Irene stood up quickly. She certainly didn’t wish to appear hesitant especially in front of the jury and in the course of her first murder trial, but even so it still took her almost half a minute before she began her cross examination. “Professor Whittingham, thank you for your comments. Now what else can you tell us about this DNA test? For instance are you saying that, absolutely positively and without any question of doubt whatsoever, this sample could have come from one person and one person only and that the person is Harry Thompson, the accused?”
“No” he replied relishing his glory in the spotlight, “I’m not actually saying that. “What I am saying is, unless Mr. Thompson has an identical twin, the odds of a similar profile being obtained from another person are in excess of 300 million to one.”
Sir Gordon couldn’t believe his luck when he heard this statement from his witness. He was on his feet in an instant. Banging his fist on the table in front of him he shouted aloud, “But there are no twins here in this case.”
Gavel in hand, the judge quickly brought the proceedings back to order once again and, although he rebuked the errant QC for his behaviour, the point had been made and it had been hammered home mercilessly...
Miss Yarwood continued as though nothing untoward had actually occurred, “Now Professor Whittingham, you carried out these tests between the samples obtained from the defendant and the samples obtained from the body of Diane Wilson, did you?”
“That is correct,” he replied.
“Did you carry out similar tests with the samples from the deceased and any of the other samples provided?”
“No I did not.”
“Well, Professor, that is indeed a surprise to all of us. Perhaps you can explain to this court why no other tests were carried out?”
“That’s quite simple. You see I wasn’t asked to. I was only provided with the sample referred to and I was asked to compare it as I described earlier.”
“What about the sample obtained from the second victim, together with all of those samples obtained from the volunteer donors in response to the police appeal for help?”
Before the Professor could reply, Sir Gordon was on his feet bellowing, “Objection, objection I must strongly object to this line of questioning by my learned colleague. From the very start of this case, the prosecution have made it abundantly clear that we would not be introducing any DNA evidence in connection with this second count of murder. Therefore it isn’t relevant and I must ask your lordship not to allow this line of questioning to proceed any further.”
Sitting silently in his chair, Judge Ewing banged his gavel repeatedly until order was restored. He ordered both counsel to the bench and addressing Miss Yarwood, he said angrily, “Miss Yarwood what on earth do you think you are playing at? If you do anything like this again I shall hold you in contempt. You know as well as I do, from the documents provided in discovery, that the prosecution are not relying on DNA evidence in the second case, in which case you cannot introduce it.”
Unabashed and unafraid Miss Yarwood replied, “Your honour I am trying to establish that there is DNA evidence in the Clarkson case and it is being suppressed by the police and the Crown. Over 200 people gave voluntary samples including my client, none of which proved a match to that obtained from Clarkson. Now, if the sample obtained from Clarkson could be matched with somebody, then it is likely or at least it’s possible that this person may well have been the last person to see her alive. In that respect that is where the two cases become almost identical. To my mind, there is a marked similarity in the two cases. On the first charge, the DNA sample relates solely to that provided by my client and he readily admits that he had intercourse with his girlfriend. It is because of this that he has been charged. In the second case we know that somebody had sex with Clarkson and that person was definitely not my client. Therefore, I think it is of paramount importance to my client’s case that this point is adequately covered during these proceedings. Please allow me to continue for a little while and, at the same time consider this... If the positions were reversed, then surely it is possible the person who killed Clarkson and left his sample also killed the girlfriend of my client?”
Irene received no sympathy from the judge who told her in no uncertain manner that his patience was now exhausted and she was skating on very thin ice adding, “The point is Miss Yarwood; none of us know the identity of the last person to have sex with the poor woman. Even if we were aware of the identity of that person it seems fair and logical to assume he’s not here because the police think he took no part in the murder and he has been eliminated from their enquiries. In those circumstances the Crown are quite justified in not bringing before this court any DNA evidence regarding Clarkson. Now that is my final ruling on the subject so might I suggest that we get back to the business in hand which happens to be your cross examination of Professor Whittingham.”
Although she had lost the battle, Irene was not disheartened because she knew she had established there was some additional DNA evidence connected to the case and one day, given that she could introduce it, it could prove decisive. As she took her place she announced, “No further questions,” and the Professor was allowed to leave the witness stand.
Nodding to Sir Gordon, Lord Chief Justice Ewing indicated that the next witness was eagerly awaited.
“Call Bridget Riley.” This was immediately repeated by the usher and, a few moments later, she entered the court accompanied somewhat symbolically by another crash of thunder. All eyes were upon her as she made her entrance and, despite her obvious attempts to alter her appearance, she still managed to look like a tart. She took her place in the witness box and repeated the oath whilst holding the bible. Sir Gordon disposed of the usual perfunctory questions such as name and address and then, with the onlookers hanging on every word, posed the question they were all waiting to hear “Occupation?”
Sir Gordon “Did you know the deceased woman Angela Clarkson?”
Bridget “Yes.”
Sir Gordon “How well and for how long?”
Bridget “At least five years.”
Sir Gordon “How did you meet her?”
Bridget “Through the escort agency, sometimes we worked together.”
