Bulgaria’s Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC), in a ruling announced on April 28, reduced the jail sentence given to British football fan Michael Shields from 15 to 10 years, a move that sparked widespread reaction from Shields’ family and supporters.

Against a background of the high emotions generated around the case, which have included calls to block Bulgaria’s accession to the EU and for boycotts in the UK of Bulgarian goods, holiday resorts and real estate, the court said that public opinion in the UK had been deliberately manipulated through selective presentation of the facts of the case.

Shields’ supporters have alleged that there were irregularities and inconsistencies in the investigation and prosecution. Some media reports have suggested that the inconsistencies were in the versions of events given by Shields’ supporters.

Shields, now 19, was found guilty of the attempted murder of Bulgarian bartender Martin Georgiev in an incident on May 30 2005 in the Zlatni Pyasatsi (Golden Sands) summer resort near the Black Sea city of Varna. Shields was ordered to pay 200 000 leva to Georgiev as compensation. The SCC judgment is final and not subject to further appeal.

In a written explanation of its ruling, the SCC said it has taken into account, above all, the fact that the act was completed in the attempt phase, and also a number of mitigating circumstances: the defendant’s age at the time (18 years) and his clean court record.

After the SCC ruling, Shields’ father told the Liverpool Echo (no relation to The Sofia Echo) newspaper that he was “devastated” by the SCC decision. He had hoped that the court would either overturn the conviction or at least grant Shields a retrial. Shields’ uncle Joye Graney went further, telling a Bulgarian news agency that Bulgaria had abused the human rights of Michael Shields.

“We’re in the process of putting pressure on our government to intervene directly. We will be writing to all European countries, European Court of Human Rights and we will try to get in touch with Nelson Mandela,” Graney said. He described Bulgaria’s judiciary system as still being “in the Dark Ages”. The fact that Shields is English had made the court increase the fine from 120 000 to 200 000 leva, Graney said.

The Shields trial saga started on July 26 2005 when the Varna Regional Court found Shields guilty of hitting Georgiev with a stone on the head. On the night of the incident, Shields was together with his friend Anthony Wilson. The two were part of a group of FC Liverpool football fans who came to Bulgaria’s Black Sea coast to celebrate FC Liverpool’s win in the UEFA championship league final in Istanbul against Italy’s Milan.

During the trial, Shields maintained his innocence, and there was a separate “confession” from another Liverpudlian, Graham Sankey, that he had hit 25-year-old Georgiev over the head with a 3.5kg stone slab, sending Georgiev into a coma.

According to the prosecution and eyewitnesses, Georgiev tried to stop a brawl among drunken Liverpool FC fans outside a bar in the resort, when Shields hit him with the slab and left him on the ground with a fractured skull and an exposed brain. Georgiev was admitted to hospital with brain damage and skull fracture. His life was saved by emergency brain surgery.

Shields’ lawyers appealed in the Varna Appellate Court against the sentence, but on November 10 2005, the court confirmed the sentence.

From the day it started, Shields’ case caused a lot of tension among the public, both in Bulgaria and the UK. The Shields family started a support campaign for their son, claiming that he was innocent and that the real perpetrator was Sankey.

Sankey was questioned by police right after the incident but he did not admit anything and was released and allowed to return to the UK. However, once in Liverpool, Sankey was reported to have made a full confession about the case, admitting blame for the incident. However again, Sankey refused to come to Bulgaria and give evidence before the Bulgarian court, which refused to take into account his “confession”, and the trial of Shields for the assault on Georgiev continued.

Claiming that Sankey had confessed to the attack, Shields’ family started reproaching what they said were unacceptable prison conditions. Indeed, restrictions were imposed upon Shields after other prisoners had complained about favourable treatment by prison authorities towards Shields.

After his sentence was confirmed, UK tabloid The Sun started a campaign for the release of Shields, urging its readers to sent letters to Bulgarian President Georgi Purvanov calling for Shields’s release and criticising the Bulgarian judicial system.

In a counter-reaction, Bulgarian newspapers started a letter campaign against the The Sun’s initiative. However The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph and The Independent covered the case in a different light, without criticising the Bulgarian judicial system, and expressing a moderate position on the issue.

The case led to sharp reactions from the Liverpool community. In September, the Liverpool Echo reported that UK foreign secretary Jack Straw had promised Shields’ family that the UK government would do its best to ensure that the outcome of an appeal by Shields would be in his favour.

According to the Liverpool Echo, Straw had requested the support of British diplomats and lawyers in handling the appeal, which was to be heard in Varna in October. The UK could not get directly involved in the court proceedings of another country, but diplomatic means could be used, Straw was quoted as saying. Straw said that he would discuss the case with his Bulgarian counterpart, the Liverpool Echo reported.

Shields’ case even reached the floor of the British parliament after, on November 17 2005, Liverpool, Riverside MP Louise Ellman submitted a motion calling on the UK to block Bulgaria’s membership in the EU over the guilty verdict pronounced against Shields.

In an interview with the Bulgarian-language newspaper 24 Chasa, Ellman said that she was concerned about the state of the Bulgarian legal system, particularly the dominance of the prosecution in the investigation phase and the pre-trial proceedings.

Ellman met Lachezar Matev, Bulgaria’s ambassador in London, who reportedly told her that Shields would get fair treatment. Ellman was quoted as saying that she was “not satisfied” with Matev’s statements, and would seek a meeting with Straw.

In its April 28 ruling, the SCC said: “Public opinion in the country of defendant Shields is being deliberately manipulated by selective presentation of only part of the information about the criminal case in order to discredit the Bulgarian judicial system by creating a wrong notion about the rule of law in Bulgaria, the country where English football fans behaved inappropriately for several days and nights, resorting to vandalism and violence and blatantly disregarding the rules of order at a hotel and in other public places. The Bulgarian courts of first, second and third instance all established beyond doubt that Shields had seriously injured the bartender by hitting him on the head with a large stone. The incident would have been fatal, had it not been for the prompt and expert intervention of surgeons and neurologists at a hospital in Varna”.

Whether the fact that Shields’ verdict was decreased by five years has anything to do with the activities of one or another official is difficult to know. However, something else from the SCC decision attracted media attention. According to the SCC, Shields would be given the choice of serving the rest of his sentence in a prison in UK.

For this to happen, there must be agreement between the relevant UK and Bulgarian justice and prison authorities, through diplomatic channels.