Malcolm Kennedy

State harassment to be challenged by former prisoner

December 2005

After 15 years of maintaining that he had no involvement in the death of Patrick Quinn in Hammersmith Police Station on December 23rd 1990 Malcolm Kennedy has now filed a formal complaint with the European Court of Human Rights alleging that there is no effective remedy to his complaint about ongoing interference with his telephones, mail and email.

The complaint is the first of its kind to challenge the draconian UK secrecy laws and is unique in that there are no national security issues surrounding him or his former case.

Kennedy, originally convicted of murdering Patrick Quinn, was released on appeal in February 1993 and later convicted of manslaughter following two re-trials. Released in 1996 he has always maintained his innocence and his case has been sent to the Criminal Cases Review Commission for consideration.

He is convinced that those behind what he describes as “harassment” are annoyed at his refusal to admit to playing any role in Patrick Quinn’s death.

Kennedy says that he has been illegally targeted by the Metropolitan Police and National Criminal Intelligence Service and that the interference with his phones has been ongoing since 1997, when following his release from prison he established a small removals company, and it is being carried out using British State interception facilities and that there is nothing in British law that allows for him to be targeted in this way.

Kennedy says that in the run-up to the complaint being filed the interference with his phones was increased, directly hitting his small removals business ‘Small Moves’ by preventing prospective customers contacting him.

“Those behind these illegal acts were attempting to intimidate me into not filing a complaint with the European court” he says.

Kennedy has previously complained to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. This is the main body to complain to about state interference with an individual’s communications. The tribunal did not up-hold his complaint.

Kennedy says that as a result of his complaint he found himself harassed by the use of material that he disclosed to the Tribunal after it was passed on, as expected, to the respondents, the Metropolitan Police, MI5 and GCHQ.

He also says that anything the respondents had to say was not disclosed to him by the direction of the Tribunal.

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal formed under the RIP Act 2000 have never to date upheld a complaint. This follows the precedent set by its predecessor the Interception of Communications Tribunal who never up held a complaint during the 13 years it existed.


Police knew two dead men in cells were friends

October 3rd 2003

An amazing new twist in the case of Patrick Quinn who was killed in Hammersmith Police Station at Xmas 1990 has been revealed by a Northern Ireland man who worked on London’s building sites for over 40 years. He has provided evidence that one of Quinn’s best friends, a Joseph Fallon also died in the police station three years earlier. He has also revealed that on the night of Quinn’s death at least one officer had already worked out that the two dead men had been friends.

Malcolm Kennedy, an east London businessman, was later found guilty of the manslaughter of Quinn, a charge which he continues to strenuously deny.

Now retired the man contacted the re-launched ‘Malcolm Kennedy is Innocent Justice for Patrick Quinn Campaign’ earlier this year asking whether they had ever heard of “Joseph Fallon, better known as Healey.”

He told them that “Fallon was one of Patsy [Quinn’s nickname] best friends and he also died in police custody.” He was unsure about the exact date but believed it to be about “three years earlier” before Patrick Quinn’s died.  The man was a friend of both men for many years.

Records reveal that Fallon died in police custody at Hammersmith on September 17th 1987. He had a ruptured liver. Because of the circumstances an Inquest was held at which Fallon’s death was recorded as natural causes. 

The group which assists people who have died in police custody, INQUEST, attended the Coroners court and the notes taken at the time by the then worker, Dave Ledbetter, record the fact that the coroner asked the families solicitor Louise Balmain to arrange a speedy meeting with them to consider making a possible police complaint. Investigations are now proceeding to try and obtain further information on this.

When interviewed at his home the man spoke of his initial surprise when a friend told him that Fallon had died. He however says he was “astonished” when he was further told Fallon had been dead over a month and he still hadn’t been buried.

“I went straight home and I rang the police station and I said ‘have you got anyone there by the name of Joe Fallon?”

They [the police] said ‘we have, but we can’t find any relatives”. The man knew Fallon was from “a good, decent family” and “I said to them, the police; ‘make sure you don’t do anything with the body by burying him because I know he comes from a decent family”.

Over the next few hours the man claims to have contacted officers in Fallon’s home town area of Tarmonbarry near Longford, in Ireland in order to try and locate Fallon’s family.  However before he’d had the chance to do so, and just over four afters after first speaking to them a police officer at Hammersmith Police Station rang him back to say they had now located Fallon’s sister in Croydon and a brother in Dublin.

“He claims to have said to the police “that’s very, very unusual, that all of a sudden with me contacting you that you’ve found them.” He later identified Fallon’s body at the mortuary and attended the funeral and mass.  

