He gave a signal to the clerk.
50
Tuesday 14 May
On the monitor screen, to the left of where the judge was seated, angled so that everyone in the courtroom would see it, a colour, low-resolution video began playing. It showed a wide urban street, with traffic passing. On the far side were three firms of solicitors, shoulder-to-shoulder, a Chinese takeaway, Sun Yip Lee, with the name TG LAW across a first-floor window, and a small fashion store next door. A clock in the top right-hand corner of the frame showed 11.17 a.m.
An elderly woman walked along the far pavement, pulling a wheeled shopper. Then a man appeared, wearing a bomber jacket, jeans, dark glasses and a beanie. He was walking determinedly, on a mission, passing the premises of the first three firms of solicitors, then the takeaway restaurant, and stopping just beyond it, at a doorway. Reaching out his left arm, he pressed what was, presumably, the entryphone bell. The door opened shortly after and he went in.
As the video ended, Stephen Cork asked, ‘Mr Parker, are you able to identify the man in the footage we have just seen, who entered the premises of TG Law?’
‘No, the quality of the footage doesn’t allow me to identify who that is for certain, but whoever it is was carrying Michael Starr’s phone.’
Cork thanked him.
Primrose Brown QC stood up. ‘Good morning. I appear for the defendant. I believe that eleven people worked in the law offices of TG Law: four other solicitors, in addition to the defendant, one paralegal, two legal executives, two legal secretaries and an accounts clerk. You can’t be certain he was visiting TG Law, can you?’
‘No.’
‘Or, if he did, that he wasn’t visiting one of the ten other people who worked there?’
‘No.’
‘There’s nothing to show that he met anyone at all, is there?’
Parker replied, ‘No.’
‘Mr Parker, you have mentioned the subject of Wi-Fi connectivity. What margin for error in these connections might there be? Are they completely accurate or could there be doubt — by which I mean sufficient doubt to allow for the possibility of error within the criteria of this court? Can you really trust the accuracy of the Wi-Fi?’
Meg watched Parker shift uncomfortably. Good, she thought. Good question!
Parker answered. ‘We don’t rely solely on Wi-Fi records — we always try to support these, where possible, with CCTV footage, and in this instance, we have obtained footage from the camera of Brighton Law Courts, located directly opposite number 176A Edward Street. Significantly, we have footage on the date of the last recorded visit of a male in possession of Mr Starr’s phone in the vicinity of 176A Edward Street on Wednesday November 21st of last year, which clearly shows the male entering the door to the side of Sun Yip Lee, which is the entrance to the offices of TG Law.’
Brown continued. ‘You have no evidence that the two men met. Is that correct?’
Parker replied reluctantly, ‘That is correct.’
‘Mr Parker, is there CCTV footage showing that same male leaving the premises?’
‘No, this is all we have.’
‘So we don’t know if it was Mr Starr who was there, if he met anyone, or even, on the CCTV evidence, if he ever left?’
Parker replied a grudging, ‘No.’
‘Then I have no more questions.’ Brown sat down.
Cork told the court he also had no further questions and Judge Jupp told Parker that he could stand down.
‘I would now like to call my witness Haydn Kelly,’ Stephen Cork said.
Defence Counsel Primrose Brown rose. ‘Your Honour, can I ask for a short adjournment of no more than twenty minutes? I have arranged for an expert witness to listen to the evidence that this next witness for the prosecution will be giving to the court. I understand his train this morning was delayed but he is on his way to court as I speak.’
Richard Jupp responded, ‘Very well, Ms Brown, we will adjourn for twenty minutes.’
51
Tuesday 14 May
Meg, along with her fellow jurors, filed out of the court and into the jury room. It was furnished with a long, plain, rectangular table taking up much of the space, with reasonably comfortable chairs upholstered in purple and a blue carpet. There was a fan on a tall stand, a dehumidifier, a monitor, a whiteboard with a selection of coloured marker pens, tea and coffee-making facilities, as well as male and female toilets. The solitary, curtained window looked out at a blank wall. There was nothing, she had noted previously, to distract them from their purpose for being here.
And on one wall was a stark warning notice.
It is contempt of court punishable by a fine or imprisonment for a juror to disclose to any person any particulars of statements made, opinions expressed, arguments advanced or votes cast by members of the jury in the course of their deliberations.
Everyone took their seat, in the same order as earlier today, with herself, now she was foreperson, given the one chair with arms at the head of the table.
‘Are we going to be long? Shall we get refreshments?’ Gwen asked in her affected accent. ‘Or is there someone who will bring drinks?’
Harold Trout — Meg remembered his name — said, ‘I’m afraid it’s self-service. I’ll put the kettle on.’
The woman frowned, as if never before in her life had she had to stoop so low as to make a drink herself. ‘Well,’ she said. ‘I hope we can get rid of this beastly business before Royal Ascot. Can anyone imagine the disappointment of missing it — especially Ladies Day — because of some horrid little drug dealer?’ She looked around, her face a mask of contempt.
From the blank expressions around the table, it didn’t seem to Meg that anyone else could imagine it.
‘I mean to say, the man is obviously guilty,’ she went on. ‘I think we’ve already heard quite enough to reach a verdict, don’t you all?’
‘Well,’ Trout said, standing up and pottering over to the kettle, ‘I don’t think I can agree with that.’
Meg looked at the woman. ‘Mrs Smythson—’
‘Oh, Gwen, please, Meg,’ she simpered then added, ‘As we are all becoming such good friends here.’
‘Very well, Gwen,’ Meg said. ‘I really don’t see how you can have formed a verdict when we have only heard the opening statement by the prosecution counsel and the first witness. And we’ve barely heard anything yet from the defence.’
‘Really?’ Gwen retorted. ‘Well, I think I’ve heard quite enough, and we could all save a lot of time and unnecessary expense by agreeing to an early verdict, don’t you think?’
‘No,’ Meg said, firmly. ‘I don’t.’
To her relief, from the expressions and nods of her fellow jurors, they did not either.
‘I think it would be extremely inappropriate not to hear out the full trial,’ said Maisy Waller.
‘And unbalanced,’ Meg said, emphatically. ‘It would be a complete dereliction of our duty.’
Mike Roberts chipped in. ‘Gwen, we might have our private opinions of the defendant at this stage — and as a former detective who has dealt with plenty of Terence Gready characters in my time, I do understand where you are coming from — but as the judge has reminded us, persons on trial under English law are innocent until proved guilty. I agree with our foreperson and Maisy, we need to hear all the evidence from both sides.’
‘Huh,’ Gwen said with a scowl. Then she turned to Trout. ‘I’ll have an Earl Grey, with just a touch of milk and two sweeteners.’
He smiled at her politely. ‘I think it’s best if we all make our own drinks.’
Gwen gave a what’s this world coming to? shake of her head.