A Milford man has admitted hurling a barrage of racial insults at a male, after calling him ‘a black b******’ and ‘n** n**.

Appearing via a video link from HM Parc Prison, Ben Hilton, 32, admitted carrying out the racially aggravated harassment of Mr Mikeal Campbell between February 19 and February 27, 2024.

“Work had been carried out at the victim’s property in Market Street, Haverfordwest and a dispute broke out over money and how much work had been undertaken,” Crown Prosecutor Sian Vaughan told Haverfordwest magistrates this week.

“There was a break down in their working relationship, and various comments were made to the victim.

“These included ‘a dirty conman’, ‘a dirty black b****** and a’n** n**’.

Hilton, 32, of Marble Hall Road, Milford Haven, was legally represented in court by Alaw Harries.

“No threats of violence were made, although he accepts that this was racially aggravated,” she said.

“He should not have made those comments, and he knows that.

“But the defendant was frustrated as he believed the victim owned him money for work. However some level of distress was caused to the victim.”

Alaw Harries said that Hilton is currently serving a custodial sentence following a previous conviction in July 2024.

“Since then, he’s made significant progress in custody and is in a stable environment where he can address his issues,” she said.

“He’s been working as a cleaner and has been doing educational work in English and maths.”

Hilton was sentenced to nine weeks in custody. He was ordered to pay a £154 court surcharge and £85 costs.

A MAN who admitted assaulting another man and possessing a concealed sword has been sentenced at Aberystwyth Justice Centre.

David Rees, 62, of St Dogmaels, pleaded guilty to assault by beating and possession of an offensive weapon in a private place. The court heard that Rees had a sword stick—a weapon disguised as a walking stick—at his home.

The incident took place on September 16, 2024, at a building plot in St Dogmaels. That day, armed police, dog units, and a helicopter were deployed to the village, with police later describing the matter as an “isolated incident” that had been “safely resolved.” Officers remained in the area into the evening to reassure residents.

Rees had admitted both offences last year, but sentencing was delayed for a Newton hearing—a process used when there is a dispute over key facts that could affect sentencing.

On Thursday (Mar 6), magistrates handed Rees a 12-month conditional discharge. This means that if he commits another offence within the next year, he could be sentenced for both crimes.

The court also issued a forfeiture and destruction order for the sword stick and imposed a restraining order preventing Rees from contacting his victim or visiting a specified address in St Dogmaels.

Rees was ordered to pay £85 in court costs and a £26 victim surcharge.

THE CRIMINAL CASES REVIEW COMMISSION has confirmed that its review of John Cooper’s convictions remains ongoing, with no fixed timeline for a decision. The process, described as extensive due to the volume of evidence and the potential need for expert analysis, is expected to continue well into 2025, with an update likely in October.

Cooper, who is serving a life sentence for the murders of Richard and Helen Thomas in 1985 and Peter and Gwenda Dixon in 1989, applied to the CCRC last year for a review of his convictions. Unlike many applications, which are dismissed early, Cooper’s case has progressed further than most, with dedicated case workers assigned—suggesting it is being taken seriously.

A spokesperson for the CCRC told The Herald on Monday (Mar 10): “Reviews can often be extensive, particularly when there is a lot of evidence to analyse; if we need to consider new case law or instruct scientific experts. A more complicated review can take many months, or even years.”

Sources close to the matter indicate that Cooper’s application, which exceeds 1,000 pages, is well-researched and has met the threshold for further scrutiny. While the CCRC operates under strict resource constraints, it is understood that this case is receiving significant attention.

Despite the high-profile nature of Cooper’s original trial, particularly following the ITV drama The Pembrokeshire Murders, the CCRC review has received little media coverage so far.

Cooper has always maintained his innocence, though previous appeals have failed.

If the CCRC ultimately refers his case to the Court of Appeal, it would be a significant legal development.

When approached for comment, Dyfed-Powys Police told The Herald: “We will comply with our obligations in any judicial process, but consider it inappropriate to provide specific comments at this time.”

The CCRC plays a crucial role in determining whether there are any anomalies in Cooper’s conviction or sentencing. If any are identified, the case will be referred to the Court of Appeal.

Cooper’s case gained national attention partly due to its dramatization in the ITV series The Pembrokeshire Murders, which highlighted his appearance on the TV game show Bullseye—a crucial yet circumstantial piece of evidence in his conviction.

At his 2011 trial, Justice John Griffith Williams sentenced Cooper to life imprisonment, describing him as a “very dangerous man” whose conviction relied heavily on advances in forensic science.

As readers may recall, The Pembrokeshire Herald previously uncovered significant concerns about the handling of forensic evidence in Cooper’s case. An investigation by this newspaper revealed a series of procedural failings, including missing or incomplete exhibit logs, the mixing of different evidence samples, and a previously unreported flood in the storage area where forensic materials were kept.

Documents obtained by The Herald suggested that some forensic exhibits were not properly logged at key stages of the investigation, raising concerns about gaps in the chain of custody.

The absence of complete records makes it difficult to determine whether all items were handled and stored correctly, an issue that is particularly significant in cases where forensic evidence plays a central role in securing a conviction.

The mixing of evidence samples was another area of concern. It was found that items from different cases had been stored together, a practice that increases the risk of cross-contamination. The potential for DNA transfer between exhibits, particularly when stored in close proximity, is well-documented in forensic science. Any such contamination could have serious implications for the reliability of the evidence used to convict Cooper.

Perhaps most troubling was the discovery of a flooding incident in the forensic storage facility. The flood, which had not been disclosed in court or in any official reports at the time, raised concerns about whether water damage may have compromised key exhibits. The extent of any damage and whether steps were taken to mitigate the risk of evidence degradation remain unclear. The possibility that critical forensic materials were exposed to moisture, mould, or other contaminants could be a crucial issue for the CCRC to consider.

Despite these concerns, the forensic evidence presented by the Crown was substantial and was not challenged during Cooper’s unsuccessful 2012 appeal. However, advances in DNA testing and forensic methodologies since his trial may now allow for more sophisticated analysis of key exhibits. If the CCRC determines that new scientific techniques could yield different results, this may influence its decision on whether the case should be referred to the Court of Appeal.

Statistically, Cooper faces an uphill battle. Between April 1997 and February 2023, the CCRC received 29,845 applications but referred only 811 cases to an appeal court.

However, if his case does reach the appeal stage, historical data suggests a roughly 70 percent chance of a successful challenge.

Chloe Handling from the CCRC press office confirmed to The Pembrokeshire Herald previously: “I can confirm we have received two applications for John Cooper.”

“However, we won’t be able to comment any further while the review is underway.”

With no fixed timeline for completion, Cooper’s case remains under detailed review.

The Herald will continue to follow developments and provide updates as they emerge.

(Cover image: Athena Picture Agency)