Last October the Prime Minister commissioned a review of when historical records are transferred to The National Archives, and made available to the public – this currently happens 30 years after an event.
Successive governments have kept details secret on some court cases, not just for 30 years, some for as long as 70 years.
Ruth Ellis case papers were locked away from public scrutiny for nearly 50 years. Other documents about the case, in files not to be opened until 2031 were finally opened at my request in 2006, a year after our book RUTH ELLIS MY SISTER’S SECRET LIFE was published.
This is not the end of the story – I have compiled a long list of documents that are still missing from official files and I intend to contact the Home Office again on this matter.
Long Closure of documents highlights the unfair system used in British courts of justice, which does not necessarily seek the truth but simply a winner or loser between the prosecution and defence counsel.
I have seen the effect of 50 years of secrecy surrounding Ruth Ellis’s case, a so-called open and shut case of cold-blooded murder where no-one else was involved. For example, how Ruth’s defence counsel, the eminent Melford Stevenson, who clearly bungled her case, has been protected from scrutiny.
It has been brought to my attention that in 1957, 2 years after Ruth Ellis was executed, Melford Stevenson was involved in another botched trial (this time for the prosecution) that of Dr John Bodkin Adams. He was suspected of murdering more patients than Dr Shipman. Dr Adams walked away a free man. Once again case papers were locked away until 2033, only opened at Pamela Cullen’s request for researching her excellent 2006 book, Stranger in Blood, about the Dr Adams case. Ms Cullen apparently is convinced the prosecution ruined the case on purpose for political reasons and wonders if he botched Ruth Ellis’s trial too.
In my opinion the 30-Year rule is no longer acceptable in the educated society in which we live today. You have until 29th February 2008 to have your say about it on The National Archives website for the sake of justice: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk.
