This article is from the source 'independent' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/john-worboys-release-latest-decision-high-court-parole-board-black-cab-rapist-a8277341.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
John Worboys prison release decision overturned by High Court John Worboys prison release decision overturned by High Court
(35 minutes later)
The decision to release rapist taxi driver John Worboys from prison has been quashed by the High Court following a challenge by victims.The decision to release rapist taxi driver John Worboys from prison has been quashed by the High Court following a challenge by victims.
Three senior judges ordered the Parole Board to make a “fresh determination” on the 60-year-old serial sex attacker’s case, saying they had identified failings in the original decision. Three senior judges ordered the Parole Board to make a “fresh determination” on the 60-year-old serial sex attacker’s case, after they identified failings in the original decision.
Sir Brian Leveson, Mr Justice Jay and Mr Justice Garnham said the board should have “undertaken further inquiry into the circumstances of his offending” before it permitted his release.Sir Brian Leveson, Mr Justice Jay and Mr Justice Garnham said the board should have “undertaken further inquiry into the circumstances of his offending” before it permitted his release.
Parole Board chairman Nick Hardwick resigned ahead of the ruling, admitting he had been ”wrong” on a key issue of whether wider allegations against Worboys could be taken into account. He apologised “for the mistakes that were made in this case”.Parole Board chairman Nick Hardwick resigned ahead of the ruling, admitting he had been ”wrong” on a key issue of whether wider allegations against Worboys could be taken into account. He apologised “for the mistakes that were made in this case”.
The High Court judges said the case would be “remitted to the Parole Board for fresh determination before a differently constituted panel”, with Worboys remaining behind bars indefinitely.The High Court judges said the case would be “remitted to the Parole Board for fresh determination before a differently constituted panel”, with Worboys remaining behind bars indefinitely.
Lawyers for the two women who brought the challenge argued during a hearing earlier this month that the Parole Board’s decision to release Worboys, who now goes under the name of John Radford, was “irrational” and should be overturned.Lawyers for the two women who brought the challenge argued during a hearing earlier this month that the Parole Board’s decision to release Worboys, who now goes under the name of John Radford, was “irrational” and should be overturned.
At the conclusion of the hearing on 14 March the judges continued a temporary bar preventing Worboys’ release, which was originally granted in January.At the conclusion of the hearing on 14 March the judges continued a temporary bar preventing Worboys’ release, which was originally granted in January.
Worboys was jailed indefinitely in 2009 with a minimum term of eight years after being found guilty of 19 offences, including rape, sexual assault and drugging. He became known as the “black cab rapist” because he preyed on victims in his taxi.Worboys was jailed indefinitely in 2009 with a minimum term of eight years after being found guilty of 19 offences, including rape, sexual assault and drugging. He became known as the “black cab rapist” because he preyed on victims in his taxi.
Although he was convicted of offences against 12 victims, police believe he committed crimes against 105 women between 2002 and 2008.Although he was convicted of offences against 12 victims, police believe he committed crimes against 105 women between 2002 and 2008.
The two women who challenged the decision – who cannot be named for legal reasons – said something had gone “badly wrong” with the Parole Board’s decision to free him.The two women who challenged the decision – who cannot be named for legal reasons – said something had gone “badly wrong” with the Parole Board’s decision to free him.
They said the Parole Board should have taken into account “critical evidence” of the “wider allegations” against Worboys.They said the Parole Board should have taken into account “critical evidence” of the “wider allegations” against Worboys.
The judges heard that Worboys, who has served 10 years behind bars, has denied committing any offences other than those for which he was convicted.The judges heard that Worboys, who has served 10 years behind bars, has denied committing any offences other than those for which he was convicted.
The Parole Board argued that its decision was “lawful and and rational” and was based on appropriate evidence.The Parole Board argued that its decision was “lawful and and rational” and was based on appropriate evidence.
