Essex Boy

by Steve 'Nipper' Ellis; Bernard O'Mahoney

  Despite Boshell’s futile attempts to destroy evidence that could link him to the shootings, he was arrested a few weeks later for the theft of the vehicle. The police had matched his fingerprints to a partial fingerprint they had found on the steering column prior to the car being burned. As soon as Boshell was bailed by the police, Alvin quizzed him about his time in custody. Had the police questioned him about the shootings? Had they found the gun? And had they asked him about Alvin? Boshell denied being questioned about the Tretton shootings, which Alvin found very suspicious. Alvin told me that he didn’t believe Boshell and feared that he may have given information about him to the police.

  ‘I don’t even know for sure if he was arrested or if he is just fucking storytelling. You can never tell with him. He’s always talking gangster shit,’ Alvin said.

  A month after the shootings, Alvin was left in no doubt that Boshell had been arrested because, on this occasion, he was handcuffed alongside him when police took him into custody. The arrest had nothing to do with the Locksley Close shootings; Boshell and Alvin had been caught breaking into Jewson’s, the builder’s merchants. Boshell knew that he had no chance of evading justice this time because he and Alvin had been caught red-handed by the police. It was equally apparent to him that no judge was going to give him anything other than a custodial sentence after taking into account his habitual offending.

  Previously, Boshell would have accepted his fate and served his time but recently he had met a girl that he hoped he could settle down with and start a family. Between 1996 and 1998, Boshell had been rewarded by the courts with discounted sentences for snippets of information that he had given to the police about his criminal associates. Desperate to avoid losing his girlfriend, Boshell asked the officers involved in the Jewson’s case if he could once more trade information for a reduced sentence. No promises were made, but Boshell was told that any assistance he did offer would be made known to the judge who was going to sentence him.

  This bargaining process by criminals with police is a fairly common practice, but anybody who agrees to become an informant has to adhere to strict rules that try to ensure that the information given is genuine and the informant is not encouraging others to commit crime, about which he can then tell the police. Documentation generated by the police at the time describes Boshell as being a ‘previously untried source and the authenticity of any information he may give should be doubted’. Rules regarding informants had changed since Boshell had first offered evidence to the police in 1996. All informants now had to be registered, which involved them meeting a senior police officer, having the terms and conditions explained to them and then signing the agreement if deemed suitable.

  The officer who dealt with Boshell wrote in his notes: ‘The source was told in no uncertain terms that he must tell us everything in relation to crime. He was told that if he was arrested then the fact that he was an informant would not assist him in any way. He was told that there could be, in exceptional circumstances, a situation where he could have a minimal involvement in a crime, but only after he has been given authorisation by us and not before.’

  Rules, regulations and the law had never meant much, if anything, to Boshell. He considered himself to be one of life’s players, the type of guy who would agree to go through the motions of any agreed scenario so long as it was ultimately beneficial to him. Nobody can deny that some of the information that Boshell went on to give to the police proved to be reasonably accurate. Likewise, nobody can deny that some of the information proved to be entirely false. The problem that exists, in the here and now, is that nobody can say with any certainty which evidence falls into which category.

  In order to try and protect Boshell’s identity, the police gave him the pseudonym Michael Bridges. Giving informants a false name is standard police practice designed to ensure that their informant’s true identity does not become known to their criminal associates. All paperwork, telephone calls and conversations with, and regarding, the informant only ever refer to the informant’s pseudonym to prevent them from being identified.

  It was clear from the outset that Boshell was never going to give the police his full co-operation as promised. Instead, he decided to cherry-pick crimes that he could tempt the police with, and play some bizarre game that he believed would result in the police needing him more than he needed them. Once Boshell believed he had taken the upper hand, he could then negotiate a better deal when he came to be sentenced. The criminal company that Boshell kept meant that he didn’t just have a good hand of cards to play the police with, he had an entire pack. Testing the water, rather than diving in head first, Boshell initially offered the police details of fairly minor crimes and criminals that they were already aware of. He told them that a man was selling stolen tax discs; another, counterfeit designer clothing; and he told them the identity and address of the person who stored Alvin’s stolen goods for him.

  Boshell’s information was received with thanks, but little enthusiasm. The police were told about these sorts of matters more often than time, and their limited resources, permitted them to prosecute people for committing them. Sensing that Boshell was holding back on far more serious criminal activities, his police handler felt the need to remind him ‘in no uncertain terms’ that he had to tell them everything he knew in relation to crime if he wished to continue being an informant. Keen to appear compliant, within a month Boshell had begun telling the police about a plan of Alvin’s to rob a drug dealer from Basildon using guns. He also mentioned rather vague details about the stolen vehicle used in the ‘Locksley Close shootings’.

  Finally, the police appeared to be sitting up and listening. When asked what else he knew about the Locksley Close incident, Boshell said that Alvin had told him that he could lay his hands on cyanide and hand grenades. Asked what Alvin intended doing with such lethal weapons, Boshell said that Alvin had bragged, ‘The Trettons could end up getting a syringe full of cyanide, injected into a milk bottle on their doorstep, or a hand grenade thrown through their letterbox.’

