FOLLOWING the conviction late last month of an East Sussex vicar – The Rev Alex Brown, 61 -Â who conducted 360 fake marriage ceremonies at the church of St Peter and St Paul in St Leonards-on-Sea comes news that two clergymen have been arrested as part of an inquiry into sham marriages in London.
The Reverend Brian Shipsides, 54, and the Reverend Elwon John, 43, were arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to breach immigration law.
Two churches in Forest Gate, east London, are being searched by police. All Saints and St Edmunds operate together, with Shipsides being the priest in charge while John is an associate minister for both churches.
Shipsides, who was arrested at his vicarage, is also being questioned on suspicion of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Neither man has been charged with any offence.
During the seven-week Sussex trial at Lewes Crown Court jurors also convicted co-defendant Vladymyr Buchak, 33, of conspiring to breach immigration laws by paying Eastern Europeans up to £3,000 each to marry Africans, mainly from Nigeria.

Rev Alex Brown
A third defendant, solicitor Michael Adelasoye, was found guilty of conspiring to facilitate the commission of breaches of immigration laws.
Nigerian-born Adelasoye, who specialised in immigration law, helped the African participants by advising them with their applications for residency once they were married.
The court heard that Buchak, 33, a Ukrainian national who had himself been living illegally in the UK since at least 2004, was responsible for “cajoling and persuading” the Eastern Europeans into the marriages of convenience.
He preyed on migrant workers who were living in the area and were desperate to earn money by offering them large cash sums to wed Africans to allow them to obtain the documents to live and work in the UK.
Jurors were shown photocopies of the marriage register at the church which showed that 360 out of the 383 weddings over a four-year period involved Eastern Europeans marrying African nationals, mainly from Nigeria.
Brown was arrested on June 30 last year following a joint investigation by Sussex Police and the UK Border Agency, and both his vicarage home in Blomfield Road, St Leonards- on-Sea, and the church were searched.
There they found documents he had doctored, including the church’s electoral roll plus a second, altered copy, which he had filled out to hide the dramatic increase in weddings over which he was presiding.
Although Buchak was seen as the principal organiser of the operation, prosecutor David Walbank said there was no doubt that Brown must have been fully aware that the majority of the weddings he was conducting at the church were shams.
Giving evidence, Brown who is openly gay, insisted he only ever married couples he was sure were getting married for the right reasons and exceptions would only be made if the bride-to-be was imminently expected to give birth.
Outside the court, the Archdeacon of Lewes and Hastings, Philip Jones, said Brown had committed a “betrayal of trust” towards his congregation and the wider community.
He added:
We are particularly sorry for those who have been deceived and hurt by the actions of Father Alex Brown. The church and the community of St Leonards-on-Sea are faced with a betrayal of trust on the part of Father Alex Brown.
He added that Brown, who was suspended from his duties after his arrest, may now face disciplinary action from the Church.
Judge Hayward adjourned sentencing until September 6 for pre-sentence reports to be carried out on Brown and Adelasoye as he was told they were both of previously good character.
Buchak was remanded in custody while Brown and Adelasoye were given continued bail.
Hat tip: Adam Tjaavk


The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
August 4th, 2010 at 11:53 am
Doesn’t “head office” have sufficient controls to prevent this from happening?
If not, this organization (CofE) should not be permitted to perform marriages untill they have instituted the appropriate controls. It is a management failure.
August 4th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
I’d agree with that, Arnold. The irony is, if this was a commercial organisation there’d be some form of government or outside audit to check their records were straight, their management up to the job of providing the wedding services to a set standard, and so on. But as it’s a church…?
Funnily enough, I seem to remember that when Humanist Society of Scotland were setting up their bid to perform legal weddings they had to provide just such evidence and be monitored by the Chief Registrar for a year or something. But I gather there’s no such system of monitoring for the main churches up there either.
August 4th, 2010 at 6:15 pm
If 360 out of 383 weddings caried out over a four year period were crooked that leaves only 23 genuine weddings, less than six per year. Are Church weddings now so unpopular that six a year is now normal or is this chuch located in a particularly heathen part of the country?
August 4th, 2010 at 6:54 pm
Stony
I imagine Brown prioritised his lucrative convenience weddings and told many genuine couples the church was fully booked.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
to me the rev was only performing his duty by wedding couples. i believe there is nothing wrong with it. is up to them and GOD. [the couple]God will be their judge. i believe before any one could WALK CONFIDENTLY straight to the church of GOD TO MAKE A VOW, TO SOMEONE PROMISING EACH OTHER FOR BETTER FOR WORST, SHOULD KNOW THE CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT THEY ARE ABOUT TO DO.
August 4th, 2010 at 11:24 pm
see u
August 5th, 2010 at 3:07 pm
It’s hiding under the bridge in wait for the three billy goats Gruff.
August 5th, 2010 at 7:35 pm
osbond, these people are not “PROMISING EACH OTHER FOR BETTER OR WORST” (That should be WORSE by the way), they are pretending to get married to get around British and European immigration rules. This is not very difficult to understand.
August 20th, 2010 at 12:06 pm
yes osbond, u r right about what u say. But if this rev , married them with the knowledge that it is a sham situation, then thats not good. the issue is about his ignornce or knowledge of the couples intentions, not the act of marring them.