I was well into my stride now with Leslie. He had the ability to calm me down and make me feel that he and I were the only ones in the room.
We were then moving on to the impact of the prosecution on Jeremy and me. I said that when we had got married we were very happy, and had been until this incident. As I said this out loud I felt the sadness creep over me and in doing so had not realised that my voice had become hushed. Leslie asked me to speak up again and I continued to say that we were very happily married until this incident and Jeremy’s arrest, and that he was humiliated and disturbed by it.
Leslie briefly mentioned the raid on our house on 30 October 2003 and then moved on to 19 July, when Jeremy was charged. He asked me to explain to Cranston what effect the arrest had had on Jeremy first.
‘He became withdrawn and he lost his easy-going manner,’ I said. ‘He lost his focus on the business, became very depressed. There were times when I used to come home and the curtains were drawn. He was just lying in bed, he couldn’t get up.’
Leslie went on to ask how Jeremy was beforehand, was he the sort of person who would be in bed when I came home in the afternoon? Was that his character?
I confidently responded, ‘No, he was very business-minded, entrepreneurial, very outgoing and then he became withdrawn. It was a noticeable difference. He became uncommunicative, snappy, irritable, totally different to the person he was.’ Then I was led on to the period after Jeremy’s arrest and before charge and asked if there was any improvement in his behaviour or not.
‘There was a slight improvement. I had to motivate him because I was worried about the business.’ I told the court that the business started in August 2003 so it was fairly new and we had invested a lot into it, both time and money. I was worried about the impact on that so I had to get Jeremy motivated and back to work doing what he does best. After Christmas he became a bit more motivated to do that and he was more encouraged at the fact that he hoped that everything would be sorted out by the time he returned to bail and that it had all been perhaps a misunderstanding and everything would be cleared up by then.
Leslie carried on: ‘This was his belief once he returned to his bail, that this would be the end of the matter?’
‘Yes,’ I said, ‘he just thought it would be a formality and we would get on with our lives and this was just a blip.’
Then I was asked how Jeremy’s behaviour had changed after charge on 19 July. I answered, ‘He called me to say that he had been charged and that he couldn’t believe it and he went right downhill after that time. He was very depressed by then. He was back to being uncommunicative, he shut down.’
Leslie talked about the four charges against Jeremy and the various court appearances until April 2005. Then he asked me to explain to Cranston the effect on my husband and our home life.
‘He had completely changed. He went back to being introverted and quiet. If I spoke, it was sort of like I was to blame for everything. He looked to his family. We never socialised and I again tried to motivate him to do the business but was very much aware that Lloyd Gerard was gunning for him.’
‘Tell us about that,’ said Leslie.
‘There was bad blood between them anyway and they had been constant business rivals. Jeremy was trying to get involved in the business although it was half-hearted. There were lots of court appearances and after each appearance he was withdrawn. It got to the point where I was afraid to speak to him and every time he had been to court he would come home and close the curtains, go to bed and not speak to me.’
‘Are you saying that his sleeping patterns changed?’ pressed Leslie. ‘And did it affect your marital relations?’
I was a little thrown by this question, at having to talk about such personal things in front of these people, but I soldiered on despite my embarrassment, not looking at anyone but Leslie. I said that at night Jeremy would be up at all hours watching TV and during the day he constantly slept, which I thought was quite depressive. The physical side of our marriage had come to an end, and I explained that we had had a fairly normal loving relationship but after being charged he didn’t want to know anything about sex at all. I knew that the mere subject of this case had made Jeremy feel that it was somehow dirty.
Leslie asked how the charge of possession or making images of children had actually affected him around children. I replied, ‘He did not want anything to do with them because he felt that if people knew [about this case] they might be worried about how he was with them. He just felt guilty by the association of it really. His sister had a child, she’s two and a half and he has yet to really interact with her.’
In fact I knew his sister was extremely hurt by the fact that Jeremy would not go near her daughter, but I could understand the reasons why. He did not want anyone to think he was that kind of person.
I explained further that our social life had more or less ended as Jeremy felt comfortable only in the company of family and he knew he did not have to say anything to anyone. He was always worried about people knowing about him and forming an opinion without knowing the facts.
Now we were on to publicity of the criminal proceedings and I talked about buying the local papers after each of Jeremy’s court appearances. I said that we had contained it quite well and that I did not find any articles, which was a relief because we would have felt unsafe with allegations like these. Leslie nodded in understanding.
With Leslie’s guidance, I relived my experience of the break in Spain and Gerard’s meddling as a police witness. Those old feelings came back again and the pleasure at getting an opportunity to have a dig at Gerard never went away.
I was asked to turn to look at a sentence within my statement about Jeremy’s fears of conviction and the associated stigma, followed by the question about the possibility of him being on the sex offenders register.
