Find Them Dead

89 Thursday 23 May

The first defence witness of the afternoon was a forensic financial analyst in her early fifties called Carolyn Herring. Primrose Brown began by coaxing her credentials out of her. Having worked for some years in a senior position in the fraud detection department of the Inland Revenue, she was now employed in a similar role in the private banking sector.

With a few skilful questions, the QC established for the benefit of the jury that this woman was a very much more experienced and qualified forensic financial analyst than the prosecution witness put forward by the CPS, Emily Denyer. Then slowly, item by item, she went through the spreadsheets produced by Denyer, totally losing Meg — and she sensed quite a few of the other jurors — in the process.

Quite apart from being baffled by the figures, Meg was struggling to concentrate, because she was so distracted by her fear for Laura, and the challenges some of the jury presented. Who could she count on, at this moment, for a ‘not guilty’ verdict?

She looked surreptitiously down at the list on the tiny notepad she kept in her handbag. So far those she hoped were on her side were Maisy Waller, Hugo Pink and Hari Singh, who, with his Buddhist views, she was increasingly sure wouldn’t give a ‘guilty’ verdict. Including herself, that was just four out of eleven — so far. Enough for a hung jury, but not remotely enough for the verdict she had to deliver.

Shit.

And now the QC, plodding through these spreadsheets with her witness, in agonizing detail, was going to antagonize some of the jurors even further, for sure. It was gone 2.30 p.m., over an hour, but they were coming towards the end.

Suddenly, as if sensing the mood of the jury in a moment when the analyst had paused, Brown said, ‘Ms Herring, I don’t wish to go back over all these transactions and the complexity of the inter-account trading. I’m sure some members of the jury, like myself, struggle when we see columns of figures.’ She smiled as she glanced at the jury. ‘Are you able to summarize what you have found during your exhaustive analysis?’

Herring turned to the jury. ‘Everything that you have heard from Emily Denyer is circumstantial. In all the transactions, between bank accounts across seven different countries, not once does the name Terence Gready appear, nor do any of the transactions link back to any accounts pertaining either to him or to his firm in Brighton. In my opinion, I can see no evidence of any financial benefit to him in any of them.’

Meg’s spirits rose at this.

‘Undoubtedly, there is a very clever mastermind behind all of these transactions, but could anyone say beyond reasonable doubt that the mastermind is Mr Gready? There is no direct evidence to show this.’

Primrose Brown addressed her witness. ‘To be sure I have this right, your conclusion, from reviewing the prosecution’s case, is that there is not one shred of evidence that would link Terence Gready to any of the financial transactions?’

Herring shook her head.

Jupp leaned forward. ‘Could you please say that aloud, for the benefit of the recording.’

‘No,’ Carolyn Herring said, very definitely. ‘I could find no link connecting Terence Gready to any of these transactions or bank accounts.’

‘Thank you,’ Brown said. ‘I have no further questions for my witness.’

Cork stood. ‘Ms Herring, one thing you have not addressed is the Rolex wristwatch, valued at approximately £55,000, purportedly given to the defendant by his wife, Barbara, as — ah — a supposed Christmas present some five years ago. This lady is a renowned worldwide authority on orchids, who regularly performs the function of judge in orchid competitions and had an orchid cultivation business, but is there anything to suggest she could have made sufficient money to make such a purchase?’

The financial expert answered him with barely a moment’s hesitation. ‘The defendant’s wife, Barbara Gready, from my careful study of the family’s financial affairs — and prudency — had inherited the sum of £284,000 net of tax from the estate of her late mother.’

‘Still quite an extravagant amount — close to twenty per cent of her inheritance on a gift for her husband — would you not say?’

Primrose Brown addressed the judge. ‘Your Honour, this is misleading. A rare watch of the kind Mrs Gready acquired is an investment, with a proven track record of rising in value. I would say, in our uncertain times, perhaps a better investment than having the money in some banks.’

Jupp nodded. ‘It is a fair point.’

Cork went on. ‘Ms Herring, in your experience, is it usual to find with this type of investigation that it is hard to connect actual people to these types of overseas bank accounts?’

Carolyn replied, ‘Yes.’

‘When you worked for the Inland Revenue, were you faced with the same issues?’

‘Yes.’

‘Would you agree that there are links between these accounts and LH Classics?’

‘Yes.’

‘So all you can say really is that you have not found the defendant’s name anywhere?’

‘Correct.’

‘Do you agree that someone has gone to great lengths to hide the origin of the monies in the accounts and the source of the large value deposits? Someone who could be the defendant, Mr Gready?’

‘Yes, but I found no trace of the defendant’s details.’

‘But then you would not expect to, would you?’

‘Not necessarily, no.’

Cork paused for a moment. ‘You placed great importance in your evidence that all the details Ms Denyer referred to were merely circumstantial evidence. However, circumstantial evidence is still evidence that the court can take into account, is that not true?’

She replied reluctantly, ‘Yes.’

He continued. ‘And in this case the court has heard there are substantial amounts of circumstantial evidence from the financial transactions, is that correct, Ms Herring?’

She muttered a response.

‘Sorry I don’t think the court caught your last answer, would you mind repeating it?’

She replied, ‘Yes, it is fair to say there is substantial circumstantial evidence in this case.’

‘Thank you, no further questions.’

‘I have no re-examination,’ Brown said.

The usher escorted Carolyn Herring from the witness stand.

‘I would now like to call my next witness,’ Primrose Brown said. ‘Mr Arthur Mason-Taylor.’

A lean man in his fifties, with brush-cut grey hair and a suit he was clearly unused to wearing, was escorted in, gave his name and took the oath.

‘Can you please tell us your profession?’ Brown said to him.

‘I’m a mechanical engineer and worked full-time at LH Classics with a couple of part-timers.’

