Fit Up

by Faith Clifford

  Irene’s representative did their part by explaining that she had been approached by Jeremy, telling the court what had brought him to the point of the breakdown of the solicitor/client relationship. Clearly the judge was confused by Hamilton’s barrister’s vociferous attempts to keep his client. ‘Is Mr Clifford in court?’ he asked. Jeremy got up from his seat, glad to have been looking smart in a suit, and said, ‘Yes, your honour.’

  He nodded to Jeremy but, saying nothing to him, turned his gaze back to the rest of the court and announced that he would grant permission for the representation order to be changed. There was a bang of the gavel and an ‘all rise’. Jeremy breathed a sigh of relief. Irene smiled and said that she would be in contact with him soon.

  Once out of the court Jeremy called Duncan to say that he had been successful at the hearing and that Irene would now be his solicitor. Duncan was equally delighted by the news.

  We had to pay £352 for this hearing out of our own pocket as it was not covered by legal aid, but it had been well worth the investment. There was still some way to go but Jeremy felt encouraged with Irene and Duncan on his side and we decided to enjoy this small victory.

  Chapter 14

  PREPARING FOR TRIAL

  Fouhey had also mentioned two other CD reports, which Duncan was not in possession of but were of crucial importance to Jeremy’s case. He had told Irene that his report could go ahead more or less as it was, but that she needed to apply as much pressure on the police to get immediate disclosure of the CD reports.

  Eventually Irene managed to get these reports, but only on the third or fourth time of asking. They revealed that Fouhey had failed to mention ‘recovered folders’. He implied he was dealing with ‘allocated/deleted’ space, i.e. deleted but still present files. Duncan reviewed this again and reported that it was clear that Jeremy was using the computer for much of 2000. There was no presence of any sex-related material until 18 January 2001 when, in the middle of an internet banking transaction with RBS, a page came up called www.sex-exchange.com. It popped up between two banking pages and was not driven by Jeremy, but the same page popped up again three hours later. After that, the offending images all came in quick succession on 26 January between 9.06 and 9.09 a.m. which were scripts driving pop-ups (computer commands that are executed without the user knowing). Duncan had loaded one of the main scripts into his browser bar upon which around twelve unwanted pages popped up in a matter of seconds, most of the material relating to children. On 11 February there was another similar session, although on this occasion the material was not related to children.

  In the court hearing of 20 December 2004, which Hopkins had attended and when the CPS were asked to firm up on their forensic evidence, apparently a further report had been forthcoming from Fouhey. The report was dated 21 December 2004, but this was the first time anyone in our legal team had seen it and it was definitely not in the files sent on from Hamilton. Where had it been during disclosure? Duncan said that this was most important and it would have saved him a lot of time had he seen it earlier, as it accurately set out where the images were found.

  The report from Fouhey was made up of only a few lines but it was the last sentence that was the most crucial part as far as we were concerned: ‘These images would appear to have originally come from a temporary internet folder.’ Duncan agreed with this entirely, but Fouhey failed to spell out the implications of this observation in his report.

  Duncan suggested to Irene that she write to the CPS, pointing out that they didn’t have a case given the fact that their own expert had stated that everything that was found was in the internet cache and that the images arrived as a result of pop-ups, which Jeremy was trying to stop from happening by installing the security software. Duncan also said that if they rejected this she could follow up with a report from him with a further statement that would bring out the embarrassing fact that the police had ignored highly suspicious material created by Gerard, whom they relied on as a witness.

  Upon receipt of Duncan’s advice, Irene sent an urgent fax to the CPS in St Albans dated 12 April 2005. It read:

  Dear Sir

  Re: Regina v Jeremy Clifford – St Albans Crown Court As you are aware, Mr Duncan Campbell, specialist in electronics, computers and telecommunications, has been investigating various Encase images from exhibit JB/1, the Tiny brand tower type computer, seized on the 30 October 2003 from the business premises of Video Action Limited, Technology House, 6 Princes Parade, Golders Green, London.

  Our expert is in the process of preparing a full report, however in the interim he has provided us with certain information which we feel may assist the prosecution in taking a decision as to whether or not they wish to proceed with the case against Mr Clifford.

  Mr Campbell has now been provided with the statements of Mr Fouhey of 21 December 2004 which in its final sentence states ‘images would appear to have come from a temporary internet folder’ save that they came from four temporary internet folders. Mr Campbell agreed.

  Mr Fouhey fails to spell out the implication of this, images and files in the temporary internet cache are copied without the knowledge of the user. They are stored in a jumble in deeply buried folders with random names like ‘FX7RA’ and so on. They cannot be viewed or recovered by an ordinarily skilled and equipped computer user. Since the images were in a cache, the burden shifts to the prosecution to show probable reason that the page containing the images were deliberately sought. If the page can be shown to be a pop up then it is obvious that it was not a page sought by the user. These issues bear on making and possessing charges.