‘It is the stigma of it and that there would probably be a time when more people would find out about him. Also in the business he filmed at schools and things like that and we knew that this would affect the business as well and also the restrictions of freedom. Every time you go on holiday, especially we like to visit the States, I know that this would possibly show up and that it could impact on where we went, where we go. It was just awful to contemplate that that could happen.’
I felt we were nearing an end as we got to the part about Jeremy’s inability to cope with the business and the closure of the shop. Leslie asked me to address the judge and give him an idea of how Jeremy’s mental state changed vis-à-vis how he was running his business.
I stated that Jeremy had changed from the time of his initial arrest to being charged. Obviously we didn’t know what was going to happen and he was having a lot more meetings with the solicitor prior to the criminal trial. With the time taken out of the shop and not being able to operate it properly, Jeremy was suffering. He was trying to diversify the business to get away from the competition of Lloyd Gerard and the impact he was making. If customers called him first this affected our business because he was obviously blabbing about the case to all and sundry. Jeremy just couldn’t handle it any more.
I paused here momentarily, thinking of the wreckage that had been caused due to Gerard’s slander destroying a legitimate business and, if it was not for me and our families, almost destroying a good man. My hatred for Gerard was only tempered by the fact that he was, hopefully, in a place to atone for his sins.
Interrupting my thoughts, Leslie asked, ‘Have you and your husband ever received an apology from the police?’
‘No,’ I angrily replied.
Leslie continued: ‘In a word, if it is possible to do it in a word, what do you say to his Lordship about how this has all affected your life and your husband’s life?’
Sensing that this would be Leslie’s last question to me, I said, ‘It has been a financial and emotional disaster. In attacking Jeremy, I’m a victim as well and so are the close family.’
As Leslie sat down, Challenger got up. My mouth was d
ry and I sipped some water as I wondered what he had in store for me. I really wanted to sit down as it wasn’t exactly comfortable leaning on the stool, but I dared not fidget now.
While Challenger flicked through his file, I took the opportunity to glance over at Cranston. His demeanour had not changed, his head was still down as he scribbled away. I then looked over to Jeremy but he was looking down at the floor; Andre and Leslie were looking through papers.
‘Mrs Clifford, first this.’ Challenger brought me back to attention. ‘The event which caused all these problems was the arrest in October 2003 of your husband, was it not? That is what set it all in motion?’
‘It was more after charge,’ I replied.
‘Would you agree – I am not going to ask you to look it up but I am simply going to read a passage to you from Dr Turner’s report. Dr Turner is the psychiatrist who examined your husband and reported on him for the purpose of these proceedings. He describes what your husband said to him during the examination. What your husband said to Dr Turner is this: Between October 2003 and about June 2004 your husband described himself as being totally dysfunctional. Does that fit with your recollection of how he was during that period?’
Finally, after all that rambling, there was a question.
I answered him, ‘Yes, more or less.’
Challenger then asked, ‘I just want to ask you this. You spoke of your short holiday which was interrupted by virtue of a telephone call to your husband’s shop, apparently from Mr Gerard. You were on holiday at the time in Spain in your own flat?’ I replied with one word – ‘yes’ – but did not expand. Keep answers short for him, I thought.
‘A flat you own together with your husband.’
‘Yes.’
‘Do you still own that?’
‘No.’
‘When was it sold?’
‘A year ago I think.’
Challenger changed track.
‘When your husband told you or informed you of what he had learned from Julie, your suggestion was that your husband should ring up Detective Constable Hopkins straight away?’
‘Yes.’
Challenger continued, ‘I think this is right. There had, over the period since your husband’s arrest and charge – because this was post-charge – been quite a number of both meetings and telephone conversations between your husband and Mr Hopkins, had there not?’
‘Yes,’ I shot back.
‘Were you present when your husband called Mr Hopkins up from Spain?’
‘Yes.’
‘The general tone of the conversation between them at that time was that when your husband got through to Mr Hopkins he would say: “Hello, Brian.” That is how he addressed Mr Hopkins at that time, was it not?’
I replied, ‘Yes, because Mr Hopkins called him Jeremy.’
I could see that Challenger was trying to show the court that there was a fair amount of civility, rather than malice, in the relationship between Hopkins and Jeremy and I phrased my answer like this to show that Hopkins was the one trying to endear himself to Jeremy to try to catch him out. I had always thought way back at the beginning when Hopkins crash-landed into our lives that he should have been more formal, and I did not feel comfortable with Jeremy addressing him as Brian either. It had not felt like the correct protocol at all.
There was a pause from Challenger as he looked down at his notepad and I waited in anticipation for the next question, only to be surprised by him looking towards Cranston to say, ‘I have no other questions, my Lord.’
