Tonight:
4°c
Grinning Glitter is back but still free to go abroad
Rob Singh and Benedict Moore-Bridger22 Aug 2008
Gary Glitter is today still free to travel abroad despite being put on the sex offenders register for life.
The paedophile arrived back in Britain grinning arrogantly as he was escorted by police in Heathrow airport at 7am this morning.
He then refused to go to a court hearing at Uxbridge magistrates' court, as his lawyer attempted to clear his name, and remained in a holding area at Terminal 3 out of fears for his safety.
Glitter, 64, landed at the airport after a 10-hour flight from Bangkok, ending a bizarre week-long hunt for a country which would take him following his release from a Vietnamese prison on Tuesday after serving almost three years for abusing two girls aged 10 and 11.
The former singer had wanted to use a court hearing in order to clear his name, claiming his conviction was unsafe, and protested his innocence.
But a judge dismissed his claims and ordered that he should be put on the sex offenders register indefinitely.
After the hearing, he was then whisked away through a back entrance at Heathrow to a secret location.
Glitter will now be forced to attend a police station and provide details of his national insurance number, date of birth and address within three days.
He is also obliged to contact police if he plans to leave the country for more than three days. This means he will be free to take weekend breaks abroad as long as he is back in the country within three days, leaving him free to travel to the world.
Today his lawyer David Corker, who represented Michael Barrymore when the presenter faced a trail over the death of Stuart Lubbock, said that Glitter's trial in Vietnam had been "a travesty of justice".
He said: "It [his conviction] was obtained in the most appaling of circumstances. My client received an unfair trial and it was a travesty of justice in that case."
He said the conviction was a "gross breach of standards of justice" and asked that the court should enquire whether the conviction should be recognised in Britain.
"Every pressure group says it [Vietnam] is far, far below what is acceptable for European standards of justice."
Prosecutor Rajeev Shetty said the length of Glitter's conviction in Vietnam meant that he would have been placed on the sex offenders register for life if he committed the crimes in Britain.
District judge David Simpson said: "As Mr Gadd has demonstrated his desire to avoid the jurisdiction of the court I therefore make the order sought.
His conviction is not disputed but the fairness of it may be."
He said the conviction was not unsafe and the length of his sentence was sufficient for him to be put on the list in Britain.
Christine Beddoe of leading international children's rights organisation ECPAT attacked the court's decision to let Glitter out the country.
She said: "We are disappointed, that despite the claims of the Home Secretary this week, that the police and courts have not agreed that he poses a risk to children abroad." Speaking outside the court Mr Corker said: "He tells me that his trial in Vietnam - a country which has been condemned by virtually every organisation concerned with justice and human rights as being a system of unfair justice and political trials - was a charade, was a travesty of justice.
"This morning was an opportunity for him to come before English justice for the first time to make these points.
"Unfortunately the court didn't agree with my submission that it should hear me on the issue about the unfairness of how he has been treated by the Vietnamese system." He added: "Mr Gadd wants, through me, to say to you that he did not commit the offences for which he was convicted in Vietnam. It was a show trial and he had no opportunity to put his defence forward."
Glitter's fall from grace began when he was convicted of downloading child pornography in the UK in 1999 and he served two months of a four-month sentence. He then moved to Spain and Cuba before settling in south-east Asia.
It has emerged that 19 countries will refuse him entry although Glitter has reportedly suggested that he could go to Sri Lanka or Singapore.
Reader views (2)
"1)This Labour government supports the use of torture on it's citizens.
2)This Labour government supports the illegal use of rendition for it's citizens.
3)This Labour government supports the use of illegal detention for it's citizens."
Clive, this can't be news to you. Western governments have been acting in this way for 100s of years. Today's government faces the impossible dilemna national security vs individual liberty and so is compelled to use these practices. I know many think that the whole national security argument is a smokescreen but it cannot be denied that islamist cells are present in this country intent on doing damage. A society must be run on a utilitarianism basis. If suspending the rights of a few can ensure the greater good then, difficult and unpalatable as it may be, so be it.
- Marc, London, 26/08/2008 12:00
Report abuse
In case you missed it, yesterday, the High Court found that:
1)This Labour government supports the use of torture on it's citizens.
2)This Labour government supports the illegal use of rendition for it's citizens.
3)This Labour government supports the use of illegal detention for it's citizens.
-I think this may be more important than Gary Glitter.
- Clive Allen, Nelson, New Zealand., 22/08/2008 12:48
Report abuse