Summarising the court’s conclusions, Sir Brian said the judges upheld the challenge ”on the basis that [the board] should have undertaken further inquiry into the circumstances of his offending and, in particular, the extent to which the limited way in which he has described his offending may undermine his overall credibility and reliability.Summarising the court’s conclusions, Sir Brian said the judges upheld the challenge ”on the basis that [the board] should have undertaken further inquiry into the circumstances of his offending and, in particular, the extent to which the limited way in which he has described his offending may undermine his overall credibility and reliability.
“That is so even in relation to the offences of which he was convicted, let alone any other offending.”“That is so even in relation to the offences of which he was convicted, let alone any other offending.”
Kim Harrison, a specialist abuse lawyer with law firm Slater and Gordon, which represented 11 of Worboys’ victims, said: “Our clients are delighted and deeply relieved by today’s decision to overturn the release of this dangerous man.Kim Harrison, a specialist abuse lawyer with law firm Slater and Gordon, which represented 11 of Worboys’ victims, said: “Our clients are delighted and deeply relieved by today’s decision to overturn the release of this dangerous man.
“We have said all along that Worboys is a manipulative and calculating individual who conned the Parole Board into granting his release.“We have said all along that Worboys is a manipulative and calculating individual who conned the Parole Board into granting his release.
“Our clients, who have been terrified that he will track them down after his release, can now sleep easy in their beds safe in the knowledge that this serial sex offender will be kept in jail where he belongs.”“Our clients, who have been terrified that he will track them down after his release, can now sleep easy in their beds safe in the knowledge that this serial sex offender will be kept in jail where he belongs.”
Justice secretary David Gauke said after the ruling: “I welcome today’s judgment and congratulate the victims who brought this unprecedented legal action.Justice secretary David Gauke said after the ruling: “I welcome today’s judgment and congratulate the victims who brought this unprecedented legal action.
 ”I want to take this opportunity to reiterate my heartfelt sympathy for all they, and the other victims, have suffered as a result of Worboys’ hideous crimes.” ”I want to take this opportunity to reiterate my heartfelt sympathy for all they, and the other victims, have suffered as a result of Worboys’ hideous crimes.”
Mr Gauke had decided not to pursue a judicial review of the Parole Board’s decision after taking legal advice which suggested it would fail.Mr Gauke had decided not to pursue a judicial review of the Parole Board’s decision after taking legal advice which suggested it would fail.
He said: “ I considered whether the decision was legally rational – in other words, a decision which no reasonable Parole Board could have made. He said: “I considered whether the decision was legally rational – in other words, a decision which no reasonable Parole Board could have made.
“The advice I received was that such an argument was highly unlikely to succeed. And, indeed, this argument did not succeed. However, the victims succeeded in a different argument.” “The advice I received was that such an argument was highly unlikely to succeed. And, indeed, this argument did not succeed. However, the victims succeeded in a different argument.” 
The justice secretary welcomed Mr Hardwick’s resignation, which he said was “the correct decision in light of the serious failings outlined in today’s judgment”.The justice secretary welcomed Mr Hardwick’s resignation, which he said was “the correct decision in light of the serious failings outlined in today’s judgment”.
In his resignation letter to Mr Gauke, the departing Parole Board chief said: “I had no role in the decision of the panel in the case and believe I am capable of leading the Parole Board through the changes, many of which I have advocated, that will now be necessary.In his resignation letter to Mr Gauke, the departing Parole Board chief said: “I had no role in the decision of the panel in the case and believe I am capable of leading the Parole Board through the changes, many of which I have advocated, that will now be necessary.
“I am sorry for the mistakes that were made in this case but I have always made it clear that I will support the members and staff of the board in the very difficult individual decisions they make and I will accept accountability for the work of the board.“I am sorry for the mistakes that were made in this case but I have always made it clear that I will support the members and staff of the board in the very difficult individual decisions they make and I will accept accountability for the work of the board.
“I will not pass the buck to those who work under me. In these circumstances I inform you of my decision to resign with immediate effect.”“I will not pass the buck to those who work under me. In these circumstances I inform you of my decision to resign with immediate effect.”