|
Previous
on William Sampson |
William Sampson
(2005)
UK court allows 3 men
to seize Riyadh assets
(AP) May 16, 2005
LONDON - The court of appeal
in London on Monday granted lawyers acting for three men, who
were tortured and detained in Saudi jails for more than two years,
permission to seize the kingdom's assets in this country, including
Saudi commercial airliners.
The ruling follows a decision
by the court of appeal last October giving the men the right
to sue Saudi officials responsible for their torture in the British
courts.
In October, the Saudi government
decided it would not contest an order to pay the men's costs,
yet has failed to do so. It has promised to take the case to
the House of Lords.
Bindman and partners, lawyers
for William Sampson, Sandy Mitchell and Les Walker, will now
apply to the high court sheriff to seize sufficient commercial
property to meet the costs, believed to be more than £100,000.
Bindman and partners have made clear they will send the sheriff
in to seize Saudi property as soon as possible. They are not
entitled to enter the Saudi embassy, as it is covered by diplomatic
immunity and regarded as foreign territory.
However, any commercial property
owned by the Saudi state in Britain is regarded fair game. That
includes Saudi Arabian airlines, as well as houses and cars used
for commercial purposes by Saudi officials or employees.
The Saudi embassy could not
be reached for comment on Monday, but lawyers for the kingdom
indicated in court that they would seek to overturn the order
to pay costs by asserting immunity, setting the stage for further
legal arguments.
Lawyers for the three men subsequently
asked the Court of Appeal to prevent Saudi representatives from
relying on immunity in the costs issue, but the court on Monday
rejected the application, said Tamsin Allen, one of the British
men's attorneys. Hailing the court's decision, Allen said she
was appalled by the Saudis' delaying tactics.
"We, our clients and the
public funding authorities are outraged that Saudi Arabia, one
of the richest states in the world, should force the legal aid
board to pay its debts and at the same time use our courts to
seek immunity from torture claims." William Sampson pointed
out that the Saudis had agreed not to challenge the cost order
when it was granted in October and were now seeking to renege.
Ahmed Rejects Torture
Claim by 3 Britons
P.K. Abdul Ghafour, Arab
News
JEDDAH, 19 May 2005 - Deputy
Interior Minister Prince Ahmed yesterday rejected allegations
made by three Britons that they had been tortured at a Riyadh
jail and said they should have been thankful for receiving pardon
for the crimes they had committed.
"They have never been
tortured. They had lawyers and the representatives of their embassies
used to visit them and their families. If there were anything
of that sort, their countries would have protested and it never
happened," the prince said when asked about the torture
allegation.
"The Shariah court had
issued a strong verdict against them as they deserved it for
their crimes," he pointed out.
Prince Ahmed said the Kingdom
was not officially informed about the move by Bindman and Partners,
a London-based law firm, which represents Britons Sandy Mitchell,
Les Walker and William Sampson, to seize the Kingdom's assets
in Britain to pay for overdue legal costs.
Tamsin Allen of Bindman and
Partners, said her firm would "start the process" this
week of seizing some Britain-based Saudi state assets. She claimed
that her clients had won a landmark case in which Britain's appeals
court effectively removed blanket immunity for officials from
foreign states accused of serious crimes, for example, torture.
The men were held in Saudi
jails for more than two years and confessed, allegedly after
torture, to plotting a series of bomb attacks in Riyadh in 2000
and 2001. Saudi authorities described the bombings, in which
one Briton was killed, as part of a turf war between Western
gangs supplying illegal liquor to expatriates.
The appeals court ruled that
the men, along with a fourth Briton jailed by the Saudis, could
sue individuals. Allen also claimed that the court ordered Riyadh
to pay for the legal costs of its appeal to that decision, believed
to be more than 100,000 pounds ($180,000).
But the Saudi Embassy in London
said the Court of Appeal Judges had resoundingly rejected the
application by Bindman and Partners on behalf of their clients
concerning a technical question about legal costs.
