IN December 2009, Judge Simon Newell held two hearings in his Chambers to decide whether accused rapist Jonathan Vass should be granted bail.

The repercussions of his decision to release the former paramedic were to be devastating as, seven months later, Vass murdered his former girlfriend, Barrowford nurse Jane Clough.

Judge Newell has been criticised by Jane’s parents, John and Penny Clough, for granting Vass bail at the second of the hearings.

And their campaign to have the laws of bail reviewed saw the issue raised in the Commons by Pendle MP Andrew Stephenson on Tuesday.

Now, for the first time, the Lancashire Telegraph has gained access to a full written account of the two bail hearings, under the Freedom of Information Act.

Despite a formal application to the courts service being refused, the judge personally agreed to release the transcripts.

Previously, the Judicial Communications Office, which represents the judge, said: “In this case, at no stage was the judge told of any concerns expressed by Ms Clough in relation to her safety, nor was there any evidence presented to the court that Mr Vass was likely to commit further offences against her. Mr Vass was a paramedic of previous good character.”

In response, the Crown Prosecution Service said: “The prosecution told the court that it was an ‘extreme likelihood’ that the defendant would interfere with witnesses when, and if, he had the opportunity.”

Both statements are supported by the transcripts, as experienced prosecutor Roger Green opposed bail on the grounds of ‘witness interference’.

But the tapes reveal that the judge was never explicitly told about any fears Vass would go on to offend against Jane.

After reading the transcripts himself, Jane’s father, John, 50, said: “What comes out of both documents is that there was no consideration given to Jane in either of them.

“I still find it unbelievable that the judge can claim he did not know about Jane’s fears – what does he think witness interference means? That he was just going to ring her up and ask her to stop the complaint?

“He made no effort to take into account Jane’s feelings, but had already heard Vass had been leading a lying, deceitful, triple life.

“The concern was more for his right to freedom than anything else.”

Chief Crown Prosecutor Ian Rushton told the Lancashire Telegraph that by the December 11 hearing, the full scale of Vass’s alleged offending – including nine counts of rape – was before the judge.

He said: “Rape does suggest violence and, in our view, we made the judge fully aware of the allegations and the risk of him trying to contact witnesses. I think the counsel made it quite clear and the judge has then got to make a difficult decision.

“What is not clear from the transcripts is that the barrister met with police before the hearing and was fully up to speed on the fears they held.

“We feel those concerns are implicit when talking about ‘witness interference’, which is the provision of the Bail Act statute which we had to hang our objections on.”

But the CPS did not choose to oppose bail on the grounds of a risk of Vass committing further offences, which was an option open to them.

Despite police fears, he had no previous convictions.

In the original bail hearing on December 3, prosecutor Roger Green makes reference to a report of domestic violence against Vass from his wife Joanne.

He said it did not result in any proceedings, but may be ‘of relevance to the current allegations’.

However, on December 11 that allegation is not mentioned because Mrs Vass, and another woman with whom Vass was in a relationship with, sided with the defence and were said in the transcript to be ‘horrified’ at suggestions he was violent.

Barrister Andrew Nuttall said Mrs Vass’s statement gave ‘no indication’ of any violence towards her.

The JCO said: “At the two hearings the prosecution objected to bail on the grounds that Vass was extremely likely to abscond, and that he would interfere with witnesses by trying to make contact when he had the opportunity. It was not suggested that Jane Clough was at risk of violence.”

Jane’s family remain committed to pushing for the Bail Act to be overhauled. They want the Bail Act rebalanced to allow the prosecution the right to appeal if a defendant is granted bail.

Currently only a defendant can appeal if bail is refused, as Vass did.

Vass is currently serving life, with a minimum of 30 years, for Jane’s murder.