Lee Morgan Lewis & CCL forensics
Lee Morgan Lewsis and CCL Forensics work(ed) for and on behalf of the NCA.
Both Lee Morgan Lewis and CCL forensics failed to disclose and/or find exculpatory evidence in my case and it was only by independent examination that the evidence was found to prove I was not responsible for what I was charged with.
CCL also failed to mention the 'forensic copy' they worked on and provided to my defence team, WAS NOT THE ORIGINAL FORENSIC COPY worked on by Lee Morgan Lewis, but one taken almost a year and a half later.
The CPS subsequently presented 'no evidence' on both charges.
Lee Morgan Lewis has since 'moved on', which is a way for officers to avoid misconduct charges, and from the NCA's reluctance to let the IOPC investigate, Lee Morgan Lewis and the NCA have avoided any independent organisation holding him to account for any wrongdoing, in my case, and potentially others.
CCL foresnics have also avoided being investigated since as the IOPC says: 'There is no jurisdiction to raise a complaint to the NCA about CCL' and 'there is no jurisdiction regarding complaints against contractors and the regulations do not cover complaints against NCA independent contractors'
I also enquired to the IOPC and to the forensic team who successfuly found the exculpatroy evidence in my case, what organisation do I complain to regarding CCL to hold them to account and to investigate when their work has negatively effected the cases of other people? I was told there is no organsation who I can complaint to or who can investigate.
CCL are the largest digital forensics labaratory in the UK:
https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/online-grooming-new-trends-online-sexual-abuse-1526146
'CCL works with police forces and law enforcement agencies investigating digital crime. They are the largest digital forensics laboratory in the UK covering all aspects of digital crime.'
"We work with the Child Protection Unit within the National Crime Agency."
They are also run by 2 ex NCA head officers:
'CCL Group are led by CEO Andy Archibald, former
Head of the National Cyber Crime Unit who works under the stewardship of
Chairman and former Head of the National Crime Agency, Keith Bristow. '
Yet are not accountable for any wrongdoing or any of the shoddy work they do.
You will note that in other cases where forensic examiners, whether it be individuals or teams have failed to find and/or disclose exculpatroy evidence, any previous cases they have woked on have had to be re-examined, no matter what kind of case they have been involved in:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2007/feb/22/topstories3.ukcrime
'Thousands of rape prosecutions across England and Wales are being re-examined to check whether they have been affected by disclosure errors similar to those that led to the recent collapse of a number of cases'
'In London alone, 600 rape cases are being reassessed by prosecutors and detectives.'
Clearly if the police and CPS relied on forensic reports created by Lee Morgan Lewis or CCL, and a defendant:
- Admitted wrongdoing in interview due to the convincing nature of the evidence (which is what they attempted in my case) or due to psycological pressure and stress
- Pleaded guilty due to the stress and just wanting it over with or like in my case they tried to get me to plead guilty to just one charge as an 'early plea'
- Was found guilty in court based on forensic reports by Lee Morgan Lewis or CCL
Then if the devices and evidence was not independently examined, there is the potential for miscarriages of justice.
Shortly after my case concluded I tried to get my legal representatives at the time, solicitor Nova Murray and Barrister Gavin Irwin to deal with this issue, so others were not effected but they would not assist, instead I was told by Gavin Irwin words to the effect: 'you may want to go on a crusade against this, but I won't be doing so.'
Lee Morgan Lewis was the Senior forensic examiner in my case.
I believe he altered and added data to my devices to try and convict me in the UK plus to assist the USA with their case against me, but this backfired when he made mistakes and I requested the devices to be examined by independent forensic examiners.
I believe he then had to destroy the evidence to avoid detection. Who else knows of his actions I don't know but he has clearly 'moved on' to avoid serious misconduct proceedings.
None of this can of course be confirmed unless there is full disclosure and investigation.
Lee Morgan Lewis was willing to put his experience and the fact he was a 'senior' forensic officer for CEOP down in print for presentation to a court.
Obviously his experience, position, opinion and credibility would have often been used in court by the police; both in written statements like this and verbally.
The word of experts, people holding senior positions and the police are rarely questioned; once again we are back to 'good faith'; they must be trusted on their word, which often means no evidence needed.
With positions of power, especially those that can effect others and you are an employee of the people, as the police and their associates are; also comes responsibility.
Where is the taking ownership and being held to account instead of quietly being moved on?
How many other cases has Lee Morgan Lewis worked on before he got to someone who could see the mistakes and stood up for themselves?
I have no doubt if I had not seen the glaring errors and inconsistencies and not been a fighter and just buckled under the pressure to plead guilty (which people do every day at the hands of the police who are not interested in evidence, just a conviction) Lee Morgan Lewis would not have 'moved on'!
