‘Why does the name trouble you?’ Walter asked as he held open the door.
Mordecai stopped. ‘I don’t know. But it does.’ Then he growled, ‘What were those lunatic suicidal Japanese called who flew their aeroplanes into the ships?’
‘Kamikaze,’ Walter replied.
‘Well, that’s what you and I are.’
‘Why? What’s worrying you? You’ll get him all right. He can’t get round the money.’
‘It’s just what I feel – in my bones, in my gut,’ said Mordecai.
Usually, when there was a jury, he staged an entrance very late as he had the day before, taking his place noisily with a perfunctory nod to the bench. But today he entered the courtroom in time to precede the judge and he got to his place just as Jack Traynor reached his. Mordecai bowed politely and remained standing, ready to resume his cross-examination. To those in the court hoping for a good day’s sport, he looked as threatening as ever. Yet as he stood there looking so formidable he had a sense of foreboding. Something wasn’t right. He gave a great shrug, shaking his whole head and body like a dog and letting out a grunt.
Jack Traynor looked at him with distaste.
The clerk called out ‘Tancred versus News Universal and Others, part heard’, the judge nodded and Mordecai began.
‘Who was Oscar Sleaven?’ he asked Tancred loudly, not looking at him but at the jury.
‘The Chairman of Sleaven Industries.’
‘Is that a conglomerate that trades in property and manufacturing, including the manufacture of trucks and military vehicles?’
‘Yes.’
‘And you had dealings with Oscar Sleaven when you were the Minister for Defence Procurement?’
‘I did.’
‘Many dealings?’
‘Yes.’
‘In October three years ago, when you were the Minister, did Sleaven enter into a contract with your ministry to supply the Army with a new armoured personnel carrier, or APC for short?’
‘As far as I can remember, I believe that he did.’
‘Did the contract for the manufacture and supply of those vehicles involve millions of pounds of public money?’
‘It would have, certainly.’
‘So whoever got the contract could anticipate making hundreds of thousands of pounds of profits?’
‘Yes.’
‘And a contract for the manufacture of those APCs was entered into between the Ministry and Sleaven Industries?’
‘I have said I believe so, yes.’
‘Before the contract had been signed had tenders been sought by the Ministry from a number of manufacturers? ’
‘Of course.’
‘Was the Sleaven tender the lowest of those submitted? ’
‘I’m not sure.’
‘I suggest it was not. Not by many thousands of pounds.’
Tancred shook his head. ‘I cannot quite remember after all this time. But you may be right.’
‘I suggest that you know perfectly well that I am right. October three years ago. The Sleaven tender for the APC contract. It was not the lowest tender, yet the Sleaven tender was the one your ministry accepted. Why?’
‘I expect it was because we judged that their tender had other important advantages – better performance of the vehicles and sooner delivery dates.’
‘The unsuccessful manufacturers whose tenders had been lower were resentful, weren’t they? They complained bitterly, didn’t they?’
‘I do not know. But manufacturers who fail to win a contract usually are bitter and do complain.’
‘And why should they not complain if they had submitted a lower tender and yet failed to win the contract? ’
‘As I said, I think the advantage of Sleaven Industries was that they offered better terms and conditions.’
‘Was that the reason they got the contract?’
‘It was.’
‘The only reason?’
‘Yes.’
Mordecai waited. Then he said, ‘Or was the real reason because the Chairman, Oscar Sleaven, was paying you money?’
‘That is totally false.’
‘Is it? You knew Oscar Sleaven. He was a friend?’
‘I knew him. Not well.’
‘You were often in his company?’
‘Sometimes.’
‘More than sometimes. You were continually meeting outside the Ministry. I take an example. Richmond records that he saw you and Oscar Sleaven at the Italian Embassy on 27 April two years ago; then three weeks later at a dinner given by Lady Sylvia Benedict in London on 18 May; and again later that same month at a weekend party at Wainscott, Lady Sylvia’s country house. Three occasions within the space of one month.’
‘That we were fellow guests on those occasions was a coincidence.’
‘On each of those occasions you were seen to engage in private conversation with Oscar Sleaven.’
‘As I said, we were fellow guests.’
‘Why, on each occasion, did you talk privately to him?’
‘Out of politeness. By chance we had both been invited as guests.’
‘Was it chance that later in that same summer you were observed meeting Oscar Sleaven at the Tate Gallery?’
Tancred was silent.
Price looked up, smiling his grim, self-satisfied smile.
‘No,’ said Tancred, ‘that meeting was by arrangement.’
‘At the Tate? You arranged to meet at the Tate? The Minister arranges to meet the industrialist he’s doing business with at a picture gallery? Wasn’t that an odd place for a minister of the Crown to meet one of the industrialists with whom his ministry was negotiating million-pound contracts for the supply of military vehicles?’
‘It would have been, yes, if that meeting had had anything to do with the business of the Ministry.’
‘Did it not?’
‘No, it did not.’