  I refer to the case law of Bowden and Atkins and Goodlands. In Bowden the court held that the defendant ought to be convicted of making the photographs which he deliberately copied onto his directory but he could not be guilty of making the photographs unknowingly stored in the cache. Further ‘the offence of possession of an indecent photograph was not committed unless the defendant knew he had the photograph in his possession’.

  We would suggest that the prosecution are now in difficulties as their own expert states that everything found was in the internet cache. Perhaps your expert would also be able to confirm that the images arose as a result of popups to which it is obvious from the history that the user was trying to prevent by installing security software and then reinstalling the whole operating system.

  It would also appear that the events of making the images occurred before the operating system was installed and at a time before the user was registered as Jeremy Clifford.

  We are providing you with this information in advance as we consider we now have a duty to the public purse. We are informed by Mr Campbell that to do a more detailed report dealing with the apparent unwanted interference from 18 January to 11 February and attempt to install Norton Security and eventually the reformatting and re-installation of the operating system on the latter date, just a few hours after the second group of unpleasant images arrived or reconstructing the events which a nearly intact internet cache can enable us to do will incur considerable work and expense, necessitating our having to make an application to further extend our certificate.

  We should be grateful if you would give careful consideration of this document prior to the hearing on Friday 15 April.

  Yours faithfully

  Smith Brown & Sprawson

  Before the trial was due to start, it was important for Jeremy to spend time going through the case management strategies with Irene. She would ask him questions that the prosecution would likely ask so that he could consider his responses. They would also discuss what the weaknesses and strengths of the evidence were, and so on.

  On 14 April, the day before the case management hearing, Jeremy was in Irene’s office for the afternoon attending such a meeting. The questions were deep and searching, which made Jeremy irritated and wonder how it had all got this far. Despite having lived with the subject of child pornography for the last year and a half, it was still no easier to talk abou
t and all mentions of it disgusted him deeply. His anger sapped his concentration and all he could think about was how someone was going to pay for this. He did not know if it was Hopkins persecuting him or Fouhey not doing his job properly but one thing was certain, he was going to find out no matter what the outcome of the trial.

  Irene had to encourage Jeremy to carry on – every minute counted and she didn’t want to waste the afternoon. She told him that the evidence was very weak and that she was surprised that the case had got this far but, nevertheless, they had to carry on this session and others as if he was going to go to trial. She said that this was his chance to prove his innocence once and for all.

  Jeremy began to settle down and about twenty minutes into the meeting, Irene’s assistant knocked on the office door and walked in. She handed Irene a sheet of paper that consisted of two typewritten lines. After she had finished reading it she looked up at Jeremy and said, ‘I am going to give you this to read and I will leave you alone for ten minutes. Then I will come back.’

  Jeremy picked up the paper and looked at the two lines. He could not believe what he was seeing and had to read them several times as his eyes welled up.

  The letter was from the CPS. It stated that their forensic expert agreed with Duncan and that the prosecution would be offering no evidence. All charges would be dropped and they had already informed the court.

  This nightmare was actually over. There would be no three-day trial and no name in the papers. Gathering himself, Jeremy called me at work to tell me the good news. At first I could not believe it and insisted he repeat what he had said. Then we were both crying. Shortly after he said he had to go as Irene had returned and that he would see me later.

  It was late afternoon by this time and I decided to leave the office to meet Jeremy at home. The case management hearing for the next day had now become an acquittal hearing and I was definitely going to attend that. It had felt like an eternity but the day we had been waiting for had finally arrived.

  That evening we celebrated with our families by booking the restaurant that we would have gone to for Jeremy’s birthday back in October 2003.

  The next day we attended St Albans Crown Court with our heads held high. We met up with Irene and, for today, a Miss Beverley Cripps was to be Jeremy’s barrister for the hearing. She shook our hands and offered her congratulations as we sat down and waited to be called. Irene was staring thoughtfully into the distance, then her eyes hardened and she quietly said to us, ‘Something has been driving this case along.’ We were in no doubt about that, especially as Fouhey’s last report (the one that proved to be the downfall in the police’s case) had been sat on since before Christmas.

  For the final hearing of Regina v. Clifford we filed into the courtroom to listen to the formalities and to hear the judge say the words we had been waiting sixteen months for: ‘Mr Clifford, you are free to go.’

  On our way out of the courtroom Jeremy noticed that the reporter who had been following all of his hearings looked rather disgruntled as he packed away his notebook. We were again reminded how miraculous it was that in all this time we had not once been featured in the local papers.

  We bid our final farewell to Irene who had been absolutely wonderful for Jeremy, both professionally and emotionally. She had been so proactive that she had ended this case in a matter of weeks – compared to the many months taken by Hamilton.

  Finally, we were able to leave. Holding each other tightly, we walked down a long corridor towards the exit with the relief that it was all over.

  The dark days were now behind us.