He had to be, because at the point of me not pleading guilty and also asking my equipment to be independently examined, his position and possibly those around who ignored or condoned his actions were compromised.
Where is this guy working now?!
If you or anyone you know has been involved in a case which involved this individual or the department he worked for and you suspect something similar may have happened, or you pleaded guilty or were convicted when you knew you were innocent, I urge you to contact a reputable solicitor.
On 20th October I read about organisations that can raise 'super complaints'. I'm not holdoing my breath for any assistance or action rom them, but I thought I would try.
Below is the contents of the email and letter via signed for delivery I sent them:
22nd October 2019
Dear CJA,
I have been advised by Peter in a telephone call at 11AM this morning to put my concerns in an email to you.
I can provide all supporting documentation I refer to if you wish. You will find my full contact details at the top of this letter.
This communication is regarding a super complaint and any way you may be able to assist or any action you may be able to take.
I apologise in advance for the length of this letter but I want you to be aware of all the circumstances, information and lengths I have gone to to get these issues addressed.
In 2013 I was arrested on suspicion and subsequently accused and charged with having indecent images on various electronic devices.
2 years and 1 month of being on bail later, the CPS offered 'no evidence' in crown court Ipswich.
During those 2 years my legal team requested independent access to my devices so they could be examined as I was pleading not guilty and knew myself not to be responsible for the alleged images.
For a year and a half the police either did not respond or made excuses to why the devices could not be provided to my legal representatives.
Eventually ONE (MacBook pro) of the devices was provided and my own forensic team hired by my legal representatives found the evidence to prove I was not responsible for the indecent images on that device.
The device (MacBook pro) was also found to have be accessed AFTER it was seized from me at least twice and it was not the original image (copy) of the device the forensic officer took after its initial seizure, but an image of the device taken a year and a half later.
My devices were initially handed to Lee Morgan Lewis, a SENIOR forensic examiner of the NCA in London by DC Denise Davey of Suffolk Police.
It is Lee Morgan Lewis who did the initial examinations and who created the forensic reports on the basis I was interviewed on and which were used to charge me and progress through the court system for over 2 years.
Another device (external HDD) which was also provided to and examined by Lee Morgan Lewis, after repeatedly being requested by my legal team, was after a year and a half said to have been 'dropped' and the data was now irretrievable and/or unreliable.
Lee Morgan Lewis of the NCA therefore failed to find and/or disclose exculpatory evidence on one of my devices and another device was said to have been 'dropped' by him and now the data was inaccessible.
Some months later I found out that CCL forensics working on behalf of the NCA ALSO examined my devices and created reports.
On the device that was said to have been 'dropped' (external HDD) they found no indecent images from the data they were able to recover.
On the other device (MacBook pro) they ALSO failed to find and/or disclose exculpatory evidence which meant I should not have been charged with the offence and the reason why the CPS presented no evidence on this charge.
TWO separate forensic reports both commissioned by the NCA and both failing to find and/or disclose exculpatory evidence.
I will note here that CCL forensics: (from their website):
'CCL Group are led by CEO Andy Archibald, former Head of the National Cyber Crime Unit who works under the stewardship of Chairman and former Head of the National Crime Agency, Keith Bristow. '
I attempted to get my legal team at the time to take action regarding Lee Morgan Lewis for fear that he had effected other cases (I did not know about the CCL report at the time), particularly since they had verbally said to me outside court words to the effect of: 'there are probably many other cases where people have been found guilty on the bases of incorrect forensic reports like that' but they refused to take any action or alert anyone, and simply said: 'you may want to go on a crusade against this, but I won't be doing so.'
Unfortunately within two months of the CPS presenting 'no evidence' on both charges my mother died, I was very unwell, and I was unable to deal with anything else at this point.
It wasn't until about 18 months later I attempted to deal with these issues, as I was and am still VERY concerned how many other may have been effected by the actions of Lee Morgan Lewis and CCL.
I contacted more than 300 solicitors, barristers, chambers and other organisations as well as more than 500 MPs, including my own regarding these issues and not one would assist.
I therefore decided to take the task up myself.
I made complaints to the NCA regarding Lee Morgan Lewis and CCL and also to Suffolk police requesting the original images of my devices which SHOULD have been taken after seizure. (Under the ACPO - Association of Chief Police Officers good practice guide for digital evidence and Digital evidence gathering procedure) chain of custody records, examination records and unused material from my case, which was never provided to my legal team.
After more than a year of communications and complaints Suffolk police said they could not provide me with this information and I would have to request it through the NCA.
The NCA website states:
'To ensure we can protect our officers, victims, witnesses and partners the Freedom of Information act 2000 does not apply to the NCA so we are unable to respond to Freedom of Information requests'
The NCA responded by saying they were not required to provide me with anything and they would also disapply my complaints against Lee Morgan Lewis and CCL because more than a year had passed since the incident.