  Only Boshell knows why he decided to discuss aspects of the Locksley Close shootings with the police. It was a crime that he had been actively involved in. Although he never went so far as to implicate himself in any serious wrongdoing, Boshell must have known that if the police did arrest Alvin there was a possibility that he would talk about his involvement. As the date for Boshell to appear in court approached, he became noticeably depressed and increasingly desperate. Boshell was painfully aware that if he was given a lengthy prison sentence he would lose his girlfriend and all that the relationship promised. His darkest secrets could, he realised, become his guiding light. If Boshell told the police everything he knew, maybe, just maybe he could escape a custodial sentence and set up home with his girlfriend and live happily ever after.

  Seven weeks before Boshell was due to appear at Southend Crown Court for sentencing, he concocted a story for the police that was a mixture of truth and lies about the Locksley Close shootings. He said that he had been the driver of the car on the night of the shootings and his passengers, Alvin and Percival, had been in possession of a double-barrelled shotgun. The inclusion of Percival was an obvious choice for Boshell to make, because most people in the area believed that Percival was guilty, or at least involved, because he had been arrested for the shootings. Boshell told the police that they had been ‘spooked’ by a police car and ‘his bottle had gone’, so they had abandoned the vehicle.

  ‘Later the same evening,’ Boshell said, ‘Alvin asked me to drive to the scene of the shootings, but I refused to do so. Alvin had called me a cunt for not doing as he had asked, but the following day he acted as though nothing had happened.’

  The police did their best to convince Boshell to tell them more about the shootings but every time he agreed to discuss the incident, his story seemed to change. On one occasion, he said that Percival and ‘a doorman named Dave’ were responsible but nobody had heard of ‘Doorman Dave’. Beginning to doubt th
e authenticity of Boshell’s information, the police reminded him that he had agreed to be truthful with them at all times. In an effort to prove to them that he was being honest, Boshell offered to take the police to the drain where the shotgun used in the shootings had been dumped. Boshell knew that the gun was not, in fact, there because he had already searched the drain for it with Alvin. Regardless, Boshell needed to prove that he was a trustworthy informant and so decided to act out his part. When Boshell accompanied the police to the drain, he feigned surprise that it was no longer there.

  The police had also known that the gun was not in the drain because they had recovered it shortly after finding the stolen car nearby. They had just wanted to test Boshell’s knowledge of the crime and ensure that he was telling them the truth. Unwittingly, the police had failed miserably with the second half of their objective. Boshell was now considered to be truthful, but in reality he had only lured the police into trusting him with half-truths. He had shown them where the gun had been, but he hadn’t told them that he knew it had already been taken.

  The general public are, in the main, of the opinion that if the police know who committed a crime they should lock them up. Fortunately or otherwise, depending on which side of the fence you live your life, the police are not supposed to be able to do this. Thinking that they know who committed a crime is a world away from proving that somebody is guilty. That is why the police are duty-bound to painstakingly gather all the available evidence before charging their suspect and presenting everything to the courts, so that the guilt or innocence of the accused can be ascertained by a jury. Owing to forensic tests and the time it takes to gather and evaluate evidence, it can be months before any arrests are made in a major investigation.

  The police had already arrested Percival for the shootings and so arresting him again would have been pointless because Boshell’s information was not only contradictory, it was also made up of the same gossip that every villain in Essex had been repeating since the incident first happened. Not wishing to dismiss Boshell’s information out of hand, the police told him that they needed to know more details about the incident in Locksley Close and tasked him to find out all that he could. Boshell’s court date was now only a few weeks away and his chances of securing a reduced sentence were looking increasingly slim. He had taken the information regarding the shootings as far as he dared. So, in a last-ditch attempt to win favour, Boshell told his handler that the robbery of a drug dealer that Alvin had been talking about for some time was going to take place soon. When asked to find out who was going to be robbed, when and where, Boshell said that he had not managed to discuss the job in any detail with Alvin because he was working away from home in Kent. However, he would be returning shortly.

  Boshell told his handler at their next meeting that he had spoken to Alvin and he had been asked to steal a car. Alvin said that he needed a vehicle for use in the robbery and was prepared to pay Boshell between £150 and £300 for stealing one. Boshell claimed that Alvin, Percival and I would be the three carrying out the job and we would be armed with two handguns. The reason that we were going to be armed, according to Boshell, was that our intended target received regular visits from ‘trigger-happy niggers’.

  I must admit I did laugh when I learned of Boshell’s treachery and the lies he told about us all several years later. ‘Trigger-happy niggers’ sounded like a line out of one of the gangster rap songs he was always trying to sing. I have lived in and around the Southend area all of my life and although I admit it can get lively at times, I haven’t encountered the ‘trigger-happy’ set just yet. Boshell told the police that Alvin and Percival trusted each other ‘110 per cent’, but neither completely trusted me. According to Boshell, this was because they knew that I was ‘capable of anything after shooting Pat Tate’. Boshell had recently been disqualified from driving, and so was told by his handler that if Alvin asked him to drive, he was to give an excuse for not being able to do so. However, after a risk assessment of the planned crime, of those allegedly involved and Boshell’s driving ban, Boshell’s handler was instructed by a senior officer to provide him with a vehicle for use in the robbery.

