‘Most wanted’ drug accused to walk free after blunder

Andrew Spooner was due to stand trial in 2001, accused of being concerned in the supply of ecstasy in October 2000 in Edinburgh city centre. But he failed to turn up at the High Court in Glasgow on 17 September 2001 for the gang’s trial.

Two of the men who went on trial in his absence received lengthy jail terms – with Mohammed Younas jailed for ten years and Michael Cuthbert locked up for five.

In 2007, police received intelligence that Spooner had fled to Spain and in February this year he was placed on a most wanted list by the Serious Organised Crime Agency. Weeks later police received a tip-off that Spooner was living in Salford, Manchester.

The High Court in Dundee heard he was arrested by police at a railway station in the city and brought back to Scotland to face justice.

However, prosecutors were forced to accept his not-guilty plea to being concerned in the supply of ecstasy, because officials had destroyed the drugs that formed a central part of the case against him – despite an order by the procurator fiscal’s office that they be retained.

Now Spooner will be back on the streets within weeks after admitting a charge of failing to appear in court for his original trial, while he will not face trial over the drugs charges.

Judge Lord Pentland condemned Spooner’s evasion as “disgraceful” and said it was “highly unsatisfactory” that he would not face justice.

He ordered prosecutors to look into possible tax fraud by Spooner – after defence advocate Ronnie Renucci told the court that Spooner had been living and working cash in hand as a labourer in England for the ten years he had been on the run.

Lord Pentland jailed Spooner for 21 months over his failure to appear – backdating the sentence to March when he was remanded in custody.

Passing sentence, the judge said: “The maximum penalty I can impose is two years in prison. In my view this is undoubtedly at the upper end of the spectrum. He took a deliberate decision not to appear for a High Court trial where he faced serious charges.

“This was a gross breach of trust on his party. He evaded justice as a result – he chose to remain at liberty for almost a decade.

“It transpires that contrary to an instruction apparently given by the procurator fiscal following the conclusion of the earlier trial in 2001, that certain important items of evidence – namely the drugs – were destroyed.

“It is not entirely clear why this happened and it was clearly unfortunate.

“The Crown has accepted that this made it impossible to proceed to trial on that charge because the critical evidence is no longer available.”