Although suspicious the man did not do anything about what happened but he recalls that “the family … had doubts, at the time, about the cause of his death.”

Three years later at 7.00am on December 24th 1990 the same man claims he was rang by the police to be told that Patrick Quinn had died in Hammersmith Police Station.

He had known Quinn’s since meeting him at a friends wedding in 1967 in Hammersmith. Over the next 23 years he frequently worked with him on various sites and also enjoyed the odd pint or two. “He was a very respectable Irish man” he says of Quinn “who would stick up for his rights” leading to him having “the odd argument” including with the police. According to the man Quinn was a passionate Republican, and he makes similar claims for Fallon.

The man claims “that the police would have the odd go at Quinn now and again” something he heard from the men he was transporting them to and from work on various building sites as they talked about various incidents. “I would hear the banter among them” he says.

Earlier this year a new witness came forward to reveal that Patrick Quinn had, despite police claims at the time, a long history of conflict with the police. This had the effect at the time of Quinn’s death of leaving Kennedy, who had been arrested for drunk and disorderly, and locked in the same cell as Quinn, as the only suspect in the case. 

This second witness would appear to confirm that Quinn was known by the police before his arrest and death in Hammersmith Police Station.

Asked why he thought the police had contacted him less than 6 hours after Quinn had been confirmed as being dead in the Police Station the Tyrone man, who is married and has two grown up children, felt “it could have been they had my name in there because of Joe Fallon.. my opinion would be that they [the police] knew Patrick Quinn knew Joe Fallon” and as such the man was contacted because of his concern three years earlier when Fallon died.

This would indicate that if true, certainly one or more officers had already made the connection in a matter of a few hours between Quinn’s death and that of Joseph Fallon three years earlier at the same station. In effect, at least, one officer knew that the dead man Quinn was a friend of a man who had earlier died in the same station. If proved to be true this is amazing.

It is nearly 13 years since Patrick Quinn was brutally killed in Hammersmith Police Station. Malcolm Kennedy was subsequently convicted of his murder and sentenced to life in mid 1991. Quinn had had all his ribs broken, his heart and spleen crushed and his face pulped in a vicious attack which took place after he had been arrested and placed in a cell in the police station.

Following new witnesses who were in the police station on the night of Quinn’s death [who were not disclosed by the police to Kennedy’s lawyers] being located by Kennedy’s solicitors and a World in Action investigation Kennedy’s case went back to the Court of Appeal in February 1993. A re-trial was ordered.

The re-trial in September the same year was abandoned while PC Paul Giles was in the witness box when the second investigating officer suddenly found a vital piece of evidence that had been missing for three years.

At the fresh re-trial PC Giles was declared mentally unfit to give evidence claiming he could suffer irreparable mental damage if he went in to the witness box. Giles was a key witness. He was known to have strong anti-Irish Republican views and a history of violence.

Kennedy was found not guilty of murder. However, the Jury, under pressure from the Judge to reach a decision found Kennedy guilty of manslaughter. He was sentenced to 9 years imprisonment. The ‘Free Malcolm Kennedy Justice for Patrick Quinn’ campaign picketed Hammersmith Police Station on a monthly basis during his time in prison.

Following Kennedy’s conviction officers from Hammersmith Police Station, including PC Giles, subsequently sued Granada Television and won substantial damages in an Out of Court settlement.

Kennedy’s appeal against his manslaughter conviction was later lost and despite attempts to take his case to the European Court of Human Rights he was unsuccessful.

Kennedy had hoped to “get on with his life” when he was released. He soon started up a small home removals company called ‘Small Moves’ in east London. However, he alleges that he has been the subject of “highly intrusive and unlawful surveillance” and interference with his phones, mail and emails which has had the effect of preventing him from going about his everyday business.

He claims that potential customers can’t always contact him as his incoming calls are barred, that he gets a high volume of nuisance calls and has lost a lot of business as a result.

Kennedy has complained about this to the Tribunal established under the government’s controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers [RIP] Act 2000.  His case is being supported by the Civil Rights organisation, Liberty and the case is ongoing.

Celia Stubbs, the partner of Blair Peach, who was killed by an unidentified member of the Metropolitan Police at Southall in April 1979 during counter demonstrations against the National Front, and who has backed Kennedy’s Campaign from the start said “The fact that it would now appear that a close friend of Patrick Quinn also died in the same police station three years previously and that at least one of the officers on duty that night linked them together makes me more convinced than ever that Malcolm Kennedy is innocent and that those responsible still have to be brought to justice.

