Crime

Judge blasts ‘hearsay’ evidence in Niall Taylor driving appeal case

Published

5 months ago

January 13, 2026

Crown Court criticises magistrates’ reliance on email and questions CPS preparation as Milford Haven pensioner fights conviction

A CROWN Court judge has criticised magistrates for relying on “hearsay” material to convict Milford Haven pensioner Niall Taylor, saying he is entitled to appeal and entitled to a fair hearing.

Taylor, 76, of Haven Drive, Hakin, appeared at Swansea Crown Court on Tuesday (Jan 13) for a mention hearing in his appeal against conviction.

The court was told Taylor had previously been convicted at Haverfordwest Magistrates’ Court of driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence and using a motor vehicle without insurance.

Taylor had initially pleaded not guilty, but changed his plea part way through a trial. Questions were later raised over whether that guilty plea was equivocal, and the case was subsequently reopened under section 142 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980.

A full rehearing followed, with Taylor entering not guilty pleas. He was found guilty after a trial of the facts and sentenced on Wednesday (Dec 3).

However, at the Crown Court hearing this week, HHJ Geraint Walters voiced serious concerns about the material relied upon to secure the conviction.

The judge was told the magistrates had convicted Taylor after relying on email evidence without a formal witness statement from its author.

Judge Walters said that without a statement, the evidence amounted to “hearsay”, and questioned whether the magistrates had properly applied the law.

He asked: “Do the magistrates know the law? Was this a lay bench?”

Judge Walters also criticised the prosecution’s approach to the appeal, suggesting it was not sufficiently prepared.

He said: “I am triageing all appeals to this court and I want to see this appeal apple pie ready when it comes before me in three weeks time. We won’t hear the case then but we will look at progress.”

The judge questioned the prosecution’s handling of the appeal, asking: “Where is the obligation on the Crown to fairly assist a person appealing and representing themselves?”

During the hearing, Judge Walters warned that if the case was not properly prepared and progressed, it could become drawn into further litigation — potentially even reaching the High Court — and that this could result in it being sent back down to the magistrates’ court again.

The matter will return to Swansea Crown Court in around three weeks for a progress hearing. The appeal itself will not be heard at that stage, but the judge said he expects the case to be ready for effective case management.

The Pembrokeshire Herald understands the appeal will focus on the insurance conviction.

Why the judge’s criticism stands out

The core issue the judge highlighted was the reliance on email evidence without a formal witness statement from its author. Under English and Welsh evidence rules:

Hearsay evidence (out-of-court statements offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted) is generally inadmissible unless it falls under a specific exception or is admitted via a formal process (e.g., under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 provisions for business documents, res gestae, or other gateways).
An email, without supporting witness testimony or a formal statement, would typically constitute hearsay if used to prove key facts (such as the status of insurance or licence details).
The judge explicitly called this “hearsay” and questioned whether the magistrates had properly applied the law on admissibility.

Crime

Sex offender in senior role at Tenby family hotel

Published

2 hours ago

June 8, 2026

Tom Sinclair

CREST HOTEL GROUP says it is investigating safeguarding concerns after staff at the Imperial Hotel in Tenby raised alarm over a senior employee who they say has a conviction linked to indecent images of children.

The Herald understands concerns were raised internally after staff became aware that a senior member of the hotel group’s guest experience team was alleged to be a convicted sex offender and subject to safeguarding restrictions.

The Imperial Hotel, on The Paragon, is one of Tenby’s best-known seafront hotels and regularly welcomes families and children.

Staff concern

A source at the hotel, who asked not to be named, told The Herald that employees were deeply worried after becoming aware of the man’s background.

The source said staff had raised safeguarding concerns because children and families are regularly present at the hotel.

They also alleged that, during a staff meeting after concerns were raised, management said they were aware of the matter, stood by the employee, and did not believe he presented a risk.

The Herald has not been able to independently verify everything said at that meeting, but has put the allegations directly to Crest Hotels Group.

Company response

A solicitor acting for Crest Hotels Group confirmed the company was aware of the safeguarding concerns raised.

