Fit Up (29 page)

I
t was just as well that the trial date had been pushed back as it gave Andre precious time to spend a fraught day searching for companies who would be prepared to insure Jeremy for the CFA. I don't know how he did it but he played a blinder in finding a suitable company who were able and willing to offer insurance and get the paperwork processed before the end of the day.

Having been unexpectedly distracted with this task, Andre had to return to finishing his latest statement for submission to the court ahead of the next day's hearing. This was to include a detailed account of how the police had behaved in relation to using Hopkins's alleged illness as a means to get the case adjourned. He made it clear that Jeremy wanted Hopkins to give live evidence and that if he did not attend court then he would rather press on with Hopkins's statement and sworn evidence from the first trial being read out than postpone. In fact, we were of the opinion, and making preparations for the possibility, that we would never see Hopkins again. Even if a new trial date was set, his psychiatrist would always claim that he would become too traumatised and suffer a relapse. Andre summarised all the evidence with the appropriate exhibits and also attached the press releases that related to Hopkins leading a complex national investigation for the Environment Agency. He had also pointed
out that Hopkins's claims of ill health (as opposed to his fear of perjury and attempting to pervert the course of justice) needed to be considered very carefully, particularly given his absence, the lack of information and general evasiveness by Challenger and Grundy.

Andre had emailed Jeremy a copy of his statement by early evening and I felt a real sense of achievement that I was able to help in such a massive way, being the one who had found out about Hopkins – even better that it would surely be causing some consternation for the police. Anyone reading the statement could see that this was the conduct of someone seeking to avoid being questioned. I hoped we would have an open-minded judge this time.

While sitting down to relax and watch television with the comfort of our dogs nearby, I couldn't believe that, finally, we were on the eve of the retrial that we, Andre, Leslie and their support teams had fought so hard to get to. I thought nothing could go wrong now.

Jeremy and I had been quite involved with his final preparations earlier in the day and he seemed fairly jovial and much more confident. We had an early dinner and agreed that there would be no more court talk that evening. At around 9.30 p.m. Jeremy said that he needed to put petrol in the car as we had such an early start in the morning. I wondered why on earth he had not done that earlier in the day but I did not bother to question it.

After about half an hour I looked at my watch to see that it was nearing 10 p.m. and he was not back yet. Strange, I thought, as the petrol station was not far away. I then suspected that he may have gone to the little corner shop that sold his favourite sweets. I guessed that he was looking for some comfort junk food and tutted to myself, although I was starting to feel a little bit uneasy.

Suddenly the phone rang, making me jump. I said hello and there was silence. I knew it was Jeremy and I was worried. ‘Is that you, Jeremy?'
I asked and then he meekly replied, ‘Yes', followed by: ‘I'm sorry, but I cannot do what everyone wants me to do tomorrow. I know I am letting everyone down, but I am not coming back, forgive me.'

‘Come home now!' I yelled, and before I could say anything else the line went dead. I tried frantically to ring him back, but each time the call went straight to voicemail. I started to pace around the house, demented, not knowing what to do next, how to sort this out – Do I sort it out? Do I request a search party? Who do I call to help? All the time I was thinking of Andre and Leslie, of their hard work and how he was letting them down. I couldn't bear the thought of it and neither could I bear the vision of the smug faces of Challenger and Grundy winning the trial by finally breaking Jeremy.

I decided that I had to call Andre: ‘Sorry to call you so late, but I have bad news: Jeremy has disappeared.' I informed him of the brief conversation I had had with Jeremy and admitted that I thought it was my fault for being so hard on him for the past few weeks. Andre must have felt as panicked as I did but he certainly never revealed that in his voice. He said he would try to call Jeremy in the hope that he'd take Andre's call if not mine. The minutes ticked by while Andre and I desperately tried to make contact with Jeremy. I left a voicemail message on my last try, pleading with him to come home and telling him that he was so close to the end of this whole sorry saga. I finished with what I hoped would persuade him to return. ‘Think about me,' I said.