We would appeal to anyone with further information on either Patrick Quinn’s death or that of Joseph Fallon to contact us via Malcolm’s solicitor. “

Those who have further information can contact Michael Schwarz, Kennedy’s solicitor on 020 7 833 4433 at Bindman’s Solicitors.

© Mark Metcalf

Guardian wins key secrecy case

By Stuart Millar and Richard Norton-Taylor
From The Guardian 24/1/2003

The Guardian yesterday won a landmark legal victory when two senior judges
upheld its unprecedented challenge to a blanket rule dictating that every
hearing of the government's surveillance watchdog be held in secret.

Meeting in public yesterday for the first time, the investigatory powers
tribunal quashed rules made by the home secretary that prevented any public
access to or reporting of the tribunal's business, even when there was no
threat to national security.

The tribunal is responsible for hearing complaints from members of the
public who believe they have been the target of unlawful surveillance by
police, MI5, MI6, GCHQ, customs or the Inland Revenue. Since 1985, every
case has been held entirely in secret and no complaint has been upheld.

But in their 85-page judgment, the judges ruled that parts of cases where
no sensitive information would be disclosed should be held in public.

They said the challenge to the rules was "the most significant case ever to
come before the tribunal", and their ruling would have important
consequences for future complaints.

Alan Rusbridger, editor of the Guardian, said: "Today's ruling is a
significant victory for those who campaign for open justice, freedom of
expression and the right to a fair trial."

The Guardian's challenge related to two cases brought by the human rights
group Liberty, which also challenged the secrecy rule. One case involves an
east London businessman, Malcolm Kennedy, who said police had continually
interfered with his communications after he complained about them during a
criminal case in 1984 in which he was convicted of manslaughter.

In the second case, Liberty, British-Irish Rights Watch and the Irish
Council for Civil Liberties allege that telephone calls between them in the
UK and Ireland were routinely intercepted by GCHQ.

In the Guardian's submission to the tribunal last July, Michael Tugendhat
QC argued that the absolute blanket ban on any public access or reporting
was incompatible with the principles of open justice and freedom of
expression enshrined in common law and the Human Rights Act. The tribunal

The judges also voiced anxiety that the tribunal's rulings could not be

Despite yesterday's decision, much of the tribunal's work will remain
secret. Only procedural issues will be public. Complainants will still have
no automatic right to hear or see the evidence or allegations against them
from the agency they are complaining about.

Spooky Stuff
From The Morning Star 1/11/2001

At a time when there are increasing concerns about the ability of state agencies to collect information on all of us judgement has been reserved on a Secrete Directions Hearing which took place in the High Court on Thursday August 1st. This is the first time the Investigatory Powers Tribunal formed under the Government’s controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers [R.I.P] Act 2000 has sat to hear oral arguments. The tribunal is the only place to complain about the activities of the security services and the police where intrusive surveillance and harassment is concerned. It is also the only body to complain to about violation of ones Human Rights.

Normally when a complaint is made to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal it is dealt with by letter and the complainant is ultimately informed that their complaint has not been up held. To date the Tribunal has not upheld one complaint. Malcolm Kennedy says "the tribunal is able to avoid properly investigating a complaint by writing a letter to the various state agencies whose activities are complained of and asking a "Trick Question" that can only produce a response "that no illegal activity is or has taken place".

Malcolm Kennedy, a businessman from east London, has alleged that he has been the subject of "highly intrusive and unlawful surveillance" which has had the effect of preventing him from going about his everyday business.

In a nutshell, Kennedy alleges that potential customers can’t always make contact with him as his incoming calls are often barred with a variety of different effects being given to new callers. He also alleges he gets high volumes of incoming nuisance calls and that this has led to a loss in business. Kennedy says "this type of harassment is known as psy-ops (Psychological Operations) in intelligence circles and is a tailored program of harassment designed to reduce a targets potential.

Proceedings at the Directions Hearings on Thursday August 1st before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in the High Court were held in secret and cannot reported. However Kennedy feels he can say that the directions hearing concerned the rules under which the tribunal operate, and his challenge that the rules are incompatible with the Human Rights Act. The Press and public were banned from attending. Last month at an estimated cost of £30,000 the Guardian Newspaper mounted a legal challenge to the Tribunals decision that the press and public should be excluded from the from the Tribunals hearings. A decision to end a blanket ban that all cases heard by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal must be held behind closed doors is still awaited. In the mean time the press and public were excluded from any and all proceedings.