Minesh Patel, of Keystone Law, said: “Our client considers the safety of its guests and employees of paramount importance and have appropriate safeguards, supervision and risk management oversight in place.

“Our client will be investigating the allegations and at this stage have no reason to suspect the safety of their guests, visitors or employees has been compromised.”

He added that, as the matter related to an individual employee, it would not be appropriate for the company to comment further on confidential employment matters.

Crest Hotels Group also asked The Herald to refrain from publishing “speculation or unsubstantiated facts”.

Public interest

The Herald is not naming the individual at this stage while further checks are carried out.

However, the case raises clear questions about safeguarding, transparency, risk assessments, and the reassurance given to staff working in a family hotel environment.

Crest Hotels Group’s own website lists a Group Director of Guest Experience role among its senior team, describing the role as one which shapes “every moment of a guest’s journey”.

The company has not denied that safeguarding concerns were raised by staff.

Nor has it denied that it is investigating allegations involving an employee.

The Herald has asked Dyfed-Powys Police and Pembrokeshire County Council whether any safeguarding concerns have been reported to them.

More follows.

Community

Public invited to join police scrutiny panel in Brecon

Published

3 hours ago

June 8, 2026

Cerys Lafferty

MEMBERS of the public are being encouraged to play a direct role in improving policing by joining a Community Scrutiny Panel hosted by Police and Crime Commissioner Dafydd Llywelyn.

The panel will take place in Brecon on Tuesday, July 1, from 4pm to 7pm, offering local residents the opportunity to independently review police interactions with the public.

Volunteers will examine the quality of police contact, the ethical use of police powers and the level of service being delivered to communities across the force area. The panel serves as an independent public voice, providing feedback and recommendations to Dyfed-Powys Police to help strengthen transparency, accountability and public confidence in policing.

The initiative is open to anyone aged 18 and over. No previous experience is required as training and guidance will be provided to all participants.

Those who join the panel will have the chance to influence improvements in police practice, gain valuable real-world skills and experience, and represent the views of the wider community.

Anyone interested in taking part can find out more and register online at: https://forms.office.com/e/u9dR9rjc9Z?origin=lprLink.

Crime

Kebab firm fined £500,000 after ‘lamb’ found to be mostly skin and fat

Published

14 hours ago

June 8, 2026

Court Reporter

A KEBAB manufacturer has been fined £500,000 after a court heard products sold as lamb contained little actual lamb and were instead made up largely of skin, fat and other meats.

Kismet Kebabs Ltd, based in Chelmsford, Essex, was sentenced at Swansea Crown Court after previously admitting fraud by false representation.

***The court heard invoices showed products that “cannot be called meat as per the legal definition” were being used to produce kebabs***

The company was also ordered to pay £259,298 in costs.

The case was brought following an investigation led by Swansea Council’s trading standards team, which found products supplied to takeaways and restaurants did not match the meat content declared on their labels.

***The judge said the firm had engaged in “considerable dishonesty”***

Prosecutor Lee Reynolds told the court the firm had misled wholesalers, retailers and customers over a prolonged period.

He said products described as lamb contained a mixture of fat, skin, goat, mutton, mechanically reclaimed meat and other lower-grade products.

In one example, a lamb doner labelled as containing 87% lamb was found to contain only 51% meat and 40% fat.

The investigation began after trading standards officers carried out sampling at kebab houses and restaurants in late 2020 and early 2021.

**The company purchased a “large volume of fat” to put in its products**

Further testing at wholesalers found major differences between what was stated on labels and what the products actually contained.

Officers later visited Kismet’s factory in Chelmsford, where concerns were raised about production, packaging and labelling.

The court heard invoices showed the firm was buying very little lamb, but large quantities of skin, fat, goat and other products.

***Invoices showed products that “cannot be called meat as per the legal definition” were being used***

Kismet’s barrister, Stuart Jessop, said the firm had operated successfully for many years and had since made significant changes. He said the company had “taken its eye off the ball” at the time of the offending, but argued that forcing it out of business would benefit nobody.

Judge Huw Rees said fraudulent activity had been “endemic” at the company and described the dishonesty as considerable and prolonged.

The company has been given four years to pay the fine and costs.