Sign up

Become a V.IP

This is where you sign yourself up to become a Steel FM V.I.P.

Become apart of our V.I.P Club and get exclusive special offers, access to competitions first and win club members only prizes. It’s totally free and you can opt out at any time.

Now Playing

Recently Played

Latest News

Four teenagers and man guilty of murder of two boys

Case of mistaken identity in Bristol Four teenagers and a 45-year-old man have been convicted of murdering two boys who were attacked with machetes in a case of mistaken identity in Bristol. Mason Rist, 15, and Max Dixon, 16, died from stab wounds after being chased by four armed teenagers on January 27 this year in the Knowle West area of the city. Riley Tolliver, 18, a 16-year-old boy, a 17-year-old boy and getaway driver Antony Snook, 45, were found guilty of the murders of Mason and Max by a jury of nine men and three women at Bristol Crown Court after a six-week trial. A 15-year-old boy was also found guilty of the murder of Max after previously pleading guilty to the murder of Mason. Tolliver, and the three boys, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had been driven to and from Knowle West by Antony Snook, 45, as part of a revenge mission. The two boys had been wrongly identified as being responsible for bricks being thrown at a house in the rival Hartcliffe district earlier that evening. Around an hour after that attack, Snook left the property with two of the boys and picked up the other two in a nearby street before heading to Knowle West. The Audi Q2 was driven around Knowle West for at least 12 minutes before the attack, the jury was told. Snook drove down Ilminster Avenue and when they saw Mason and Max in the street they wrongly believed they had spotted those responsible for the attack. Ray Tully KC, prosecuting, told the jury: “They were entirely wrong about that. Max and Mason had absolutely nothing to do with any earlier incident and no connection whatsoever with those events.” Tolliver, who had a baseball bat, and the three teenagers armed with machetes jumped out of the car and chased after the two boys. Max and Mason are seen going to different sides of the street, each pursued by two people from the vehicle. Tolliver and the 15-year-old boy attacked Mason, while the 16-year-old boy and 17-year-old boy chased Max. The 17-year-old boy also struck Mason, who was lying injured on the ground, as he headed back to the Audi after attacking Max. A CCTV camera on Mason’s nearby house captured how the attack lasted just 33 seconds from the car pulling up to the teenagers getting back in and leaving. Mason and Max sustained fatal stab injuries, and both died in hospital in the early hours of January 28. Snook drove the teenagers from the scene and dropped them off in Knowle West. A fire was lit in a back garden and items linked to the attack disposed of. Meanwhile, the 16-year-old boy picked up a McDonald’s meal and drinks just six hours after the attack. Giving evidence, Snook claimed he thought he was driving the teenagers in his Audi Q2 disability car to a “safe house” after the attack on the Hartcliffe property. When he was told to stop in Ilminster Avenue he believed they were outside the safe house, Snook alleged. The landscape gardener, who lost a leg in a road accident, insisted he did not know the boys were carrying weapons and was looking in his rear view mirror at the time Max and Mason were attacked. “I thought they had got into a fight or something. I didn’t want to be involved with it. I didn’t think it was something that cost two people their lives,” he said. “I just thought it was something stupid between Hartcliffe and Knowle that I had been dragged into. I didn’t realise anyone had been seriously hurt.” The four teenagers did not give evidence during the trial. But the jury was told the 16-year-old had been covertly recorded in custody saying he had heard Mason screaming during the attack and “had to sort of join in”. He also said he had put on “loads more tracksuits” and left his phone behind before heading to Knowle West. In closing speeches to the jury, barristers representing the teenagers said there was no joint plan to attack the two boys. Anna Vigars KC, representing the 16-year-old, suggested her client did not have any intention to kill or cause really serious harm to Max or Mason. “He didn’t spring into action – he gets left behind. He didn’t know what the plan was, if there was a plan,” Mrs Vigars said. “It isn’t just that his heart was not in it, but his intention was not either.” Christopher Quinlan KC, representing the 17-year-old, said his client had admitted the manslaughter of Max but denied inflicting any injury to Mason. The jury were shown the CCTV footage of Mason, after being struck by the 15-year-old, getting to his feet, with prosecutors then alleging the 17-year-old inflicted a second blow to him. But Mr Quinlan suggested an alternative, telling jurors: “He had managed to get to his feet but because of the injury he sustained he wasn’t able to stand, as the 17-year-old passes him. “We say when you divorce Mason’s movements from the 17-year-old then the evidence is not there that he did stab him or make contact with him.” Ignatius Hughes KC, representing Riley Tolliver, said his client had not struck Mason with a “sword, machete or zombie knife”. “A baseball bat is a very different choice of weapon to go out with than a great big zombie knife,” he said. “He had an opportunity to cause really serious injury to Mason, but he didn’t do it.” Kate Brunner KC, representing the 15-year-old, said he was not involved in the fatal attack on Max because it happened at the same time he was murdering Mason. “He has told you the terrible thing that he did. He was 14 when he stabbed Mason,” she added. “He says that he did that, he’s been honest with this court and with you by saying guilty.” Speaking after the verdicts, Detective Superintendent Gary Haskins, senior investigating officer