Kennedy’s complaint forms part of a determined campaign by him stretching back over a number of years. He originally complained to the R.I.P’s forerunner, the Interception of Communications Tribunal in 1998, but his complaint, like every other one made by anyone to the Tribunal, was not upheld.

Concerned by Kennedy's complaint and Liberty's own concerns about state violations of Human Rights Liberty, the Human Rights watchdog, agreed to support Kennedy's complaint and formally made a complaint to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. As the complaint was made in conjunction with a complaint that the Tribunals rules are incompatible with the Human Rights Act, the Tribunal has been forced to sit in court for the first time ever and hear oral arguments. The President of the Tribunal is Lord Justice Mummery, Mr Justice Burton is the secretary, they have the duty of investigating and dealing with complaints from people who allege they are the victims of unlawful surveillance by agencies of the state. These include the police and the intelligence services.

At the Directions Hearings it was argued that the Tribunal Rules are incompatible under the Human Rights Act as they deny the right of the complainant to have access to any information on whether or not the state is engaging in illegal surveillance of a person or persons. An application was made to hear the case in Open Court to allow Kennedy’s representatives to question state employees including members of MI5 and the police. The Treasury Barrister represented these agencies.

Kennedy admits he has no idea exactly who is carrying out the surveillance or harassment (but suspects special branch and MI5). He would like it to stop and says that "I am not involved in anything criminal, I pay my taxes and I simply want to go about my everyday business like everyone else is allowed to".

He feels that the harassment may be linked to his refusal, both now and when in prison between 1990 and 1994, to admit to any part in the brutal death of Patrick Quinn in Hammersmith Police Station in December 1990. Quinn’s injuries included 33 fractured ribs, crushed heart and larynx along with the loss of a large amount of blood. After a lengthy legal process involving a trial, a Court of Appeal hearing, an aborted retrial and a second retrial Kennedy was convicted of manslaughter. Kennedy had been charged with murder.

Kennedy appreciates that he has now exhausted the Appeals process and accepts "that there is nothing I can do legally to prove my innocence. I would now like to move on with the rest of my life, but I am prevented from doing so".

His case has meanwhile attracted the attention of others campaigning for relatives and friends who are alleging they are ‘the victims of a miscarriage of justice’.

In Liverpool, the parents of Gary Hampton, convicted with Michael Brown of the murder of Colin McGinty, told me that after the trial in October last year that numerous friends and relatives had complained about being unable to ring them. In a separate occasion when their phone wasn’t working they used their daughters phone (which is a separate line) from the bedroom in the same house. The operator told them they were ‘collecting data off the line". When they phoned back they were informed that all the lines in their area weren’t working and when challenged about this the operator was unable to provide any additional explanation. Gary Hampton and Michael Brown are appealing against their convictions.

Kevin McMahon, an ex-police officer who blew the whistle on inflated Merseyside police clear up rates, and chairman of Merseyside Against Injustice supports people like the Hampton’s. One day he received a call from British Telecom to say that there was a fault on his line and that all telephone calls directed to him and all calls made by him were being diverted to Merseyside Police Headquarters. His solicitor wrote to BT and they confirmed that this was the case, claiming it was clearly a fault.

I have also interviewed others in similar situations. They complain that they are frequently unable to ring out on their phones. Others have received a high level of nuisance calls and, in one case, the sister of a person in a high public profile case had her phone registering as having made a call to a journalist at the Press Agency. Yet at the time her phone was only capable of receiving incoming calls. She attributed this to police harassment.

Others who have never been the subject of criminal proceedings against them or their families have also found themselves the unwitting subjects of harassment. Roy Jenkins, a retired lorry driver from the West Midlands, was so concerned about corruption by some employees in the Customs and Excise Department that he reported his concerns to the police. He subsequently had a call from a Detective Constable, which he recorded on tape informing him that his phone was being ‘tapped by Customs’.

And in Kent, Yolande Lindridge, Kent businesswoman of the year in 1996, who has been campaigning for the rights of patients has found her mail being interfered with and stolen. Some of her fax messages to important bodies never arrive at their destinations and her phone frequently cuts off in mid-sentence.

Kennedy’s case has massive implications for Civil Liberties in England and Wales and the Tribunal will have to decide whether someone complaining about unlawful surveillance and state harassment has the right to know, challenge and stop it continuing. Judgement on the rules under which the tribunal will hear Kennedy's complaint is expected any day.

© – Mark Metcalf 07967 886257

Malcolm Kennedy can be contacted [hopefully] on 07958 677755 or 07903 984257

return to top