Are you OK with cookies?

We use small files called ‘cookies’ on ccrc.gov.uk. Some are essential to make the site work, some help us to understand how we can improve your experience, and some are set by third parties. You can choose to turn off the non-essential cookies. Which cookies are you happy for us to use?

Skip to content

Attwooll, Michael

Published:

On 10 June 1995 at Newport Crown Court Michael Attwooll and John Roden were convicted of the murders of Gerald Stevens and Christine Rees. They were sentenced to life imprisonment.

The victims were shot at the premises of a taxi firm in Risca in south Wales, where they both worked. Mr Attwooll was Mr Stevens’s partner in the firm.

The prosecution alleged that Mr Attwooll, with Mr Roden’s help, killed the victims using a rifle supplied to him by his brother-in-law.

Mr Attwooll applied for leave to appeal against his conviction but this was refused on 29 February 1996. Mr Roden’s application was refused on 18 July 1996.

The CCRC inherited an application for review of the conviction from the Home Office in March 1997.

The victims’ blood had been found in Mr Attwooll’s car. At trial, a key issue had been the circumstances in which Mr Attwooll, at the police’s request, attended the crime scene in May 1994 (before Mr Attwooll was under suspicion).

Mr Attwooll claimed to have used his own car to visit the scene. Police officers gave unequivocal evidence that Mr Attwooll was driven to the scene in a police car.

If Mr Attwooll had used his own car, the possibility of innocent transfer of the victims’ blood to the car was increased. If he did not use his own car, that possibility was reduced.

During review, the CCRC obtained new evidence supporting Mr Attwooll’s claim he had used his own car. In addition, the CCRC considered that this issue may have impacted on the jury’s assessment of Mr Attwooll’s credibility.

The CCRC concluded that there had been a failure by the defence to deploy, or deploy to full effect, material tending to enhance Mr Attwooll’s credibility and undermine an aspect of the prosecution’s case on an issue on which there was a direct conflict of evidence.

The CCRC referred the conviction in May 2007.

The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction in April 2008.