A mother accused of stealing more than $5,000 from the Bank of Bermuda has had her conviction quashed after an appeal judge found the original case to be littered with legal mistakes.

And defence counsel Richard Horseman told The Royal Gazette he was not "aware of a trial with a greater number of errors of law".

Controversial magistrate Ed King was on the bench when Heather Fox was given a suspended three month sentence in January 2002 but Mr. Horseman appealed on 12 grounds, eight of which were accepted by Puisne Judge Norma Wade-Miller yesterday.

Ms Fox was arrested on January 11, 2000, accused of stealing $5,209.98 in cash from the bank, at Hamilton Police Station she was searched and $1,030 was found. In the original trial, the court heard how the assistant supervisor at the Church Street branch had, as usual, taken a bundle of merchants' cheques and cash and calculated their totals before putting them in the secured vault overnight.

The next morning, when her supervisor carried out a random check on Fox's deposits from the night before, she found the box was down $5,209.98 on what the cash slip dictated there should be. Fox had written the cash slip herself the night before. After discussions with managers, the Police were called in.

In the trial, Ms Fox originally admitted taking the cash when interviewed by Police but later denied making the confession.

Mr. Horseman appealed the decision on a dozen counts of legal errors, including Mr. King being incorrect to accept the confession and his failure to allow the defence to question a number of witnesses or show exhibits to witnesses.

The matter, due to a "multiplicity of reasons", took two years to be dealt with in total.

In acquitting Ms Fox, Mrs. Justice Wade-Miller said: "The conduct of the learned magistrate not only departed from the required standard of fairness but has given rise to a number of errors of law.

"Taken as a whole, I have concluded that it would be unsafe and unsatisfactory to sustain this conviction. Therefore the appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence are set aside. A verdict of acquittal is hereby entered. "In the circumstances it would be wholly unjust to order a retrial."

After the case, Mr. Horseman told The Royal Gazette: "Obviously there were substantial errors of law and that is why the Supreme Court has come to this ruling. "It was unfortunate that the trial went on for so long but Ms Fox is now elated, to say the least. She has always maintained her innocence from the first day."