To check out items selling for CBAF, click on the link here:

100% of all monies raised goes to the Charlie Bronson Appeal Fund.

As of April 2012...

Charlie is currently held in Wakefield Prison, in West Yorkshire. As a Category A prisoner, he is kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours of the day. He is allowed out for one hour a day to exercise, or if he is on a visit. He is feeling confident of getting his case back to the Criminal Cases Review Committee, to challenge his Life sentence conviction. He has a new legal team currently reviewing all of his case files. They are assessing all the legal points to his case and his conviction, to decide whether he can indeed take his case back to the Appeal Court. Watch this space for the latest news!

To sign Charlie's official petition, please click on the image here:

History of Charlie's Case and Life Sentence:

HHJ Moss, the trial Judge, DISMISSED Charlie’s defence of Duress. It is actually not permissible for a judge to disallow a defendant’s plead. It is for the JURY to decide whether the plea put forward is relevant. What Judge Moss did left the Jury NO OPTION but to find Charlie guilty – as they were instructed that his PLEA could not be accepted. THIS IS AGAINST THE LAW OF THE UK COURTS.

Throughout the course of Charlie’s trial, he was REFUSED the right to call defence witnesses; key witnesses such as a Medical Professional, a fellow prisoner who was PRESENT at the time of the offence and a Prison Officer who could have given an account of Charlie’s treatment in Hull Prison and the reasons behind his actions leading up to the hostage situation with Mr John Philip Danielson.

Having dismissed his legal team through frustration, Charlie was clearly lost when the trial turned to the legal points of his case. At this point, HHJ Moss should have AT THE VERY LEAST halted the trial and advised Charlie to appoint a new legal team before the trial could reconvene. Charlie’s defence hinged on the plea of Duress, which would suggest he was not in the correct frame of mind and potentially STILL not in the correct frame of mind. If there was any doubt as to his frame of mind, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO CONTINUE TO REPRESENT HIMSELF.