  Boshell was offered an estate car, which he refused, but he did accept a Mondeo after explaining when he did steal cars they were usually Fords. The police plan was that when the would-be robbers had reached the busy A127 arterial road, which runs between Southend and Basildon, an armed response unit would stop the car on the pretence of searching for drugs and the occupants would be arrested. Over the next few days, Boshell was constantly on the phone to his handler giving excuse after excuse about why the robbery hadn’t yet taken place. He said that he had visited Alvin’s home and saw that Alvin’s car had broken down. Alvin had mentioned repairing it later that day, but he had failed to mention the robbery. On another day, Boshell claimed that Alvin’s partner had decided against going out and so Alvin had remained at home with her. Running out of excuses, Boshell eventually said that he had waited all evening for a call about the robbery from Alvin, but he had heard nothing. If Boshell was being honest with the police, the possibility of the robbery ever taking place appeared to hinge on the availability of Alvin, rather than me or Percival. For reasons never explained by Boshell, the so-called robbery did not take place. When Alvin was asked about this robbery many years later, he of course blamed me and Percival for being the driving force behind the conspiracy.

  He told police, ‘The reason we focused on robbing drug dealers was because they were easy targets. They had what we wanted; money and drugs. We also knew that they wouldn’t squeal to the police. Who in their right mind would report the theft of their drugs? I think the first one we planned to do was a mixed-race guy in his 30s. He was quite flash and wore expensive clothes. He mainly dealt in heroin and crack cocaine. He lived in Basildon on one of the council estates. I had met him once in the Woodcutters Arms pub some time before we ever discussed robbing him. I was aware that Nipper Ellis or Percival knew one of his runners and he had agreed to give us access to the guy’s premises so that we could rob him. Various tactics were discussed regarding the robbery and it was eventually decided that the runner would also have to get a slap, so there was no suspicion raised concerning his involvement. One night, myself, Percival and Nipper went round to the man’s address to do a reconnaissance of the area. While I was in the car, Nipper produced a handgun; it was like an old revolver. I don’t know why he was carrying it that night but it might have been for his own protection as a price had been put on his head for shooting Pat Tate. We looked around the area where the drug dealer lived. It was near a pub called the Watermill. We left shortly after arriving; Nipper still had the gun on him.

  ‘For some reason, the robbery never did take place, I don’t know why. It could have been because we had found another drug dealer who had more money and more drugs than the mixed-race guy. This dealer lived off Pound Lane in Pitsea; we referred to him as J.H. Again, this robbery was organised by Nipper. I had never heard of J.H. but I knew he was an old-time villain in his 50s. There was talk that there would be in the region of £100,000 in his home. We decided that we would watch him and his house for a couple of days so we would get to know his movements. We did this by using different cars and communicating by walkie-talkies.

  ‘Through our surveillance activities we discovered that he drove a Mercedes and he had another property at Westcliff-on-Sea. During the planning stage, Nipper said that if we were going to go ahead with the job we would need to arm ourselves as he believed the guy had firearms in his house. The talk of firearms didn’t appeal to me; I thought it was a bit out of my league. I didn’t trust Nipper either. I thought he would probably put a bullet in both Percival’s and my head if we came out of there with a large amount of cash. I decided not to take part in the crime. I can’t recall how I got out of it but there was no further mention of it. It never did take place.’

  The reason the robberies never did take place is because they were no more than Alvin’s
drink-and drug-fuelled fantasies. Boasting to his entourage of impressionable young men such as Boshell, Alvin would regularly talk about ‘big-time villains’ who he knew or associated with. He was fascinated by the murders of Tate, Tucker and Rolfe and all the things they had done prior to their deaths. A well-thumbed copy of Bernard O’Mahoney’s Essex Boys was never far from Alvin’s grasp and he would constantly quiz me about my involvement with the trio. Alvin knew that burglary had become a crime of the past; safes were just too secure and alarms were becoming too sophisticated. He had noticed that Percival and I were making a good living out of selling drugs, so he decided that he would hang up his gloves, put away his crowbar and concentrate his efforts in and around the lucrative world of cannabis, Ecstasy and cocaine.

  Dealing in drugs is an extremely risky business; if the police do not bring you down, rival dealers or informants most certainly will. Counter-surveillance techniques have to be employed when combating the police, and extreme violence has to be used to deter or destroy rival dealers and informants. Alvin thought that he was well equipped on all fronts to protect the drug-dealing empire that he was hoping to build. What he failed to appreciate is the fact that rival drug dealers will think twice about taking on a powerful man, but drug-dealing informants will have no hesitation whatsoever in passing on information to the police to bring down a man who threatens them.