"We believe the article
in Tuesday's Guardian newspaper misrepresents the Court of Appeal
hearing," the embassy said. "Once we have received
the transcript of the court hearing we will be taking advice
as to whether there has been a clear breach of the industry's
Code of Practice (Clause 1 - Accuracy), administered by the Press
Complaints Commission," the embassy said in a statement.
"Lawyers for the claimants
had not taken steps to enforce the order from last year and the
amount had not even been decided until March 31 this year. It
is the intention of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to comply fully
with the Court of Appeal," it added.
The embassy also said Saudi
Arabia would take the matter to Britain's highest court of appeal.
"It remains the intention of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
to take the underlying case to the House of Lords where it will
be heard on April 26, 2006," it said.
Lawyer of three British
'torture victims' moves to seize Saudi assets in Britain over
legal case.
By Michelle Hoffman - LONDON
A lawyer for three Britons
who claim they were tortured by Saudi authorities said Tuesday
she would move to seize the kingdom's assets in Britain to pay
for overdue legal costs.
Tamsin Allen said that her
firm, Bindman and Partners, would "start the process"
this week of seizing some Britain-based Saudi state assets, which
include Saudi Arabian Airlines.
Her clients, Sandy Mitchell,
Les Walker and William Sampson, who is British-Canadian, won
a landmark case last October in which Britain's appeals court
effectively removed blanket immunity for officials from foreign
states accused of serious crimes like torture.
The men were held in Saudi
jails for more than two years and confessed, allegedly after
torture, to plotting a series of bomb attacks in Riyadh in 2000
and 2001.
Riyadh authorities described
the bombings, in which one Briton was killed, as part of a turf
war between Western gangs supplying illegal liquor to expatriates
in the strict Islamic state, but critics reject the argument
as a way to scapegoat foreigners instead of homegrown militants.
The appeal court ruled that
the men, along with a fourth Briton jailed by the Saudis, could
sue individuals, including their interrogators and the Saudi
interior minister, Prince Naif bin Abdul Aziz.
It threw out the Saudi demand
for blanket immunity, and ordered Riyadh to pay for the legal
costs of its appeal to that decision, believed to be more than
100,000 pounds (180,000 dollars, 150,000 euros).
Allen said that although the
Saudis had not contested the legal costs they had failed to pay,
and would now face the "normal" procedure of having
assets seized.
"The news is that they're
not paying the costs. And we're going to therefore seize an asset,"
she said. "They may try to stop us and they may succeed
in stopping us, but they haven't done that yet."
Under normal court procedures
the High Court sheriff can be asked to seize and sell Saudi property,
including aircraft or cars, but not the embassy, which is considered
foreign territory.
A spokesman from the Saudi
Arabian embassy in London, however, said the country would take
the matter to Britain's highest court of appeal.
"It remains the intention
of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to take the underlying case to
the House of Lords where it will be heard on 26th April 2006,"
the spokesman said.
Allen noted that the Saudi
state's refusal to pay had forced her clients to use public legal
aid monies.
"We, our clients and the
public funding authorities are all outraged that Saudi Arabia,
one of the richest states in the world, should force the hard-pressed
legal aid fund to pay its debts and at the same time use our
courts to seek immunity from torture claims," she said.
The Britons' compensation claim
will only be able to move forward once the Saudi appeal is either
rejected or dealt with by the Law Lords, she said, adding that
settling the issue of immunity would "open up the way for
straightforward claim for damages for torture".
"Ideally the Saudi government
would pay the legal costs and pay compensation and apologize,
and accept (the three Britons') innocence," the lawyer added.
British inquiry clears
Sampson
CBC News, February 23, 2005
LONDON - A British inquest
has found no evidence linking a fatal car bombing in Saudi Arabia
to Canadian William Sampson, who spent two-and-a-half years in
a Saudi jail for his alleged role in the crime.
Coroner David Masters ruled
found there was no evidence tying Sampson or two other suspects
to the crime.
The inquest was investigating
the death of Christopher Rodway, a 47-year-old British hospital
worker who was killed in a car bomb attack in Riyadh.
"As far as I am concerned,
I have been exonerated by the coroner," said Sampson, who
lives in Penrith, northwest England. "It effectively clears
my name."