Sir Gordon “Did you work Rodney Street together?”
Bridget “Yes we did.”
Sir Gordon “On a regular basis?”
Bridget “Yes, if there wasn’t any other work.”
The prosecutor then picked up the watch from the table where the exhibits lay. Turning to Bridget he asked, “Did you ever see Angela Clarkson wearing a watch like this and could this watch have belonged to her?”
He walked slowly over to the witness box holding the watch aloft by the strap in order that the jury could see it as he handed it to Bridget.
Bridget looked at it very briefly and without hesitating replied, “Yes that’s Angela’s watch. She bought it just before she died.”
Sir Gordon “Have you any idea when she bought the watch?”
Bridget “I think it was about three weeks before she died but I’m not... absolutely sure.
Sir Gordon then stated that he had no further questions and he asked Bridget to remain in the witness box whilst the defence satisfied themselves about the evidence she had just given.
Even though Irene Yarwood knew beforehand that this evidence would be introduced, she was well aware that it did nothing to improve the chances of her client. Nevertheless, she just had to get on with it and she began her cross-examination.
“Now Miss Riley, you have told this court that you were a long-standing friend of Angela Clarkson’s and that you weren’t simply street corner acquaintances plying your trade together. Is that really true?”
Bridget was now growing in confidence and to some extent she was relishing her moment in the spotlight as she answered, “Yes I’d known her for quite some time.
Miss Yarwood. “So when you said that you saw Angela wearing this watch she showed it to you, did s
he?”
Bridget “Yes she did.”
Miss Yarwood “Did she take it off in order that you could have a good look at it?”
Bridget “Yes she did.”
Miss Yarwood “So you had a good look at it and did she tell you how much she had paid for it?”
Bridget “Yes I had a good look at it but she didn’t tell me that. She just said that she’d come into a bit of money and that she had always wanted a decent watch.”
Miss Yarwood “Really Miss Riley, I find that very hard to believe. Are you telling this court that Angela Clarkson your long-standing friend, comes down to Rodney Street wearing a very expensive watch and you didn’t want to know where she got it from or how much she paid for it?”
Bridget “Well I didn’t want to ask too many questions in case she thought I was jealous.”
Miss Yarwood “And were you jealous?”
Bridget “A little bit I suppose.”
Miss Yarwood “I have to remind you now that you are on oath and I am putting it to you that you never saw Angela Clarkson wearing that watch at any time. I am putting it to you like this because I’d like you to tell me how much you think a person might have to pay for a watch of similar quality?”
Bridget “I suppose she paid about sixty or seventy pounds for it or something like that.”
Miss Yarwood “As much as that, really, and, you’re telling this court that Angela Clarkson would go out on the streets touting for business, wearing a brand new watch costing sixty or seventy pounds?”
Before Bridget could answer Irene continued, saying, “Well let me tell you something, young lady. That watch didn’t cost sixty or seventy pounds. Actually it cost three hundred and fifty pounds and, I have here a letter of confirmation from the maker’s English agents confirming that.”
Bridget was no longer in control. She was beginning to feel more than a little uncomfortable especially with the way this cross-examination was going. All she wanted to do now was to get out of the witness box and sink at least a couple of large gins. She stood anxiously in the witness box waiting for the next barrage as the QC continued, “Now Miss Riley, are you seriously telling this court that your friend took off this watch in order that you could have a good look at it, and you could see it was quite an expensive item to put it mildly, and she was quite happy to walk the streets wearing it whilst knowing full well that it had cost three hundred and fifty pounds. I put it to you, Miss Riley, that this testimony of yours is nothing more than a pack of lies because Angela Clarkson never bought that watch and you never saw her wearing it at all, did you?”
Bridget “That’s not true. I did see her wearing that watch three weeks before she died and she did tell me that she’d bought it herself.”
Irene then surprised everyone in the court by announcing that she had no further questions but this was just a trick she was playing in an attempt to unsettle or unnerve the witness. Bridget was just about to step down feeling mightily relieved, when the lawyer suddenly turned and said, “I’m sorry Miss Riley but there is something I forgot to ask you. Did you happen to notice the maker’s name of the watch?”
Caught unawares and with her guard completely down, Bridget stood there not knowing what to say and whether to answer or not until Lord Chief Justice Ewing intervened saying to her, “You may answer Miss Riley.”
The question had caught her completely off guard as she falteringly replied, “Yes, I …I …I’m almost sure it was a Rolex.”
Irene knew before she had begun to cross examine this witness that she was lying but she knew that she had no way of proving it unless she could totally discredit her testimony and she reconciled herself to ending her cross examination by correcting her before allowing her to stand down. Just like a conductor leading the orchestra into a finale, she concluded,
“No Miss Riley, you are totally mistaken. It was not a Rolex, it was, in fact a Ramond Viell so I say to you once again, you never saw Angela Clarkson wearing that watch before because the probability is that she only received it on the day she died and, in all probability, it was given to her as a present from a grateful client.”
Bridget stood in the box glaring at the counsel for the defence. Then she repeated defiantly, “I am telling you the truth. I did see Angela wearing that watch before she died. I did and that’s the truth.”
