LETTER TO CCRC FROM CHIVERS SOLICITORS
20 May 2007

Dear Sir,

RE: OUR CLIENT- CHARLES BRONSON- BT1314

I am currently instructed by Mr Bronson and have recently attempted to arrange a video conference for the purposes of Mr Bronson receiving legal advice. I was to be present along with Mr Bronson and the video link was to be with Mr Giovanni Di Stefano at Studio Legale Internazionale which is situated in Rome. I initially instructed our secretarial staff that they should contact HMP Wakefield and enquire as to the availability and the protocol for arranging this. I was instructed via our secretarial staff that we should contact a local firm who facilitates these video conferences on a regular basis. It was made quite clear that this was no problem whatsoever, as long as the booking was confirmed in good time (2-3 days in advance) and the prison were supplied with the details.

On Friday the 11th May I then asked our secretarial staff to arrange a video conference. I was quite sure that this could be arranged without problem now that we had been advised as to the requirements. However, when attempting to arrange the conference our member of staff was told that this was not possible due to the fact that the prisoner was Mr Bronson. I am afraid that I do not accept this. It is quite clear that Mr Bronson should have a legitimate expectation to be able to liaise with his legal advisors in the same way as other prisoners. Mr Bronson, as I am sure you are aware, has been incarcerated in segregated conditions for a considerable number of years. His case is of considerable gravity and incorporates issues of wider public importance. Given that Mr Di Stefano is based in Rome (and has very considerable involvement with Mr Bronson’s affairs) it seems clear that the ability to communicate via video conference is both reasonable and necessary.

On the afternoon of Friday 11th May I asked the member of staff to call HMP Wakefield once again to make the request again. This time I asked her to make clear our concerns and to try and extract any reasons why this facility was not available. I was informed that, once again, this request had been denied. I then thought it appropriate to liaise directly with the custody department. I was informed of the following-

• That it was not possible to move Mr Bronson from his holding location to the video conferencing facility

• That the video conference would constitute a security risk.

• That it was not a staffing issue, but that it was simply not an available option.

Once again I must reiterate that I do not accept this. I understand that it might not be possible to have a video conference with Mr Bronson and myself in the same room. However, I would strongly submit that HMP Wakefield should be able to facilitate a video conference between our client and Mr Di Stefano in Rome. I am concerned that this decision is the result of an unwillingness to provide this option to Mr Bronson. I am also convinced that in reality, such a conference could be provided for in a safe way that in no way compromises security. I assume that Mr Bronson is the subject of location changes (such as to exercise, clean, and not least when transferring establishments).

In light of the above I would kindly request that you consider this issue personally. At the moment there appears to be an automatic and arbitrary decision in place. Therefore could you please advise as soon as possible if Mr Bronson will be permitted this facility in future? Please give details of the same.

Please note we reserve the right to commence judicial review proceedings. However, we hope that this letter avoids the need for further litigation.


I thank you for your time in this matter and look forward to your response as soon as possible.


Yours sincerely


Matthew Burniston
CHIVERS SOLICITORS of BINGLEY