Acquitted of Preparing a Terrorist Attack

The Client

Our client was a Merseyside born, 19-year-old man of previous good character who found himself facing prosecution for one of the most serious offences under the Terrorism Act 2006: preparation of terrorist acts, contrary to section 5.

The allegations carried the prospect of a substantial custodial sentence and threatened to define our client’s future. The prosecution case was built upon a large volume of digital and physical evidence, which investigators said demonstrated that he had moved beyond holding extreme anti-government views and had begun preparing for acts of terrorism.

The Allegations

The prosecution relied upon a document described as a manifesto, together with a significant quantity of material said to be terrorist-related. The evidence also included extensive online communications with individuals in the United Kingdom and overseas, survival and “prepping” equipment concealed in woodland, crossbows and the purchase of a 3D printer.

The prosecution alleged that these matters, considered together, demonstrated preparation for terrorist acts rather than merely the expression of unconventional or extreme political beliefs.

The case therefore involved a critical distinction: whether the evidence established the specific criminal intention required for an offence under section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006, or whether it amounted to a prejudicial collection of beliefs, communications and possessions that did not prove the necessary intent.

Our Strategy and Work

From the outset, we recognised that the prosecution case depended upon the interpretation placed upon a large amount of material. The existence of extreme or unconventional views was not, by itself, sufficient to establish preparation of terrorist acts. The prosecution had to prove the specific intention required by section 5.

We carefully examined the alleged manifesto, our client’s online communications and the surrounding circumstances in which the material had been created or obtained. We challenged the prosecution’s interpretation of his ideology and scrutinised whether the evidence genuinely demonstrated preparation for terrorism.

Particular attention was given to the distinction between hostility towards government and modern society, a desire for a simpler way of life, and the much more serious allegation that our client intended to prepare for terrorist acts. The defence case was that the prosecution had sought to draw conclusions from material that, when properly analysed and placed in context, did not establish the necessary criminal intent.

We also addressed the way in which the physical items relied upon by the prosecution had been presented. Equipment described as “prepping” material, crossbows and a 3D printer could create a highly prejudicial impression when viewed in isolation. It was essential that the jury considered what those items actually demonstrated and whether they provided reliable evidence of preparation for terrorism.

The case required detailed engagement with digital evidence, ideological material and the statutory requirements of section 5. We ensured that the prosecution was required to prove the precise offence charged rather than relying upon the seriousness of the subject matter or the disturbing nature of some of the material.

Outcome

Following a lengthy trial at Manchester Crown Court, our client was acquitted of s5, preparation of a Terrorist Attack.

The result meant that he avoided conviction for preparation of terrorist acts and the severe consequences that would have followed. The case demonstrated that large volumes of online material, political or ideological writings and apparently suspicious possessions do not necessarily establish the specific intention required by terrorism legislation.

Comments from Elizabeth Syddall

“Section 5 prosecutions require the prosecution to prove a very specific criminal intention. Extreme views, unusual possessions and disturbing online material may create a powerful impression, but they do not remove the need for the prosecution to establish every element of the offence. By examining the evidence in detail and separating prejudice from proof, we secured an acquittal for a young man facing one of the most serious allegations in the criminal calendar.”

Elizabeth Syddall, Clifford Johnston & Co.

Specialist Terrorism Defence

Clifford Johnston & Co defends clients facing serious terrorism allegations, including the preparation of terrorist acts, offences connected with proscribed organisations and allegations involving extremist material.

We provide strategic advice and strong representation from the earliest stages of a police investigation through to contested Crown Court proceedings.

If you are accused of a terrorism offence, contact our specialist Terrorism Defence Lawyers for expert legal advice and representation.