  Or so we thought.

  Chapter 15

  END OF A DREAM

  Sadly, with the culmination of the long, drawn-out process of clearing Jeremy’s name, the many absences from the shop and Gerard’s slanderous and libellous telephone calls and emails to everyone in the filming industry, his position had become untenable which, in turn, had taken its toll on the business. UK Professional Video was forced to close down.

  Had charges been dropped against Jeremy at the return to bail hearing on 19 July 2004, we could have recovered and put this bad experience behind us, but the ongoing prosecution just killed off the business stone dead. On top of that, we had two court cases to prepare for, which would require a substantial fighting fund. One was against Lloyd Gerard for libel and slander, the other against Hertfordshire Constabulary for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office. The past eighteen months had been tortuous for us both but amazingly quick in destroying what could have been a fruitful business leading to a comfortable retirement. We had lost our investment as well as our self-respect.

  As we emptied out the last remnants of the shop premises and locked the doors for the final time, we felt disappointed that we would never know how far we could have gone with this venture. It had all been so exciting at the beginning, with plans scribbled down in a notebook under the Tenerife sun, but now it all lay in tatters. Our only hope of redemption was in the form of litigation. Hopefully, the wrongs that we had experienced would soon be put right, and our hatred of Hopkins and Gerard was at least giving us the determination to pursue that goal.

  With the criminal case behind us, we now had a lot of work to do in order to get the wheels in motion and prepare our strike back against our perpetrators.

  With all the paperwork we had accumulated since October 2003, our first task was to put together a file that would give an overview of each case and which could be sent to solicitors specialising in slander, libel or police misconduct.

  While I was at work, Jeremy had the time to research possible solicitors and it was at this time that we decided to take on Gerard first. This was due to there being a one-year time limit in bringing an action of slander and libel from the first comment made. Also, Gerard had been very busy and was continuing to slander Jeremy, as reported by some of our suppliers and customers who told us about the phone calls. We imagined he must have been enraged by the dropping of the charges and that he had failed in his attempt to bring down Jeremy. If people didn’t dislike Gerard already, they certainly would now knowing that his statement was all lies.

  One such phone call had been made to Stephen Thompson who worked for the trade magazine Highbury WV. Stephen contacted Jeremy after he had received a call from Gerard asking him to stop running advertisements for UK Professional Video because Jeremy would soon be in court accused of paedophilia. Of course, he had no reason to stop advertising and it would not have been ethical for him to do so. He also said that he hated Gerard, so was pleased to be able to annoy him by not acceding to his request. Jeremy asked Stephen if he would be prepared to be a witness when the time came and he confirmed that he would make a statement.

  Surprisingly, and very much out of the blue, at around the same time Jeremy also received a telephone call from Bob Crabtree who ran the DVDoctor website. He had been wrestling with what to do with two emails that he had received from Gerard on 7 and 13 April, the contents and tone of which disturbed him. Bob did not like Gerard at all but he knew he had to tolerate him due to their business interests.

  Jeremy then told Bob that he was suing Gerard in the High Court and that he already had good recorded evidence. Bob told him that if that was the case he would be happy to hand over these emails to a solicitor, once one had been appointed. Although it was fantastic news that more evidence had come to light on top of what we already had, we were disappointed that Bob wouldn’t forward it to us. We were now really curious, and rather worried, because it meant that Gerard was still happily emailing and talking about Jeremy in defamatory terms. He had to be stopped. And soon!

  Jeremy had already started his internet research and had made lists of possible companies for both cases before the criminal trial had even ended; he wanted to be prepared. While I was at work he methodically called each one to see if they would be interested in taking his case. He tried the local ones first as their offices would be more accessible and their rates cheaper than
London solicitors. After Jeremy told them his story, however, each and every one said they were too busy to take on any more cases and by the end of the day Jeremy felt quite disillusioned. Justice seemed to elude him and, more worryingly, his quest for vengeance against Gerard only magnified. In his frustration, he called me at work to spit profanities about Gerard, telling me that he wished he was dead. I knew he couldn’t think clearly in this state of mind so of course I had to calm him down and encourage him to research other solicitors. Perhaps it was now time to look at the big guns in London, I suggested. He agreed that he might have more success there. On putting down the telephone, however, what I dared not mention to him was that in the back of my mind there was the possibility that those companies had not entertained him simply because the word ‘paedophile’ had raised its very ugly head. Once again representation was proving difficult, and I couldn’t help but think it was because of pre-judgement. The abuse of children is a heinous crime, but what is also appalling is to be constantly judged guilty of such a crime when you are not.

  However, one company, Carter-Ruck, based in London, who were very highly recommended, seemed quite interested in Jeremy’s story and asked for it all to be put in writing with back-up information and evidence. The fees would be expensive but they had intimated that if our case was strong they might consider doing a Conditional Fee Arrangement (CFA). This was an encouraging breakthrough, at last.