The case of Paul Higginson

Derek Ianson was murdered in the garden of his Salford, Greater Manchester, home by two men whose heads were covered by balaclava helmets. Stuart Grainger and Paul Higginson (then aged 23) were convicted of the murder at Manchester Crown Court and gaoled for life. Paul Higginson was convicted through use of the contested joint enterprise law to associate him with Stuart Grainger, rather than on evidence, of which there was almost nothing. And he had a good alibi.

At 6.00 pm on Friday 19 May 2000 two masked men entered Ianson’s house and chased him into his garden. One of them (alleged to be Grainger) shot Ianson using a MAC 10 type handheld machine gun from which 17 bullet fragments and 26 cartridge cases were left at the scene. The other carried a handgun which was not fired.

Grainger had previously quarrelled with Ianson. Paul Higginson had no quarrel with him.

The car that was probably used by the gunmen was later found abandoned, and in it the police found balaclavas, from one of which they recovered a trace of DNA which had a limited match to Paul – so limited that it also matches one in four of all other white Caucasians in the UK.

A mobile phone owned by Paul appeared to link him to the murder. Paul says that a man called Lee Tansy had borrowed this phone from him before the murder. Tansy had threatened violence against Paul and his family if he did not lend him the phone. At the trial, the defence case was that Tansy, rather than Paul, was the second man at the trial.

This is all the evidence there is to connect Paul with the crime. But he also has an alibi. At approximately 4.30pm to 4.45pm he went with his partner and their baby to the KFC on Regent Road, Salford. They left again at around 5.30 to 5.35pm after putting the baby chair into the car, and drove home, arriving at approximately 5.55pm, just before the baby’s bedtime. That would leave him approximately four minutes to go into the house, change his clothing, get into a different car and travel to the victim’s home to arrive at least one minute before 6.00pm, which was when the altercation started. But the home of the victim is a good 7 to 15 minutes’ drive away from where Paul lived, depending on traffic and driving speed.

Paul could not have committed this crime.

Both Paul and Stuart Grainger pleaded not guilty and appealed against their convictions, but the appeal, which was refused, concerned only problems over identification evidence against Grainger.

Paul then applied to the Criminal Cases Review Commission to have his case investigated. The CCRC refused to refer the case for a second appeal, but they disclosed evidence showing that before and during the trial, Paul’s solicitors, Burton Copeland, were also representing Lee Tansy – the person Paul had told them that actually committed the crime.

This very clear conflict of interest made no difference to the CCRC’s refusal to refer the case.

Now we have been told that Paul’s co-accused, Stuart Grainger, has admitted that he was responsible for the murder – and that Paul had nothing to do with it. Will this be enough to have the case put back before the appeal court and the conviction overturned.

Paul Higginson is supported by INNOCENT. If you would like more information or have any information that could help Paul please contact us at:

INNOCENT,
PO Box 282, Oldham OL1 3FY.