Masters said he could not determine
who killed Rodway. No Saudi officials appeared at the inquest.
Sampson, 45, was working with
the Saudi Industrial Development Fund when he was detained in
November 2000.
He was released in August 2003,
having faced a death sentence for a series of bombings that targeted
westerners in the Gulf state. Five British men were also released
with him after being granted clemency by the Saudi king.
Sampson claims he was tortured
during his incarceration, an allegation the Saudis deny.
Inquest ruling clears
name, Sampson says
By ALAN FREEMAN AND TOM
BROOKE-TAYLOR, Globe and Mail, February 23, 2005
An English coroner ruled yesterday
that a Briton who died in a car-bomb attack in Saudi Arabia in
2000 was "unlawfully killed," but said there was no
evidence linking the death to Canadian William Sampson and two
other men convicted of the crime in a Saudi court.
At an inquest yesterday in
the Wiltshire town of Trowbridge, coroner David Masters said
47-year-old hospital worker Christopher Rodway was killed by
an explosion in Riyadh that he called a "horrific bolt out
of the blue."
But he said he could not identify
"the perpetrators of this atrocity" and noted that
all three men convicted in the case had retracted their confessions,
which they said were extracted under torture.
Mr. Sampson, who attended yesterday's
inquest, said the ruling exonerated him of the crime, for which
he was sentenced to death by a Saudi court.
"We have no case to answer
-- I have basically cleared my name as of today," Mr. Sampson
said in a telephone interview after the inquest. "I have
now established that there is no evidence that says that I had
anything to do with the death of Christopher Rodway."
Mr. Sampson, Briton Sandy Mitchell
and Belgian Raf Schyvens confessed to the murder on Saudi television
in February, 2001, but later recanted.
Who killed Mr. Rodway remains
a mystery. Saudi authorities maintained he was the victim of
a turf war among Westerners in the illegal alcohol trade. Mr.
Sampson and others contend the attack was inspired by the al-Qaeda
terror network and aimed at the kingdom's sizable expatriate
community.
Jane Rodway, the victim's widow,
recalled at the inquest that she and her husband were driving
to a garden centre in Riyadh on Nov. 23, 2000. "We had just
turned the corner when I heard a very long bang," she said.
"I know I screamed but I don't know where the bang came
from.
"The glass came in. I
blacked out for a second. When I came to, the car was still moving
-- wheeling along the road. It finally came to a halt."
The blast appeared to come
from a device planted below the driver's seat, which blew off
Mr. Rodway's legs.
Mrs. Rodway said later she
is still seeking answers about her husband's death.
"It would be nice to know
why we were targeted," she said. "What had we done
wrong? Why us in particular? The people who killed him are free.
I don't think we'll ever know the truth."
Mr. Sampson confessed to the
murder in January, 2001, and was later sentenced to death. He
was held in jail for 31 months before being released in August,
2003, along with five other Britons and a Belgian. All had been
arrested in conjunction with Mr. Rodway's death and similar attacks
on other foreigners in Saudi Arabia.
Two police officers from Scotland
Yard's anti-terrorism branch, who travelled to Saudi Arabia to
help in the investigation, testified that Saudi authorities gave
them no evidence linking the Westerners to Mr. Rodway's death.
No Saudi officials appeared at the inquest.
Mr. Sampson believes the ruling
strengthens the civil suit that he and two others have launched
against Saudi officials they hold responsible for their torture
in prison. A British appeal court ruled in October that the case
could go ahead, overruling a lower court decision that said Saudi
Arabia enjoyed immunity from prosecution.
Mr. Sampson, a 45-year-old
biochemist, has been out of work since his release from prison.
He lives in Penrith in England's Lake District.
"I've been living hand
to mouth," he said. After applying unsuccessfully for several
jobs, he has begun giving lectures in Canada -- speaking of his
experiences in Saudi Arabia, the lessons he learned about human
survival and the obligations of states to protect their citizens
against torture and abuse of their human rights.
