Bombs Left Outside London Barrister’s Office on Orders of Businessman With ‘Serious Grudge,’ Jury Told

Jury told of 'campaign of intimidation' against lawyer representing National Crime Agency

The "Lady of Justice," a 12-foot-high, gold leaf statue, is pictured on top of the dome of the Central Criminal Court, commonly referred to as the Old Bailey, in central London on Aug. 21, 2016. (Niklas Halle'n/AFP/Getty Images)

LONDON—Explosive devices were left outside the chambers of a top London barrister as part of a “campaign of intimidation” by a wealthy businessman with a “serious grudge,” a jury has been told.

Prosecutor Catherine Farrelly told the Old Bailey on Monday that Jonathan Nuttall, 49, “harboured a great deal of animosity” towards Andrew Sutcliffe, KC, a barrister who had represented the National Crime Agency (NCA) and had played a part in the confiscation of £1 million worth of assets from Nuttall and his wife Amanda.

Nuttall denies conspiracy to plant explosive devices on Sept. 14, 2021, conspiracy to transfer criminal proceedings between Feb. 1, 2021 and March 17, 2022, and several counts of refusing to disclose the PIN number or code of a number of digital devices.

Michael Broddle, 45, his sons Joshua Broddle, 20, and Charlie Broddle, 18, and Nuttall’s driver, Michael Sode, 57, also deny conspiracy to plant explosive devices.

Farrelly said: “On the afternoon of Tuesday Sept. 14, 2021 two packages, designed to resemble explosive devices, were left in Gray’s Inn, an estate mainly comprising the offices from which barristers work, known as barristers’ chambers.”

She said one device was left close to a bench and the other was left outside Sutcliffe’s chambers, 3 Verulam Buildings.

Farrelly said at the same time as the devices were left, a smoke grenade was also let off, just to ensure they were noticed and “maximum alarm was caused.”

Objective Was to ‘Cause Serious Panic’

The prosecutor said, “These devices were left in both locations with a quite clear objective—to cause serious panic, thereby drawing significant attention.”

The barristers’ chambers and several other buildings had to be evacuated, roads were cordoned off, and a large number of police officers swooped on the scene to investigate the devices.

Farrelly said: “Andrew Sutcliffe was the clear target of the events at Gray’s Inn that afternoon. The significant attention that surrounded those events was designed not only to cause widespread alarm but it was intended to specifically cause him alarm, distress, and public and professional embarrassment.”

“Whoever was behind such an attack had clearly considered and planned it carefully. Such a person must have held a deep-seated grudge against him and would have required the means in which to execute such a bold and targeted strike against him,” she added.

Farrelly said the bombs were the final chapter in a campaign that Nuttall launched against Sutcliffe and another lawyer, Anne Jeavons, after they acted for the NCA in proceedings against him.

She said the NCA had been investigating Nuttall and his wife Amanda since 2011 on suspicion of money laundering, and in April 2019 an order was obtained that led to £1 million worth of assets being recovered from Nuttall’s wife.

Farrelly said: “It is clear that he harboured a great deal of animosity towards Andrew Sutcliffe and, to a lesser degree, Anne Jeavons, accusing them of behaving in an unprofessional way when conducting the case for the NCA. It is clear that Jonathan Nuttall perceived the NCA case as causing him and his family public embarrassment and ruining their reputation and he was not willing to accept that.”

She told the jury, “As you will hear, there is absolutely no dispute that those two devices were planted in Gray’s Inn by the third defendant, Michael Broddle.”

The prosecution claim Michael Sode—who was Nuttall’s driver and also an associate of Michael Broddle—was used as a “middleman” and passed on instructions and then reported back to his boss.

Farrelly said the “first chapter” in the campaign against Sutcliffe and Jeavons was a surveillance campaign that Michael Broddle carried out in February 2021.

She said Broddle travelled to Yorkshire with his son Joshua and camped overnight while they kept watch on Sutcliffe’s country residence.

The prosecution claim Michael Broddle later met with Sode and afterwards messaged Joshua, telling him: “Gone to see Michael. The guy liked our work so should be paid Mon/tues. £500 ok?”

Sode later deposited money into Michael Broddle’s bank account.

When Michael Broddle was arrested police searched his home and found on a laptop a document entitled “Operation Epic.”

It included photographs of Sutcliffe’s home in Kildale, Yorkshire, and reports on attempts to gain access.

The document said: “We did not see the target at any point … We decided to hit the night guard’s car … we smashed the windows silently using porcelain from spark plugs… A memory card has been given to each property so they can see vulnerabilities.”

Farrelly said there was no night guard at the property or record of any windows being broken and she added, “It appears that Michael Broddle’s report was not entirely truthful, and he was seeking to overplay some of the tactics employed by him and make excuses for not engaging in other conduct.”

Notes Left in ‘Campaign of Intimidation’

She said chapter two of the “campaign of intimidation” began in May 2021 and involved leaving threatening messages on the doorstep of Sutcliffe’s home and of a charity, the Pimlico Foundation, linked to Jeavons and her husband.

One of the notes involved a threat to rape a female relative of Sutcliffe and also to dig up the grave of a young relative.

Farrelly said a note left outside the offices of the Pimlico Foundation referred to Jeavons and her husband and included an “untrue and scandalous allegation” against him.

The trial is due to last for 12 weeks.