COLIN HOWELLS' 2014 JUDICIAL BATTLE OVER FACEBOOK FRIENDSHIPS IN LONDON

In June 2014, a failed attempt by sex offender Colin Howells to undermine his conviction was linked to a juror’s Facebook connections. Howells, now 50 and residing on Annie Street in Ramsbottom, was sentenced to 18 years at Bolton Crown Court the previous year after being convicted of numerous heinous crimes, including multiple rapes of a young girl.

Today, Howells challenged his convictions at London’s Criminal Appeal Court, claiming that social media interactions might have influenced the jury’s decision. His lawyers argued that one juror was friends via Facebook with two women who had been watching the trial, and that if this friendship had been disclosed, the juror could have been discharged.

The legal team also stated that the same juror had been 'gossiping' locally about the jury’s deliberations. However, Mrs Justice Elisabeth Laing dismissed these claims, stating that the Facebook connection was merely a ‘superficial acquaintance’ with only a very tenuous link to Howells.

During the hearing, she emphasized that while it would be 'deplorable' if the juror had discussed the case publicly within the community, such conduct could not be considered sufficient to cancel out the jury’s verdicts.

Howells was convicted of abusing a young girl in the early 2000s. He denied all wrongdoing but was found guilty on 16 counts of rape, one count of sexual assault, and one count of causing a female to engage in sexual activity without consent.

His defense argued that none of the jurors initially indicated they knew anyone involved in the case. Nevertheless, it was later uncovered that one juror was friends on Facebook with two women who had been present in the court’s public gallery.

Mrs Justice Laing noted that the juror’s Facebook friendship was with more than 1,500 friends of those women, and there was no evidence to suggest bias. Sitting alongside Lady Justice Rafferty and Mr Justice Burnett, she concluded, ‘Here, there is the most tenuous acquaintance — we therefore reject the submission that the convictions are unsafe."

She added, ‘If it is true that the juror discussed deliberations in the local community, that would be deplorable and she should not have done so. However, even if that occurred, it does not warrant doubts about the safety of the convictions.’