Anna, beside Emerald and Sybil, both in smart but different outfits from those they had worn yesterday, leant forward in her seat. She expected Mordecai next to ask what, then, the meeting at the Tate had been about? So did Walter Morrison, sitting behind Mordecai; so did Digby Price in front of him. But instead Mordecai turned and gestured as he had the day before when John Meadows had stood and been recognised by Tancred. This time it was a middle-aged woman, with dyed, burnished hair, heavily made up, dressed in a brightly flowered dress who rose from the seat next to Anna. As she stood she simpered and looked about her, apparently delighted at the attention she was receiving.
‘Do you recognise this lady?’ Mordecai asked.
Tancred nodded. ‘I do. It is Mrs Lane. She owns the house in Consul Road in which I have a flat.’
‘If Mrs Lane were to go into the witness box where you are now standing and say on oath, as you are now on oath, that she remembers Oscar Sleaven coming to see you in your flat late at night on two occasions two years ago, would she be right?’
‘She would not. She would be mistaken. Oscar Sleaven never came to see me at my apartment.’
Mordecai handed a photograph to the usher. ‘Show that to the witness. Is that a good likeness of Oscar Sleaven?’
Tancred inspected it, then handed it back to the usher. ‘It is.’
‘If the lady were to say that she recalls seeing the man in that photograph coming to your flat on two occasions late at night after you had returned from the House of Commons, would she be wrong?’
‘Quite wrong.
‘Are you categorically saying she would be wrong?’
‘I am.’
Mordecai gestured and Mrs Lane resumed her seat. ‘Then we shall have to wait to hear her evidence – and when we do, we shall remember your denial,’ said Mordecai looking at the jury. ‘In any event I suggest that, as well as secret meetings in picture galleries and elsewhere, Oscar Sleaven also visited you in your flat, secretly and late at night.’
‘I deny it.’
‘If she were to say he did, Mrs Lane would be lying?’
‘She would be mistaken.’
‘Just as Francis Richmond was mistaken in recording he overheard you speak of your desire to get money from politics?’
‘Yes.’
‘Their word against yours.’ Then Mordecai added quietly, ‘And you with so much to lose.’
Patrick half rose. ‘That is not a question,’ he said. Mordecai waved his hand dismissively but went on quickly before the judge could intervene, ‘The meeting at the Tate. You agree that meeting took place? Richmond was not mistaken about that, was he?’
‘No. That meeting was by arrangement.’
‘And it had nothing to do with the business of your ministry?’
‘No.’
‘Why meet, of all places, at the Tate?’
‘I thought it was a discreet place to meet but it was observed by Richmond and misconstrued.’
Mordecai looked at the jury. ‘You wanted to have a discreet meeting with Oscar Sleaven, so you chose a picture gallery. And when your meeting was observed, you say that meeting was misconstrued?’ he asked quietly.
‘Yes, it was. Because that meeting was observed, it has led, in part, to this case.’
‘Oh, yes it has certainly helped to lead to this case. For did not that secret meeting, like your other meetings with Oscar Sleaven, have to do with money?’
After a moment Tancred said, ‘No, it did not.’
‘Not to do with money? Are you telling the jury that this meeting in the Tate, this secret meeting in the picture gallery, between you, who had the power to award contracts worth millions of pounds, and the man eager to win such contracts, had nothing to do with money?’
‘Not directly, no.’
‘Indirectly?’
‘Not exactly.’
‘Not directly?’ Mordecai repeated, ‘not exactly to do with money? What does that mean?’ He paused. ‘I have observed, Mr Tancred, that you use words carefully and with precision, as we would expect from so experienced and skilful a politician. So you must forgive me if I wonder what that means. “Not exactly”. What does “not exactly” or “not directly to do with money” mean?’
‘What it says. That meeting was not exactly to do with money.’
There was a lengthy pause. Then Mordecai said, ‘As you claim that your secret meeting with Oscar Sleaven was not, to quote you, exactly to do with money, perhaps the time has come for the jury to look at these.’ He held up a bundle of documents. ‘Do you know what these are?’
‘I believe I do.’
Mordecai motioned to the usher who took the bundle to the witness box. While he did so, Mordecai said to the judge, ‘You have these documents, My Lord.’
Jack Traynor nodded. And about time too, he thought.
In the witness box Tancred turned over the bundle page by page rapidly, almost cursorily. Then he laid it on the broad ledge in front of him.
‘What are those documents?’ Mordecai asked.
‘Copies of my personal bank statements,’ Tancred replied.
‘Do you have the originals here in court?’
‘My solicitor has.’
‘Would you care to compare the originals with the copies?’
Tancred shook his head. ‘No, they are accurate copies.’
‘Are you interested to know how we got our hands on your personal bank statements?’
‘No. I was aware that you had them.’
‘Of course you were. They were disclosed by us and are among the documents prepared for the trial. But these are very personal documents, your private records. Are you not interested to learn how they came into our possession?’
‘Not particularly.’
‘It is said that there are four ways to lay hands on another’s bank statements.’ Tancred shrugged and Mordecai went on. ‘By computer hacking, by tricking someone on the bank staff to divulge their details, by bribing the staff or by bank staff leaking them malevolently. Which do you think this was?’
