John Cummiskey

---

John Cummiskey (along with co-defendant Roy Meads) was convicted of armed robbery after a post office security van was robbed of bags of money containing £185,000. The attack on the van was carried out by three masked men with firearms who were weating Royal Mail capes. The case against Cumminsky fell into three parts. First, he was arrested near the getaway car. Second, he was said to have made a number of remarks which indicated he much be guilty (although it was suggested these had been fabricated by interviewing officers). Third, it was said there was forensic evidence that provided a clear link between Cumminsky and the getaway vehicle. Cumminsky argued that he had been set up by the police. On appeal, new evidence discredited officers from the West Midlands Serious Crime Squad. The Crown conceded that this meant that evidence of matters alleged to have been said by Cumminsky could no longer be relied upon. The court found that the rest of the material, in light of the way that the case had been conducted and what was subsequently discovered about the police, would not enable them to conclude that the conviction was safe. There were question marks about the forensic evidence (e.g. exhibits did not appear in exhibits book in the order they were said to have been recovered) and there were conflicting accounts of timings in the investigation. The conviction was therefore found to be unsafe, and the conviction quashed.

View Press (news.bbc.co.uk)

View Press (innocent.org.uk)

View Press (www.coventrytelegraph.net)

< Back to Case Search < Back to Overview Graph