It was approaching 11 p.m. and I was at a loss as to what to do now. I could not believe that we might have to vacate our own retrial, so I phoned Andre to ask what we would have to do and as soon as I started speaking I heard a key in the lock of the front door. ‘Andre, it's Jeremy,' I exclaimed in shock. ‘I'll come back to you.' He reassured me that he would be at the end of the phone at any time. I rushed downstairs to see Jeremy who was looking rather grey, but was apologetic about his
behaviour. He said he was scared to death about what was ahead. I told him it was perfectly natural to feel like that and that he should ring Andre for a reassuring chat before going to bed.

A
fter Jeremy's pep talk with Andre, he had slept relatively well. Not so for me, and I was glad to stop the tossing and turning so that I could get up and start the day.

We had arrived in London early for breakfast and then to meet with Andre at Leslie's chambers in Lincoln's Inn Fields. After a short briefing we all walked to the High Court together. Leslie led the way, striding it out with his hands thrust deep into the pockets of his overcoat and talking animatedly to his harem of paralegals, while Jeremy and I kept up with Andre who had the unenviable task of pulling along a large suitcase containing the trial bundles. I so hated the hustle and bustle of London and having to concentrate on weaving in and out of oncoming pedestrians with the constant blaring horns and squeaking brakes emanating from the incessant roar of traffic.

Seeing this building again made me feel nauseous and even though we had been here before, we still relied on following Andre to the courtroom appointed to us. As opposed to last time, we were down one level and not too far from the entrance. It looked a whole lot easier to navigate than our previous courtroom locations. Our legal team
went in first to set up their files and settle in while Jeremy and I waited outside. We did not want to sit inside just yet – those hard wooden benches could wait – so we took the opportunity to be alone. Although it did not need it, I straightened Jeremy's tie and brushed non-existent fluff off his suit, all the while giving him words of encouragement. Then Challenger, Grundy et al paraded along the corridor, spoiling the moment. Grundy glanced over at Jeremy and gave him her smacked bum face, which we had now grown accustomed to. Her hair was cut in a neat short bob which sported vivid orange and blonde highlights making her look both pale and severe. Whereas Fiona Campbell, who had represented the Gerard family, had been stick thin, Grundy was the complete opposite.

We let them go into the court first and then we followed to sit alongside Andre, who informed us that there was likely to be another attempt by Challenger to halt proceedings. Before we could ask any questions, the court clerk called for us all to rise as Mr Justice Mackay made his way to his seat. As we sat down, he cast a stern eye over all of us which felt a little unsettling. I looked toward Challenger and wondered when he was going to derail the trial.

Leslie was on his feet first to confirm that the judge had been provided with the trial bundles of the case. Mackay replied rather grumpily that it was unlikely that he would look at more than 10 per cent of the documents provided and that if there was ever a case that should have a core bundle, it was this one. Leslie then asked if he had received his further opening arguments and the flagged core documents provided the previous day. The response – still a little stroppy – was that he could have done with it a bit sooner and then he recited a list of papers that he had already read and those he had not, which turned out to be the transcript of Hopkins's evidence. Looking out to his audience with an air of a strict school master, he concluded with, ‘So there we are.'

Leslie asked, ‘My Lord, may I ask you why you have not read the transcript of Mr Hopkins?' to which Mackay responded wearily, ‘Yes, I didn't have time.'

Andre whispered something to Jeremy and I looked quizzically at him. Jeremy then told me that Andre was a bit worried as it seemed that the judge did not like us. My blood ran cold – this had happened at the first trial.

Leslie, undeterred, moved on to address the point of the attendance of Hopkins. The judge asked if he was present, to which Leslie responded that he was not and suspected that he would not be coming to court at all. Turning to Challenger, he was asked what the position was with Hopkins. Challenger replied that Hopkins was still unwell and evidence had been provided to support that he was unfit to give evidence. Leslie jumped in to say that he had seen none of it.

Mr Justice Mackay said that he had had a conversation with Mr Justice Clark, who had heard Challenger's application on 3 December and that he had formulated the view that the witness might never be fit to give evidence. ‘What do you say, Mr Challenger?'