He has also been following
the case of Maher Arar, the Syrian-Canadian who was arrested
in New York and sent by U.S. authorities to Syria, where he was
tortured in prison before being released. The role of the Canadian
government in his case is now the subject of a judicial inquiry.
"Somebody shipped him
back to Syria so they could have the crap beaten out of him because
they couldn't do it in their own country," Mr. Sampson said.
"They decided to farm out the business of torture to somebody
else."
Mr. Sampson said that in his
own case, the British and Canadian governments should insist
that Saudi Arabia back up its claims of his guilt and seek redress
on his behalf for the injuries he suffered at the hands of his
captors.
Inquest clears Canadian,
two others in car bombings in Saudi Arabia in 2000
Canadian Press, February
23, 2005
LONDON (AP) - British police
have found no evidence linking a fatal car bombing in Saudi Arabia
to a Canadian and two others who were accused of launching the
attack, an inquiry heard.
Canadian William Sampson, Briton
Sandy Mitchell, and Belgian Raf Schyvens were arrested after
a bomb exploded under Christopher Rodway's car in Riyadh in November
2000. Rodway died in the blast. Coroner David Masters ruled 47-year-old
Rodway was unlawfully killed but found there was no evidence
tying Sampson or the other suspects to the crime.
"As far as I am concerned,
I have been exonerated by the coroner," said Sampson, who
lives in Penrith, northwest England. "It effectively clears
my name."
Sampson, 45, was working with
the Saudi Industrial Development Fund when he was detained for
his supposed role in two car bombings in November 2000.
He was sentenced to death and
kept in solitary confinement until his release in August 2003.
He was seen on Saudi television
confessing to the car bombings but later recanted and said the
confessions were extracted through torture.
Det-Supt Kim Durham, from the
anti-terror branch of London's Metropolitan Police, told the
inquest he had found no proof that Sampson and Mitchell were
involved in the death.
"We have had no formal
documentation of their convictions from the Saudis at all,"
added Durham, who went to Saudi Arabia two weeks after the bombing.
British Labour MP John Lyons,
who campaigned for the suspects' release, said he was happy with
the verdict but said the coroner should have gone one step further
and ordered a police investigation to find Rodway's killers.
In British law, a coroner is
an official - usually a lawyer - who makes a legal ruling on
the cause of death.
Coroner clears Scot over
bombing murder in Saudi
A SCOT who faced beheading
after being wrongly convicted of a bombing murder in Saudi Arabia
has been exonerated by a coroner.
Sandy Mitchell, 47, was cleared
after an inquest into the death of Christopher Rodway, 47, in
Riyadh in November 2000.
Wiltshire Coroner David Masters
said he found nothing linking Mr Mitchell, originally from Kirkintilloch,
and Dr William Sampson to Mr Rodway's death in a car bomb blast.
Dr Sampson, 45, from Penrith,
Cumbria, and Mr Mitchell, who now lives in Halifax, were allegedly
tortured into confessing to having planted the car bomb on Saudi
TV in February 2001 and were sentenced to death.
However, they were given a
royal pardon and released in August 2003, having spent two-and-a-half
years in jail.
They both retracted their confessions
on release.
Saudi authorities claimed the
bombings were part of a bloody turf war to gain control of the
illegal alcohol trade in the kingdom.
The two men denied this and
maintained the bomb was planted by Islamic terrorists.
The inquest was told no documentation
or proof of Mr Mitchell and Dr Sampson's conviction or guilt
had ever been received by Scotland Yard.
The coroner told the inquest
at Trowbridge he saw no need to pass the papers relating to the
pair's supposed involvement in Mr Rodway's murder to the Office
of Public Prosecutions.
John Lyons, Labour MP for Strathkelvin
and Bearsden, who campaigned for the men's release, said he was
delighted by the coroner's decision not to recommend prosecuting
the pair.
But he added the coroner should
have gone one step further and ordered a police investigation
to find Mr Rodway's real killers.
-
Scot finally cleared
of car-bomb killing
- Relief for man who faced
death penalty in Saudi Arabia
LOUISE GRAY , The
Scotsman, Feb. 22, 2005
A SCOT who faced beheading
in Saudi Arabia for a murder he did not commit spoke last night
of his relief at being officially exonerated, and called on the
British authorities to try to find the real culprits.