Serving Met officer sacked over accessing confidential Sarah Everard files

Three officers who were found to have committed gross misconduct A serving Metropolitan Police officer has been sacked after accessing confidential files about the case of Sarah Everard. Pc Myles McHugh was among three officers who were found to have committed gross misconduct at a three-week disciplinary tribunal in south east London. On Friday, the tribunal panel said trainee detective constable Hannah Rebbeck, who had also accessed sensitive data, also would have been dismissed without notice if she had not already left the force. Marketing executive Ms Everard, 33, was kidnapped, raped and murdered by then-serving Met officer Wayne Couzens over the course of March 3 and 4 2021. Both McHugh’s and Rebbeck’s actions were described by the panel as an “egregious breach of the trust”. Sergeant Mark Harper was handed a final written warning, to last for three years. McHugh had looked at information about Ms Everard’s medical history, relationships, employment and lifestyle. The panel said his behaviour was at the “higher end of harm” as he was dismissed without notice for repeatedly accessing the police system on matters which had nothing to do with his duties. He looked at personal data which was “very sensitive” and “he attempted to discuss what he had seen with his colleagues”, according to panel chairwoman Sharmistha Michaels. She said he acted out of a “curiosity” about the investigation as he accessed data “extensively and accumulatively” but stopped looking for the information after Couzens was arrested. Rebbeck’s “highly blameworthy” conduct included looking at “very sensitive” personal data out of a “morbid curiosity about the disappearance of Sarah Everard”, the panel said. Ms Michaels said “she did so after it was announced that a Metropolitan Police officer had been arrested” and this “had nothing to do with her police duties”. Her behaviour was placed at the “highest end of seriousness”. The panel also noted the misconduct happened at a time of national concern. There were multiple breaches of standards of professional behaviour, failure to seek guidance from colleagues, and Rebbeck had failed to engage with the misconduct proceedings. Sgt Harper, who works in a Croydon custody unit, was given a final written warning. The material he saw related to Couzens and he had accessed it out of professional “curiosity” to see how charging decisions were progressing and not for information on Ms Everard. The panel took the view the information he looked at contained limited detail and he did not look at more sensitive areas. There was no evidence it impacted the investigation but it had undermined public confidence in the police. His actions were deemed to be at the lower-to-mid scale of seriousness. He is still working as a custody sergeant but with certain restrictions, the panel said. Misconduct allegations were brought against four serving officers, Pc McHugh, Pc Clare Tett, Detective Constable Tyrone Ward and Sgt Harper, as well as three who have resigned since the investigation, Detective Sergeant Robert Butters, trainee Detective Constable Rebbeck, and Inspector Akinwale Ajose-Adeogun. They were accused of accessing the police system in March 2021 in relation to Ms Everard’s case and this was not undertaken in the course of their duties. They were accused of breaching the Met’s standards of professional behaviour, in respect of confidentiality, discreditable conduct, and orders and instructions. Detective Constable Ward, former Inspector Ajose-Adeogun and former Detective Sergeant Butters were not found to have breached professional standards. Based on the evidence heard, the panel concluded that they did have a legitimate reason for accessing the relevant information and consequently did not breach the standards of police professional behaviour, the Metropolitan Police said. The force said that another serving officer will face a separate gross misconduct hearing on a date to be set. None of the officers or staff had direct involvement in the criminal investigation into Ms Everard’s murder, and no evidence was found that any individual had inappropriately shared information with any other individual. After the hearing, the Met said the panel heard that Pc McHugh accessed the information while off duty and for a significant period of time, while Rebbeck was found to have repeatedly accessed sensitive data without any link to her duties. The panel ruled the breaches of professional standards were so serious that the only appropriate outcome was dismissal. After the hearing Deputy Assistant Commissioner Stuart Cundy said: “Today as always, our thoughts remain with Sarah Everard’s family and friends. “We have apologised to them for the added distress this case has caused and I recognise the wider questions and concerns this raises. “Our officers and staff are regularly reminded that police systems and specific files must only be accessed where there is a legitimate policing purpose to do so. “This includes reminder screens and warning pages when logging on to our software systems, as well as mandatory training on information management which must be completed by everyone within the organisation. “It is clear the panel has carefully considered the circumstances of each individual case before coming to their conclusion that three officers had no acceptable reason for looking at this information.” Published: 15/11/2024 by Radio NewsHub

The V.I.P Club 👑

Join the V.I.P Club and receive exclusive special offers, competitions and amazing prizes. It’s FREE and easy to do!

ON AIR NOW:

Become a V.IP

Sign Up

Now Playing

Recently Played

Latest News

Four teenagers and man guilty of murder of two boys

Serving Met officer sacked over accessing confidential Sarah Everard files

Follow us

The V.I.P Club 👑

Back to top

We are Proud Members of

Station Sponsor

Sponsors

Contact: