Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
van Hoogstraten
- Thread starter ditchy
- Start date
Raphael Meade
Well-known member
just saw it on the news. is it bail? bbc website just says he's been released after winning a legal battle...
Seagullsgonnagetya
Member
Property tycoon Nicholas van Hoogstraten, who was jailed for killing a business rival, has been set free at the Old Bailey after winning a legal battle to clear his name.
Sully's Moustache
Member
3:02pm (UK)
Hoogstraten Goes Free after Winning Appeal
By Pat Clarke, PA News
One of Britain’s most notorious property barons, who was jailed for killing a business rival, was set free today after winning a legal battle to clear his name.
Nicholas van Hoogstraten had served a year in prison after being convicted of the manslaughter of father-of-six Mohammed Raja.
He left the Old Bailey today with his lawyers after the Court of Appeal agreed that the prosecution’s case against him did not stand up legally.
The man once described as Britain’s youngest millionaire may now consider suing for wrongful imprisonment.
Hoogstraten, 58, from Uckfield, East Sussex, had been cleared of murder but convicted of manslaughter of Mr Raja at the Old Bailey last year. He was jailed for 10 years.
He won the right to a retrial when his conviction was quashed in July by the Court of Appeal.
His lawyers had successfully argued that Hoogstraten’s conviction last year was unsafe.
Hoogstraten’s defence team then went on to argue that there was no case left for him to answer at all. It had no basis in law. There was a complete lack of evidence on which a jury could convict.
He could not have foreseen that the attack on Mr Raja – carried out by henchmen Robert Knapp and David Croke – would inevitably end in death, they asserted.
Croke and Knapp had stabbed and shot the 62-year-old businessman at point blank range at his home in Sutton, south London, in July 1999.
Judge Sir Stephen Mitchell agreed with Hoogstraten’s counsel Geoffrey Cox QC that there was no foundation for a manslaughter case against Hoogstraten.
He based his decision on a number of legal authorities and said: “If the act causing death was not foreseen, then it was an act for which the secondary party (allegedly Hoogstraten) could not be liable. There is no halfway house. If he is not liable, he is not guilty of murder or manslaughter.
“I have come to the conclusion that if the prosecution were successful in establishing the facts, those facts could not found a conviction of manslaughter.”
But prosecutor David Waters QC immediately asked to seek leave to appeal against the judge’s ruling – which was met with angry abuse from Hoogstraten.
Hoogstraten, who has convictions for violence and once described his tenants as “filth”, shouted from the dock: “It’s an absolute disgrace.”
The judge told him: “I know this is very difficult for you, but you must not interrupt Mr Waters.”
The judge allowed the prosecution to seek leave to appeal but the appeal court judges decided today that they had no jurisdiction.
They referred the matter back to Justice Mitchell who released Hoogstraten.
Hoogstraten Goes Free after Winning Appeal
By Pat Clarke, PA News
One of Britain’s most notorious property barons, who was jailed for killing a business rival, was set free today after winning a legal battle to clear his name.
Nicholas van Hoogstraten had served a year in prison after being convicted of the manslaughter of father-of-six Mohammed Raja.
He left the Old Bailey today with his lawyers after the Court of Appeal agreed that the prosecution’s case against him did not stand up legally.
The man once described as Britain’s youngest millionaire may now consider suing for wrongful imprisonment.
Hoogstraten, 58, from Uckfield, East Sussex, had been cleared of murder but convicted of manslaughter of Mr Raja at the Old Bailey last year. He was jailed for 10 years.
He won the right to a retrial when his conviction was quashed in July by the Court of Appeal.
His lawyers had successfully argued that Hoogstraten’s conviction last year was unsafe.
Hoogstraten’s defence team then went on to argue that there was no case left for him to answer at all. It had no basis in law. There was a complete lack of evidence on which a jury could convict.
He could not have foreseen that the attack on Mr Raja – carried out by henchmen Robert Knapp and David Croke – would inevitably end in death, they asserted.
Croke and Knapp had stabbed and shot the 62-year-old businessman at point blank range at his home in Sutton, south London, in July 1999.
Judge Sir Stephen Mitchell agreed with Hoogstraten’s counsel Geoffrey Cox QC that there was no foundation for a manslaughter case against Hoogstraten.
He based his decision on a number of legal authorities and said: “If the act causing death was not foreseen, then it was an act for which the secondary party (allegedly Hoogstraten) could not be liable. There is no halfway house. If he is not liable, he is not guilty of murder or manslaughter.
“I have come to the conclusion that if the prosecution were successful in establishing the facts, those facts could not found a conviction of manslaughter.”