Sandy Mitchell, 49, from Glasgow,
was allegedly tortured in prison after being arrested and accused
of murdering Christopher Rodway, 47, in a car-bomb attack in
Riyadh on 17 November, 2000.
Mr Mitchell and William Sampson,
45, from Penrith, Cumbria, were allegedly tortured into confessing
on Saudi television in February 2001 to having planted the car
bomb. They were sentenced to death.
The pair were then given a
royal pardon and released in August 2003, having spent more than
two and a half years in jail. They retracted the confessions
on their release.
At an inquest into Mr Rodway's
death yesterday, David Masters, the Wiltshire coroner, found
nothing to link either Mr Mitchell or Dr Sampson to the fatal
explosion.
It is the first time Mr Mitchell
has been publicly exonerated and his voice shook as he described
his relief. "It is great - just a load off my mind,"
he said. "It is the first time the authorities have officially
said we are exonerated. It would have saved a lot of pain and
torment if the Saudi authorities displayed the same degree of
professionalism."
Mr Mitchell said the results
of the inquest should force the British authorities to put pressure
on the Saudi government to find the real killers.
He said: "It is very easy
to get someone to confess under torture - it takes no art at
all and eventually everyone will break. But getting someone to
confess will not solve the crime."
Speaking from his home in Halifax,
Yorkshire, where he lives with his pregnant wife and six-year-old
son, he went on: "I would like the British authorities to
find out who really killed Christopher Rodway - his family are
entitled to that."
The Saudi authorities had claimed
the two men were behind the bombing and others like it that were
said to be part of a bloody turf war to gain control of the kingdom's
illegal alcohol trade. The men always maintained the bomb was
planted by Islamic fundamentalists.
John Lyons, the MP for Strathkelvin
and Bearsden, who fought for Mr Mitchell's release, said the
coroner should have ordered a police investigation to find Mr
Rodway's killers. "You cannot say a man was unlawfully killed
and then do nothing about it," he said. "Mr Rodway's
family will want justice. It's a matter of fact that Sandy Mitchell
and Dr Sampson were tortured into making confessions."
Inquest further exonerates
Scot who faced beheading in Saudi Arabia
Scotland Today, February 22, 2005
A Scot who faced a public beheading
in Saudi Arabia for a car bombing he denies, has been further
exonerated. An inquest into the death of Christopher Rodway who
was killed in the blast in Riyadh, has found no evidence linking
Sandy Mitchell to the murder.
Mitchell, who is originally
from Kirkintilloch, was tortured into making a televised confession,
and spent three years behind bars before being released.
With the words "I confirm
and confess that I was ordered to carry out an explosion."
Sandy Mitchell effectively signed his own death warrant on Saudi
television. His apparent confession to planting the bomb in Riyadh
which killed Christopher Rodway, put the Scot and Canadian Bill
Sampson on death row, facing a public beheading for murder.
Bill Sampson said: "What
they want is for you to confess to whatever they tell you to
confess to. They reiterate time after time after time the scenario
they want you to sing back to them until eventually you break
and you do. It took me about six and a half days for that to
happen when finally the whole idea of confessing to a murder,
for which I could be subsequently sentenced to death, was preferable
to continue to being tortured physically."
Both men were eventually given
clemency and released in 2003.Today the inquest into the death
of Christopher Rodway returned a verdict of unlawful killing,
but stressed the coroner had found no evidence linking Sandy
Mitchell or Bill Sampson to the car bombing.
Solicitor Geoffrey Bindman
said: "The Saudi authorities have failed to provide any
evidence although they've been requested on a number of occasions
by the Foreign and Commonwealth office to do so. The fact is,
they can't produce evidence because there is no evidence, these
people are entirely innocent and the coroner's verdict will help
to establish that."
Both men are now raising civil
actions against the Saudi authorities.
|
Truth can never be
told so as to be understood, and not be believ'd. William Blake, The Proverbs of Hell