‘Do you have a particular speciality?’

‘Yes, restoring classic racing cars.’

‘Were you employed by LH Classics between the years of 2005 and 2018?’ she asked.

‘I was.’

‘And what were your duties during that time?’

‘Working on preparing cars acquired by the company, for sale.’

‘What kind of cars?’

‘Ferraris, Aston Martins, Jaguar E-Types, Chevrolet Corvettes, AC Cobras, Austin Healeys — among others.’

Brown nodded. ‘Who was your boss during the time you worked for LH Classics?’

‘The General Manager, Mr Starr.’

‘Would that be Michael — Mickey — Starr? Sometimes known as Lucky?’

‘Yes.’

‘Can you tell me, during these thirteen years, did you ever see Terence Gready on the premises?’

He frowned. ‘Terence Gready?’

She pointed at the dock. ‘That man, there, the defendant?’

Mason-Taylor looked at Gready, then shook his head. ‘No, never.’

‘Did you see his name on any paperwork? Documentation?’

‘Terence Gready?’

‘Yes.’

‘No, never.’

‘You are certain?’

Mason-Taylor smiled. ‘It’s not the kind of name you’d easily forget. No, I never saw it or heard it.’

‘Thank you,’ she said.

The prosecutor asked, ‘Mr Mason-Taylor, during your time with LH Classics, were you ever involved in the construction of fake — or rather replica cars?’

‘A number of times, yes. There is a very legitimate market for replicas of certain models.’

‘A number of times? And did the construction of any of these replicas differ from the originals by having cavities built into them, which would not have been there in the originals?’

‘Yes,’ he said, positively. ‘Quite regularly.’

‘Did you query what the purpose of these were?’

‘No, I knew.’

Cork feigned astonishment. ‘You knew? Really. What exactly did you know?’

Mason-Taylor shrugged. ‘The motor racing world is full of cheats — it always has been — and the world of classic car racing is one of the worst offenders. I always assumed these cavities were about weight loss, to make the vehicles more competitive in races.’

‘Did it ever occur to you,’ Cork continued, ‘that there might be another purpose for these cavities?’

‘Why should it?’ Mason-Taylor responded with genuine innocence. ‘What other purpose do you mean?’

‘The smuggling of drugs.’

The mechanic’s astonished expression was all the response he needed. But he went on. ‘I’m sorry, but that really is absurd. My work for LH was to carry out restoration work on cars intended for sale, and to prepare cars for clients for races.’

‘Even though you knew you were helping some to cheat?’

‘With respect,’ Mason-Taylor replied, ‘you clearly have no understanding about motor racing. All cars go through a rigorous scrutineering before any competitive event. That includes weighing the vehicles. My job was to make cars as competitive as possible — but always within the rules.’

Realizing he was holding a losing ticket, Cork sat down. Brown rose again.

‘So, to your knowledge, Mr Mason-Taylor, none of the cars belonging to LH Classics were ever built or used for the purposes of importing drugs?’ she asked.

‘Absolutely no way, madam.’

‘No further questions,’ she said.

The QC was about to call her final defence witness, Barbara Gready, when her junior counsel whispered in her ear.

Brown turned to the judge. ‘I have a very urgent matter that I need to make you aware of, Your Honour, but without the jury present.’

Jupp addressed the jury. ‘Members of the jury, I must now ask you to leave the court while I speak to my learned friend, Ms Brown.’

After the jury left, Jupp instructed Brown to continue.

‘It has just been brought to my attention that my next witness, Barbara Gready, who is at the back of the court, has changed her mind about appearing as a defence witness, Your Honour. I need time to speak to her.’

Terence Gready looked shell-shocked.

His wife stepped forward and started shouting at him. She had tears streaming down her face and was sobbing uncontrollably. ‘You, you lying bastard, you’ve broken our family. How could I have been such a fool — you’ve lied to me, you’ve lied to your children, and I’ve been sitting there listening to you lying to the court. If you think I’m going to speak up for you, you are sadly mistaken.’

Gready looked ashen-faced. ‘Barbara! I’m not lying, they’re making it up. They’ve fitted me up, can’t you see that?’

‘It’s lies, Terence, it’s all lies. How did you think your little story could convince anyone — you can’t even convince me?’

Jupp raised his voice, sternly. ‘This is not the time or the place for this sort of behaviour to continue, this is a court of law. I’m now adjourning this court sitting for this issue to be resolved.’

Primrose Brown turned to Barbara Gready. ‘Let’s go outside where I can talk to you privately.’

‘Don’t waste your time. I’m through with this. He’s a loser, he deserves everything he gets. They can throw the book at him for all I care.’ She turned, still crying, and stormed out of the court.

Well aware that this could be grounds for appeal, the judge looked around sternly at those present in the court and up in the public gallery. ‘I am instructing all of you to disregard what you have just heard. If any of you mentions it in or outside of this court, you are in contempt and you will be dealt with severely.’

Twenty minutes later the hearing resumed, with the jury back in place, unaware of the drama that had just unfolded in the court. Jupp looked at Ms Brown. ‘Do you have any further defence witnesses?’

There was a moment of awkward silence.

Brown got up. ‘No, Your Honour, that concludes the case for the defence.’

Jupp looked at the clock, which read 4.18 p.m., then turned to the jury. ‘Thank you all for your patience today — you have a lot to consider. We have now heard from all the witnesses for both the prosecution and defence. Tomorrow we will hear the closing speeches from the prosecution followed by the defence. When these are finished, I will sum up for you, after which I will send you out to commence your deliberations. I would like to remind you again that you must speak to no one about what you have heard during this trial, nor must you attempt to look up anything related to it on the internet.’

Then, addressing the whole room, he said, ‘Court is adjourned. We meet back here at 10 a.m. tomorrow.’