Instead of letting the witness stand down as she had originally indicated, Irene now judged it to be the appropriate time to vary her attack by adopting a different tactic as she enquired almost nonchalantly, “When did you first get fined for soliciting and where did the offence take place?”
For a moment there was no answer. Irene repeated the question.
With utmost reluctance, Bridget replied, “Birmingham 1983.”
This was the opening Irene had worked so hard for and she seized the opportunity immediately.
“Miss Riley, Earlier, you told this court that you had known the deceased woman for 5 years but, if you were convicted in Birmingham in 1983, then it’s highly unlikely that you knew Angela Clarkson in Liverpool or anywhere else five years ago.”
Before she could finish the question, Sir Gordon was on his feet shouting “Objection, Your Honour, I object most strongly to this line of questioning. It’s quite clear to all of us that Miss Yarwood is not only badgering the witness but this line of questioning is totally irrelevant and I demand that it should be stricken from the record.”
Before giving his decision, Lord Chief Justice Ewing used his gavel to good effect. Then, after looking long and hard at Sir Gordon he fixed his gaze on Irene and invited her to explain the relevance of her question and where her cross-examination might be leading.
After thanking his Lordship, Irene kept her eyes firmly upon him as she answered, “Your Honour, before my learned colleague interrupted proceedings, I was simply trying to show to this court that the testimony of this witness is a complete tissue of lies. If the court will bear with me for one moment I think I will be able to show this provided that I am allowed to continue without any more interruptions.”
Noting her remarks, Judge Ewing gave his permission for the defence to continue and Irene repeated the question;
“Miss Riley, earlier you told this court that you had known Angela Clarkson for five years but, if you were convicted in Birmingham in 1983, then it’s highly unlikely that you knew Angela Clarkson in Liverpool or anywhere else five years ago because she was arrested in Manchester for drug offences for which she received a custodial sentence. In fact, she was not released until 1984. Furthermore, in 1984 she was again arrested in Manchester and charged with soliciting. Taking all this into account, your testimony amounts to little more than a tissue of lies.”
Lord Chief Justice Ewing, looked down from his seat on high above the court. He cleared his throat loudly before pointing at, and rebuking the witness very angrily, “Young lady, I must warn you that the penalties for perjury are very severe. You have been called here today to tell the truth and, if I suspect that you have been lying to this Court I will have no hesitation in ensuring that such charges are brought against you and, if you are found guilty on such charges, you will receive a lengthy custodial sentence. Do I make myself clear?”
Bridget teetered on the brink. She realised this was going horribly wrong. She could hardly speak out now and admit she was lying because the judge had just told her that if she did, she would probably go to prison. Therefore she knew she would have to try to brazen it out. Facing the judge, she said, “Your Honour, I might have made a mistake about the length of time I knew Angela but I am telling the truth about the watch.”
Feeling triumphant that she might have cast a little shadow of doubt in the minds of the jurors, Irene Yarwood happily conceded she had no further questions to ask at this time, although she reserved the right to recall the witness to the stand at a later time.
Bridget left the witness box with a distinct cloud hanging over her evidence and she knew it. Inwardly she cursed Detective Sergeant
West because it was all his fault and, to make matters worse, she couldn’t forget how he’d told her she wouldn’t have to testify. One day, she vowed, she would have her revenge on the evil, lying bastard. As she took her seat at the rear of the court, the usher was already calling in the next witness intoning, in the same monotonous voice, “Call Royston Chambers.”
The call was repeated down the corridor and all eyes swung to the door as Royston Chambers entered and took his place in the witness box.
Meanwhile, Irene Yarwood was hurriedly scribbling a note to Michael Mulrooney, the defence team’s solicitor, asking him to subpoena any bank account details Angela Clarkson might have possessed before she died. As a result of her own cross examination of Bridget Riley it had occurred to her that if Angela Clarkson had purchased the watch then there should surely be some evidence to show that she had that amount of money in her bank account and that she had withdrawn it or, alternatively, she had paid for it by credit card or cheque. She was desperately hoping that if she could find some evidence that the murdered woman had not bought the watch as testified then she could recall this little lying prostitute and crucify her for trying to stitch up her client with false evidence. As an afterthought, she also requested him to contact the agents once again in order to ascertain whether any of the watches had been sold on Merseyside during the crucial time in question. One thing she was quite sure of, whether he was guilty or not, Harry Thompson was going to get as much as she could give in connection with her defence of him.
With Royston Chambers in the witness box, Sir Gordon did not waste time dwelling on the circumstance in which the witness found himself, besides which, he was beginning to develop a distinct respect for his adversary on the opposite side and he was determined to ensure he didn’t give her anything she could sink her teeth into. He hadn’t expected an easy ride in this case and he had to grudgingly admit that Irene Yarwood was putting up a spirited performance at the moment even though her opportunities were severely limited. With almost undue haste, he elicited the facts that Royston Chambers was an old lag, currently residing in one of Her Majesty’s safe houses of correction and penal servitude whilst he was on remand awaiting his own trial for a serious charge of armed robbery.
Beyond Innocence Page 13