Confusion over police records of fatal night

ON CHRISTMAS EVE 1990, an Irish labourer lay dead on the floor of a cell in Hammersmith police station in London. Patrick Quinn, 56, from Donegal, had been kicked, punched and jumped on in a 'explosive' attack lasting up to two minutes.

His bloody face was unrecognisable, his jaw and nose broken, his larynx crushed. All his ribs except one were broken, caused by someone jumping on his chest with two feet. His heart was crushed. Other injuries suggested had tried to defend himself. The time of his murder was estimated at between 1.40am and 1.50am.

Arrested drunk at 11.03pm on 23 December in Little Brook Green, Hammersmith, Mr Quinn had been taken to the local police station and put in cell five, known as the tank. That was at 11.15pm. Almost two hours later another drunken man, Malcolm Kennedy, a former restaurant owner with business problems, was put into the same cell.

Two drunken men in one cell, one later found dead - it appeared to be a clear case. After a 17-day trial in 1990 Kennedy was convicted of murder.

Now, after two retrials, he has been found guilty of manslaughter. His conviction will have brought relief to police officers worried about growing image problems. Kennedy's claim from day one was that he saw a police officer kill Mr Quinn in the tank.

However, a problem still remains over why the conduct of the police in gathering and keeping records for the night was so confused. Accepted inconsistencies in the evidence regarding the police's own account still remain.

What Kennedy was saying was not lost on the prosecution. Timothy Langdale QC said: 'This cover-up would have involved every single police officer on duty in Hammersmith that night.'

In Kennedy's first trial, two and two appeared to make four. However, in the 11-week retrial police timings of events on 23 and 24 December 1990, their written records, the police investigation and the personal details of police officers were all examined. The equation no longer added up.

The inconsistencies, according to Mr Langdale, pointed not to a cover-up, but to confusion. The pocketbook system was a shambles. Vehicle logs were incomplete. Records thought to have been lost were located. But nothing 'sinister' was being hidden, he said.

PC Paul Giles, a probationary officer from Northern Ireland, dominated the defence case. It often seemed as though PC Giles was on trial. Sergeants on duty and other officers, were also criticised. PC Giles arrested Mr Quinn and took him to the tank. This was the last time, PC Giles said, that he saw Mr Quinn.

From 1.10am to 2am PC Giles claimed he was in the CAD (computer aided dispatch) room although no officer was able to confirm this. Such inconsistencies fuelled the defence's claim that there was a cover- up. An officer was posted outside the tank to log everyone who came in and out. The log disappeared. His statement was supposed to be based on the missing log. PC Giles is not mentioned. Yet a writing test on another document revealed the log and PC Giles is mentioned.

PC Giles was not called as a witness, having been diagnosed mentally ill by a police psychiatrist. That diagnosis was challenged by the defence.

Although PC Giles loomed large in the defence case, Kennedy, on the morning of the murder, 'described' the officer who came into the tank as 'clean-shaven, a sergeant'. PC Giles had a large dark moustache.

(Photograph omitted)