That was it! I was done. Cranston thanked me and I made my way down the wooden steps back to my seat. Such was the relief that it was over that I fled past Jeremy, Andre and Leslie and into the ladies’ washroom across the hall. I could feel the tears of relief well up in my eyes. I was desperate to pee and as I sat down it gave me a moment to analyse my testimony. I was fine with the Leslie stuff, I did not give it a second thought, and although the questioning from Challenger was short, I started to pick each of my responses apart. I had given one-word answers to most, so there was nothing much for him to gain from that. Perhaps he had expected me to say much more so that he could lead me elsewhere. What was the point about the flat in Spain? All I could think of was that he was trying to assess our finances or tell the court that Jeremy and I had not really been so badly damaged by the events.
I returned to my seat beside Jeremy. Dr Turner smiled gently at me and looked concerned at my visible distress. Andre leaned over and squeezed my knee and said, ‘You did good. Now you can sit back and enjoy the show.’ I couldn’t agree with him about my performance – I thought I would have been so much more confident – but no matter, my part in this drama had been played and I could now relax by my husband’s side.
Challenger was still addressing Cranston. Jeremy mentioned to me again that he had a bad feeling about how our case was going just by Cranston’s body language. He said it could be the subject matter or that the police would be favoured to win through. I told him off for being so negative, that the judge had to show impartiality and look at the evidence, but I could not tell him that I too did not feel confident. I had previously looked this judge up on the internet. I found out that he had previously been in politics, at one time being an MP. More notable was the comment from a journalist, Byron Criddle, from the Telegraph who had called him ‘a dry, uncharismatic academic Blairite’. Compared to other judges I had encountered over the past few years, I thought ‘uncharismatic’ was an accurate description indeed.
Chapter 38
THE SHRINKS
Dr Stuart Turner, Jeremy’s psychiatrist, was called up next. He was very self-assured and obviously used to giving evidence in court. Leslie asked him to explain the joint statement – his and Dr Van Velsen’s – in what areas were agreed and which were not and why he had come to his conclusion.
Dr Turner said that he and Dr Van Velsen broadly agreed on diagnosis of a major depressive episode, that there were some anxiety symptoms. Van Velsen accepted that when she had seen Jeremy initially in 2006 he had a major depressive episode with mild to moderate severity. ‘When Dr Van Velsen and I saw Jeremy in 2008 we agreed that there was no formal psychiatric diagnosis but there were residual depressive and anxiety symptoms. So he is not free of symptoms but they are insufficient to amount to a formal diagnosis. So this is the pattern.’
Dr Turner continued, ‘My opinion, and I have to say that I was helped, I think, by being able to interview Mr Clifford’s wife, and I heard her evidence this morning which is consistent with that interview – in that there was the onset of a major depressive episode following October 2003. The evidence that I have suggests that there was then some gradual improvement. That leads up to a choice point in the middle of 2004. At that choice point, had Mr Clifford attended the police station and there was no further action to be taken, my opinion is that he would then have continued gradually to recover. I estimate that on the evidence that I have the recovery would probably have been complete by about January 2005. Instead, he was told that there were charges and he then faced a series of court attendances for a criminal prosecution. Just stepping back and looking at the big picture, it seems to me that it would be entirely reasonable, not only based on what I have been told, but also in common sense, that that would have led someone who had already developed a depression and was beginning to recover, that that process would have led to a deterioration. That’s what I understand to be the case and that’s what I believe on the facts to be the case.’
Leslie asked him a question relating to the various court attendances that Jeremy had to attend during the criminal prosecution. ‘Can you say from a psychiatric point of view that those attendances are relevant and significant?’ Dr Turner replied, ‘I think those attendances are significant. I think trying to answer the substance of the question, it seems to me that if the exoneration came in August rather than July, that might have extended the initial period of depression by a month or two. So I might be looking at perhaps March
2005 rather than January 2005 on that scenario.’
Dr Turner confirmed to the court that his view was not altered on the cause of Jeremy’s depression and anxiety and the only change would be a matter of time scale.
Leslie had finished his questioning and sat down. Challenger rose and went into quite specific detail of Dr Turner’s report and, judging by the tone of questions, he was trying to mitigate Jeremy’s personal damage. Dr Turner, however, was unruffled by the onslaught of questions and answered quietly and meticulously how Jeremy had suffered in varying degrees from the initial police raid in October 2003 to when the charges were dropped in 2005. Challenger directed him through one page after another to try to establish the severity of the anxiety and depression suffered at different moments in time and it turned out that my attending a session with Dr Turner had proved quite beneficial. Dr Turner had said, ‘My opinion is that the initial event in October 2003 was sufficient and did act as the initiating event for a major depressive episode and I have reviewed these facts again in my most recent report when I had the opportunity of talking to his wife.’
Fit Up Page 22