‘I do not know. All I know is that you have them.’
‘Well, despite your unconcern, real or feigned, may I tell you that we received them in the post, with no accompanying letter, no indication who had sent them?’
‘That is of no interest to me.’
‘So you say. But these documents will be of great interest to the jury. That they were sent to us anonymously would indicate, would it not, that you have enemies?’
‘I expect I have. Your clients, News Universal, are certainly an enemy. Perhaps I have others. Most people who have been in public life do.’
‘The person who sent them to us must have had access to your private affairs. Are you not concerned about that?’
‘No. You have described the various ways that your informant could have got them. All I can say is that you have possession of accurate copies of my private bank account. You disclosed them on discovery so I have known about it for several months. There is nothing I can do about it.’
‘Have you any bank account other than this one with Coutts?’
‘No.’
‘So the court can see from these statements exactly what monies were received by you during your last two years as a minister?’
‘It can.’
The jury began examining the bundles, some of them at first looking a little bewildered, others turning over the pages and pointing out items to those with whom they were sharing a bundle.
‘Does that bundle of documents consist of photostats of monthly statements of your bank account at Coutts & Co., Lower Sloane Street in London?’
‘I have already told you. It does.’
‘Extending over a period of twenty-four months, dating back two years from April last year?’
‘Yes.’
‘Then let us examine them together. First, let me ask about some regular monthly credits. Do these represent the payments of your ministerial salary?’
‘They do.’
‘Quite modest sums?’
‘If you say so. But not everyone would agree with that description of a ministerial salary.’
‘Possibly not, but compared with other credit items in the account, they are modest. There also some irregular credit entries from what appears to be a finance house?’
‘Yes. Those are the receipts from my investments.’
‘Even more modest sums. Now let us turn to the debit entries. Are there regular debit entries consisting of a monthly sum paid to Mrs Maria Lane by direct debit. Is that for the rent of your flat?’
‘It is.’
‘Do you own or rent any other property anywhere else in the world?’
‘No.’
‘Not in France?’
‘No.’
‘Apart from the regular debit entry for the rent of your flat, are there many debit entries referred to as cash?’
‘There are.’
Mordecai turned away from Tancred and looked at the jury. ‘So much for the payments out of your personal account and what I suggest are the legitimate payments in. Let us now turn to other credit entries that figure in these accounts. Look at the entries that have been highlighted on the statements, credit entries on the first day of each month and the last day of each quarter.’ He stopped. The juryman in the blue blazer with the brass buttons was whispering to his companion and looking up at Tancred. The young Asian woman was sharing a bundle with the spinster jurywoman who found it so hard to understand the judge’s northern accent. She was pointing at various entries. Jack Traynor watched her, and his gaze never left her for long. He noted her long, slim fingers and polished nails as she drew attention to the items in the documents, guiding the confused spinster jurywoman beside her. She’s more beautiful than Lois, he thought. And more intelligent.
Mordecai satisfied that he had the attention of all members of the jury, went on, ‘Throughout those two years, is there a similar credit entry on the first day of each month?’
‘Yes.’ Tancred laid the documents on the ledge of the witness box. ‘This all appears quite clearly in the bank statements,
Mr Ledbury.’
‘It does, but the jury have not seen these documents before. Disquieting though you may find it, I propose to take you through them one by one. What do the entries highlighted in yellow show?’
‘A monthly credit of one thousand pounds – as the jury can plainly see.’
‘Paid into your account on the first day of each month?’
‘Yes.’
‘Twenty-four of them?’
‘Yes.’
‘Regular payments of the same sum paid at regular intervals?’
‘Yes.’
‘Twenty-four credits of one thousand pounds each during the two years covered by these bank statements? ’
‘Yes.’
‘There are also other entries that have been highlighted, not in yellow but in red. Do they appear on the last day of the third month in each quarter of each year?’
‘They do.’
‘Are they all for a similar sum?’
‘Yes. The jury, Mr Ledbury, can surely see all this for themselves.’
‘They can. But answer my questions. What is the sum that is paid into your account every quarter?’
‘Ten thousand pounds.’
‘Over the space of two years does that amount to eighty thousand pounds?’
‘Eight tens invariably add up to eighty, so your mathematics, Mr Ledbury, are quite correct.’
‘Sarcasm’, Mordecai growled, ‘won’t divert the jury from noting, as I intend they shall note, that over a period of two years a very substantial sum of money was paid into your bank account – your personal account that fortunately came into our hands. Twenty-four thousand pounds from the monthly payments and eighty thousand from the quarterly payments, all received by you in the space of two years when you were a minister. Isn’t that correct?’
‘Your mathematics, Mr Ledbury, are, as I have said, impeccable.’
Mordecai glared at the witness. Tancred’s hands remained folded over the documents on the ledge of the witness box. ‘The bank statements also reveal, do they not, from whom you received that money?’
‘They do.’
‘I direct the jury’s attention to the column headed “Description” against these credit entries. That indicates, does it not, the source whence each of these sums had come?’
The Richmond Diary Page 22