I therefore appealed to the ICO and the IOPC.
The ICO said the NCA had complied with the current regulations.
The IOPC I feel, tried to investigate since I know they wrote to the NCA requesting further information which took several months, but they came back on the side of the NCA with:
Lee Morgan Lewis: Abuse of process since more than 12 moths had passed since the incident.
CCL: repetition since the complaint was the same as the one against Lee Morgan Lewis.
The IOPC also said: 'There is no jurisdiction to raise a complaint to the NCA about CCL' and 'there is no jurisdiction regarding complaints against contractors and the regulations do not cover complaints against NCA independent contractors'
I contacted the IOPC by telephone regarding this issue to ask; if not them, then WHO could I complain to about CCL about at the same time as drawing attention to the fact others as yet unknown could have been very negatively affected by their work. I was told by the IOPC that there was no current way to complain about 3rd party contractors like CCL or hold them to account.
I therefore contacted the forensic team 'Evidence Matters', who had found the evidence in my case, which meant the CPS presented no evidence, and asked them if there was a body I could complain to about CCL. Evidence matters informed me there was no body to complain to in their industry.
You will see the lengths I have gone to on my own and with absolutely no assistance whatsoever to have these people held to account because not only of the effect they had in my case but my real fear they have could have negatively affected other people's lives.
One line I consistently used to the NCA, ICO and IOPC when I learn they were hiding behind the 'more than 12 months have passed' to avoid investigation was:
There can be no time limit to investigate and uncover potential miscarriages of justice.
I firmly believe this which is why I continue to fight and try and expose those officers who have potentially caused miscarriages of justice.
I myself accidentally stumbled upon a story in my local news about a person convicted of having indecent images, although the person convicted claimed he was not responsible for them.
For some reason the defendant was representing himself and it does not appear there was any other independent report on the devices which were said to contain indecent images.
It was said that the forensic officer who had created the report was not available to appear in court, even so the person was found guilty due to the forensic report.
Coincidentally this was at exactly the same time as Lee Morgan Lewis was said in court in my case to not be available because he had 'moved on'.
Of course I do not know if the report in the defendants conviction was the work of Lee Morgan Lewis but I was concerned enough to try and alert relevant people, just in case.
I contacted the IOPC who said they were not the relevant body to contact but couldn't tell me who was. The court itself and through them the defendants legal representatives, neither who got back to me for any further information. I also tried charities who work on behalf of defendants and was told by them to contact the court or the defendant's representatives.
You will see from the effort I am making that this is extremely concerning to me, particularly since in the last few years we have seen many stories about forensic work in many and varying cases hitting the headlines.
Forensic work badly carried out, exculpatory evidence not being found and/or disclosed or forensic officer's actually manipulating forensic evidence to get a conviction have all been stories:
https://www.hja.net/rare-jail-term-for-former-officer-who-falsified-evidence-in-sexual-assault-cases/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/06/40-motorists-convictions-quashed-biggest-forensic-scandal-decades/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6425621/Police-question-forensic-scientist-suspicion-tampering-test-results.html
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2007/feb/22/topstories3.ukcrime
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/met-police-forensics-mishandling-review-rape-sexual-assault-violent-cases-a8342021.html
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/jan/15/london-rape-trial-collapses-after-phone-images-undermine-case
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/30/met-police-and-cps-apologise-to-man-after-collapse-of-case
In all of these cases that have been exposed the previous cases of these companies or forensic examiners have had to be re-examined for fear of miscarriages of justice.
Unfortunately in the case of Lee Morgan Lewis and multiple forensic officers at CCL no one has been interested in exposing their actions and investigating who else may have been effected by their actions, intentional or not!
This is why a super complaint needs raising regarding these issues and concerns. Because not only is it clearly a system wide issue but because the actions of these officers needs exposing and their work, and in particular work where the defendant has under duress or stress in interview or whilst on bail admitted an offence but there has been no independent examination of the data, or a report has led to a conviction in court when there has been no independent examination of the data, needs re-examining in case it has been responsible for miscarriages of justice.
Once again, I can provide evidence of all the complaints, letters and information I mention if you so require.
You will note by the time I have spent on this letter how determined I am to have these issues addressed.
Yours faithfully,
Mark Bedwell.
22nd October 2019
27nd October 2019
Dear CJA,
Please find a copy of the letter I sent you via email a few days ago.
As stated in that communication I require your assistance to raise a super complaint.
I am absolutely determined to continue pursuing this and that the authorities and all relevant forensic analysts be held to account in the interest justice and so that any other inaccurate reports, either intentional or unintentional can be exposed and any potential miscarriages of justice due to these reports can be re-examined.
Yours faithfully,
Mark Bedwell.
27th October 2019