionally, the law surrounding compensation for wrongful conviction in the UK is restrictive. The Criminal Justice Act 1988 sets a high bar for compensation, requiring the claimant to prove their innocence “beyond reasonable doubt.” This standard is even higher than the “balance of probabilities” standard typically used in civil cases.

Despite these challenges, Rowe decided to pursue legal action. In 2017, he filed a lawsuit against the Metropolitan Police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), seeking compensation for his wrongful conviction and the years he spent in prison.

The Outcome of the Legal Battle

As of the time of writing, the outcome of Rowe’s lawsuit is not yet known. The legal battle is ongoing, and the courts will ultimately determine whether he is entitled to compensation for his wrongful conviction.

Key Takeaways

• Raphael Rowe, one of the M25 Three, was wrongfully convicted for a series of robberies on the M25 motorway in the late 1980s.
• Rowe served 12 years in prison before his release in 2000.
• He sought compensation for his wrongful conviction but initially faced rejection.
• After a second referral by the CCRC, Rowe’s conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal.
• Rowe filed a lawsuit against the Metropolitan Police and the CPS, seeking compensation for his wrongful conviction.
• The outcome of the legal battle is yet to be determined.

Conclusion

The legal battle surrounding Raphael Rowe’s wrongful conviction is a complex and ongoing saga. While he has already achieved the significant milestone of having his conviction overturned, the question of whether he will be successful in his lawsuit for compensation remains unanswered. Rowe’s case serves as a reminder of the flaws that can exist within the criminal justice system and the long and arduous journey that those wrongfully convicted must endure in their pursuit of justice.