Counter terror police in Gloucestershire have charged a man with attempted murder after a USA intelligence operative working at the Government communications centre GCHQ in Cheltenham was stabbed at a leisure centre in the town.
Sky News on the 15th March said:
Counter-terror police have charged a man with attempted murder after a woman was stabbed in Cheltenham.
Joshua Bowles was also charged with causing actual bodily harm over the incident outside a leisure centre in the Gloucestershire town last Thursday evening.
The 29-year-old, from Welwyn Mews in Cheltenham, will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Thursday.
This is quite obviously going to be a big case as there are aspects to it that suggest that. Earlier press reports, which may or may not be accurate, claimed the victim was a secondment worker from the US working at GCHQ, this information is missing from the most recent reports I’ve seen. The involvement of Gloucestershire Police Counter Terror Command in a stabbing case that could quite normally be handled by ‘normal’ police and the fact that the first court appearance is at Westminster Magistrates Court, a court that is often the first venue for high profile terror, national security and other cases where there is a non geographical element, also suggests that this case is going to be an interesting one. This feeling is enhanced by the fact that Gloucestershire Police seem desperate to stop public speculation about this case which to me suggests that this speculation is already something that is ‘turned up to eleven’.
When this case does eventually reach the Crown Court it is likely that the public will find out more about this very odd case and the circumstances surrounding it. However because there may be national security aspects to this case I would expect that at least some of any hearing, especially if the defendant pleads Not Guilty, will be heard ‘In Camera’ that is without Press or Public being able to be present. This is standard procedure in these sorts of cases where there are concerns that having evidence heard in open court might prejudice national security. If I recall correctly parts of the trial of the traitor Michael Bettaney in 1984 was conducted without the presence of press or public for national security reasons. We must wait and see just what the trial reveals and whether this is a national security related case or something else.