But prosecutor David Waters QC immediately asked to seek leave to appeal against the judge’s ruling – which was met with angry abuse from Hoogstraten.
Hoogstraten, who has convictions for violence and once described his tenants as “filth”, shouted from the dock: “It’s an absolute disgrace.”
The judge told him: “I know this is very difficult for you, but you must not interrupt Mr Waters.”
The judge allowed the prosecution to seek leave to appeal but the appeal court judges decided today that they had no jurisdiction.
They referred the matter back to Justice Mitchell who released Hoogstraten.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
"Justice must not only be done. It must be seen to be believed".
He is the unacceptable face of humanity. Very sad day for the oppressed
Dover
Home at Last.
I wonder what the bail conditions are? And whatever they may be he, I expect he will not stick to them. Justic ha not been done. It just goes to show what money can buy.
Gary Nelson
New member
I was chatting to a bloke last year who was on the ITV production team and was at the whole of the trial. I can't remember the exact details but when the charge was read in court there were a few raised eyebrows wmongst the jounro's in the gallery. He basically said that everyone knew he was guilty (alledgedly your honour-not my words guv) but the way in which it was delivered was a total farce. A bit like the ball gonig 3 foot over the line and the ref not giving it!! I was chatting to this bloke about 2 months after he was sentanced and he expected him to be out with 18 months on appeal.
Pevenseagull
meh
- Jul 20, 2003
- 20,436
he's gonna sue for wrongful imprisonment and cop a few million quid of tax payers money
how dya like them onions
how dya like them onions
Spiros
Well-known member
dover97 said:I wonder what the bail conditions are? And whatever they may be he, I expect he will not stick to them. Justic ha not been done. It just goes to show what money can buy.
There aren't any bail conditions as he has actually been acquitted. I think this is less a case of what money can buy, more a case of how difficult it is to stick a crime on someone who hired someone else to do their dirty work. You also have a police force which has trouble handling a few hundred football fans who only want to watch a game of football. How are they ever going to be smart enough to put away a bloke like Hoogstraten who's always one step removed?
Ernest
Stupid IDIOT
pevenseagull said:
Maybe he can buy Potless out ?
REDLAND
Active member
ChapmansThe Saviour said:
Yer
Vigilante style
Sorrel
Well-known member
His defence claim isn't that he didn't hire some thugs to go and beat up the guy who was murdered (who, incidently, was also a bastard evil landlord). He admits that.
He says that they were too thick to understand him, and he only said "rough him up a little" while they went and killed him. His defence was that he hardly paid them anything, and surely he would have paid much more and got someone decent in if he'd wanted to murder someone. Outrageous defence really, as it's clear that was his plan from the beginning. But it's very hard to prove.
The thick murders are still inside, for life, of course.
He says that they were too thick to understand him, and he only said "rough him up a little" while they went and killed him. His defence was that he hardly paid them anything, and surely he would have paid much more and got someone decent in if he'd wanted to murder someone. Outrageous defence really, as it's clear that was his plan from the beginning. But it's very hard to prove.
The thick murders are still inside, for life, of course.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
What a dangerous precedent this sets then. I take it in the original trial, a link was established between Hoogstraaten and the two hitmen who killed the fella ? If that was the case, but Hoogstraaten has been acquitted simply because he was removed from the actual killing (whether accidental or deliberate by the hitmen), then doesn't it mean we could all hire a hitman to do our dirty work, and be absolved from the resulting injury or death ? There HAS to be some kind of charge for Hoogstraaten to answer in this case - conspiring to kill or something ? Can't believe he can get off scott-free with this having served only a year.
Gary Nelson
New member
We're all f***ed if Belotti and Archer get bumped off them, that is until we plead your honour that we only wanted them roughed up a little
Tom Hark Preston Park
Will Post For Cash
- Jul 6, 2003
- 71,882
Jeez - can you imagine if Van Hoogstraaten ever came knocking at the Albion's door looking for a piece of the action. Doesn't bear thinking about. Pure evil.
southstandandy
WEST STAND ANDY
- Jul 9, 2003
- 5,957
Relocate his Mansion to some farmland in Nigeria and then see how long he lasts.
How on earth are the 2 blokes doing time for the actual offence thinking ? They were hardly the brains behind it. They'd struggle to scatch the panel off a lottery card.
Don't you just love the British judicial system !
What next - Huntley gets let off as the two girls 'slipped at the same time'
??
How on earth are the 2 blokes doing time for the actual offence thinking ? They were hardly the brains behind it. They'd struggle to scatch the panel off a lottery card.
Don't you just love the British judicial system !
What next - Huntley gets let off as the two girls 'slipped at the same time'
??