‘May I say that my learned friend says all the evidence is here. However, there was a letter of 22 December which was disclosed at the CMC hearing heard by Mr Justice Clark,' said Challenger, starting to sway from side to side.

In an impatient tone, Mackay said, ‘Give me the headlines, Mr Challenger. Do you wish to proceed without this witness giving live evidence?'

Challenger responded, ‘I will give my Lord the headlines, but if I can give you some background to this matter.' I had the feeling Challenger was gearing up for one of his usual lengthy speeches, and I suspected this judge was going to have none of it. Sure enough Mackay jumped in: ‘It's a straight question to which at
some
stage I would like a straight answer.' There was that tone again.

Challenger went on to explain that Hopkins was being seen by the psychiatrist, Dr Bhushan, that day and that he was awaiting an updated report. He went on to suggest that Mackay consider the current position of the witness and push the ‘matter', by which I assumed he meant this trial, back to Monday. Or sometime never, I was reckoning.

Mackay said that he could not stop evidence being read or excluded and that Challenger would have to give notice for doing so, but was now out of time. He was further told that he would have to consider the charges of the case and what this could bring to bear when looking at damages. Challenger had to agree that Hopkins's evidence could not be excluded but he was an important witness for the defence's case. He brought to Mackay's attention that Leslie had said in his speaking note that Hopkins's illness was bogus and that he had pulled the wool over the doctor's eyes. Challenger continued, ‘My Lord is aware that Mr Hopkins is ill.'

‘Apparently,' Leslie muttered sarcastically, which made me want to laugh but I refrained in case the judge saw me. I got the impression that he would not appreciate this kind of mockery in his courtroom.

Mackay was rapidly becoming impatient and said that he realised that Challenger was making an application to postpone proceedings at least until the following Monday when it was anticipated that a report would have been prepared by Dr Bhushan. He said he was unlikely to agree to this and that he wanted Grundy to report back by 4.30 p.m. with a response from the psychiatrist as to whether Hopkins was fit now or would he ever be fit to attend the trial. Challenger turned around to Grundy who was hastily sliding along the bench as gracefully as she could to make her exit from the court in order to carry out the judge's request.

Challenger persisted with his arguments about Hopkins to which Leslie, although having laid it all out in the speaking note already read
by Mackay, interjected, giving the judge chapter and verse of when the police knew when Hopkins proclaimed to be suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder from the previous July up until the December letter. I had been waiting anxiously for Leslie to reveal in court that Hopkins was working for the Environment Agency, with a diary of upcoming events and finally that point was made. Leslie added that this was all an unsatisfactory state of affairs and that we had every reason to be sceptical. Challenger sat with his head bowed, probably to avoid the stern gaze of Mackay, who, after hearing this, proposed to start the trial immediately and said that he would read Hopkins's transcript when the time came to it.

Jeremy whispered in my ear a message from Andre, that he was now more comfortable with the judge. It was obvious that he was displeased with the police and we had got his attention. Leslie then proceeded to lead Mackay through Jeremy's case until he called George Fouhey as our first witness. I had to wonder what Challenger and Grundy thought when they found out that he had come over to our side.

Leslie asked a few brief questions to Fouhey who gave his evidence as per his witness statement and meeting with Andre just over a year ago. Before Challenger could cross-examine, however, Mackay suggested a break for lunch.

After lunch and returning to our seats in the courtroom, we noticed that Challenger was extremely agitated. We found out that he had been observed in a fit of temper throwing his mobile phone into the fountain in the courtyard. Notably his trial bundles seemed to be in a state of disorder and he appeared unable to find his way around them. I assumed that he had anticipated an adjournment and was not properly prepared to start the trial.

Upon resumption of proceedings, Challenger gave us news that Dr Bhushan had seen Hopkins to confirm that he would be unfit to attend
trial and had been prescribed medication which should take effect in four to six weeks. Mackay asked Leslie what he thought of this, to which he replied, ‘My immediate reaction is that this is bogus.' He then asked what he should do, to which Leslie responded that he felt that Dr Bhushan had not been told that Hopkins was working.

