How Cadder case turned Scots law on its head

IT WAS to have huge repercussions, but Peter Cadder’s case was, at first, unremarkable.

The 20-year-old from Possil, Glasgow, was convicted at the city’s sheriff court in 2009 of two assaults and a breach of the peace.

However, it was the case human rights lawyers, who had long believed Scotland was out of kilter with the rest of Europe, had been waiting for.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

They appealed to the Supreme Court in London, citing the case of Yusuf Salduz, in Turkey, whose conviction was quashed because he – like Mr Cadder – had not been given access to a lawyer.

The court agreed with this judgment, rather than a 2009 Court of Appeal ruling in the case of Duncan McLean, which said a lawyer did not have to be present. Mr Cadder was free to appeal his conviction, and a precedent was set.

Following the ruling in October 2010, the Scottish Government was forced to bring in emergency legislation to cope with the fall-out.

The length of time a suspect could be held was doubled from six hours to 12, with the option of that being extended to 24 with the approval of an inspector not involved in the case. That came with costs – £7 million to introduce the necessary custody suites and £20m a year in additional staffing.

Justice secretary Kenny MacAskill asked Lord Carloway, now Scotland’s second most senior judge, to review areas of criminal law affected by the ruling, including corroboration.

By February the following year, almost 900 suspected criminals, including alleged rapists, had walked free, after prosecutors were forced to drop charges against them because of the Cadder ruling.

Charges of sexual assault, robbery and possession of firearms were also among 867 dropped in just three months.

Mr Cadder, meanwhile, now 21, walked free after his retrial collapsed. The man whose conviction turned Scots law on its head was cleared because of a different matter entirely.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The Crown withdrew charges after a witness, who initially told the court he had seen what happened and was able to identify the attacker, said he could not.

At the time, in May last year, Mr Cadder’s lawyer, Michelle McGarrity, was reported as saying: “Mr Cadder is satisfied that this was the correct course of action. His desire now is to move on with his life.”