Mackay looked at Challenger and said that Leslie had raised valid points where Hopkins had given evidence previously, had taken two responsible jobs in the criminal justice system and that if he got another report from Dr Bhushan that was similar to the previous one, then he would look at it with some scepticism.

Mackay was with Leslie in that there were important issues that had to be addressed and that a clear report was required from Dr Bhushan. A contrite Challenger responded, ‘My Lord is correct that this is an important issue and we will seek clarification from Dr Bhushan, but we hear from his secretary that he is fairly busy.' I looked at Challenger in astonishment. I couldn't believe he had offered this excuse, that the doctor might be too busy to write a report for the judge. It had not been lost on Mackay either. ‘Well, you tell Dr Bhushan that you have a thoroughly irritated judge who will not wait until his schedule is free, otherwise I will witness summons him to attend court to offer his professional opinion directly,' he said angrily. Challenger nodded and sat down for a moment, thoroughly chastised. We dared not show it but I knew on our side of the court we were all smiling inwardly.

Challenger, gathering himself, prepared to cross-examine George Fouhey. The line of questioning was about his contact with Hopkins and what was said about the images on the disk that was handed over. Fouhey said that his conversation with Hopkins was brief. Hopkins was told that the small thumbnail pictures were found within temporary internet folders, that the files could not be relied upon as the basis for a charge because the origin of the images could not be established
and that they can appear as advertisements without the computer user requesting them or even being aware that they are on the machine. Challenger asked him if he had told Hopkins that he could only charge for incitement, to which Fouhey said that the decision to charge is only made by the investigating officer. He could not have just handed over a disk and left Hopkins making assumptions, he had to explain what he had found. He also mentioned that his evidence had never changed at any time and entirely agreed with Duncan. It was what he had been saying all along.

Fouhey had been a very good witness. Calm and precise, he clearly had a good recollection of events and he was in court not just for us, but for himself – he was not going to take the fall for Hopkins.

By mid-afternoon, it was the turn of DS Bob Willcox, the author of the now famous Service Improvement Document (SID). He was a Detective Sergeant in the Fraud Squad before retiring in July the previous year. For just over two years up until December 2005, he was working in the Technical Support Unit and Computer Crime Unit, so was adequately qualified to conduct complex computer investigations.

Willcox recruited Fouhey, who had come highly recommended, to help clear the backlog of work from Operation Metropolis.

Both Leslie and Challenger asked a variety of questions of Willcox regarding his investigation and compilation of the SID report. Willcox confirmed that in 2004 it was standard practice not to make reference to temporary internet folders in any initial statement as there may have been other evidence linking the individual to an offence. Therefore, the technician (in this case Fouhey) would accompany the written statement with a verbal handover to the investigating officer, where it would be stated clearly what was found and the significance of these findings. The officer would then have to make a judgement as to whether to charge, take no further action or make further enquiries.

Willcox specifically recalled speaking to Fouhey, but with the passing of time since writing his report he could not recall meeting Hopkins or speaking to him on the telephone. However, according to the way he had written his report and the references made, he definitely had as he could not have compiled it without him. The whole of the SID document indicated that he had spoken to both parties in order to come to his conclusion and this report would be a reflection of him and his unit so it had to be right.

Willcox had been another good witness in supporting the truth. Both he and Fouhey remembered the events surrounding Jeremy's case and the investigation afterwards.

We were heading towards late afternoon and Jeremy was next to be called. Looking at the time, I doubted he would be on the stand for very long. I gave him an encouraging squeeze of his hand as he left my side.

Leslie asked if he still stood by his witness statement, to which he agreed. Then the tape was played of the conversations between Gerard and Julie Cullivan of 10 September 2004. He had been dead some years now and, although he was no longer a threat, hearing his voice reignited my feelings of hatred against him. Leslie's questioning was related to the misfeasance claim against Hopkins in how he dealt with the return of Jeremy's property, Gerard as a witness and informing another police officer, whose family were known to us, when there was no reason to do so.