He outlined his monitoring and supervision of Emily Denyer, and told the court that, in his opinion, she had conducted a very comprehensive and efficient investigation of the financial details, ‘chasing the money’. He also confirmed the evidence found on the USB sticks, which contained details of the cars involved, and the relevant dates, which matched large deposits being paid in to overseas bank accounts.
He further confirmed the numerous other sums that were deposited in the same accounts.
He concluded that his team had obtained sufficient evidence to indicate large-scale drug dealing and importation, together with money laundering. Finally, he reaffirmed to the court that Gready had maintained no comment interviews throughout his time in custody, when he had been questioned at some length about the allegations and his involvement.
Primrose Brown stood. ‘As you know, my client says he is innocent of these allegations and that the police have fitted him up?’
‘That is not true, the evidence we have found as part of the investigation indicates that he is guilty of drug dealing on a huge scale. He has not been fitted up in any way, shape or form.’
Brown continued with her questions, suggesting that her client had been framed, which Branson denied.
‘You have told the court that my client was responsible for so-called county lines drug dealing within Sussex. From what I have been able to establish, these activities have continued despite my client and his alleged conspirator being locked up. How do you explain that?’
‘The reality is that whenever the police are able to cut off one supply or take out one drug dealer, there are many lining up to take their place, which is what has happened within Sussex.’
‘So there are any number of people who are involved in the county lines drug dealing?’ she asked.
‘Yes.’
‘Are any of them solicitors?’
‘No,’ Branson answered.
‘Do any of them defend those accused of serious crimes?’
‘No.’
‘I have one more question,’ Primrose Brown said. ‘My client believes that you have been taken in by Michael Starr, who has lied throughout to help himself and reduce his sentence. That is a possibility, isn’t it?’
Branson replied, ‘Absolutely not, there is clear evidence of your client’s involvement.’
‘So whatever is suggested to you, you cannot even entertain the thought that my client is being cleverly accused of crimes he did not commit?’
Branson stared at her, unsure of how to respond. Before he could, she nodded once and said, ‘I have no more questions, Your Honour.’
Cork confirmed he had no re-examination and that the prosecution case was complete.
Richard Jupp said that the trial was now adjourned for the day and they would recommence tomorrow at 10 a.m., when they would hear from the defence.
As soon as the judge had left the court and the jurors headed back to their room to collect their things, Meg scrambled past the others, just making it to the toilet in time. She locked the door behind her, lifted the lid and threw up.
81
Wednesday 22 May
Just after 5 p.m., Primrose Brown, her junior counsel, Crispin Sykes, and Nick Fox sat once more with Terence Gready in an interview room at Lewes Crown Court.
To all three of them, Gready was looking shell-shocked, as if all the fight had gone from him. He sat, hunched over the metal table, defeat in his eyes. ‘What the fuck happened?’ he said, quietly, almost as if he was talking to himself.
‘Terry, you tell us,’ Fox said. ‘Michael Starr was meant to be our prime witness. He was going to swear on the Holy Bible in the witness box that he had never met you before in his life and was acting alone. What the hell happened?’
Gready looked up at him, haplessly. ‘Someone must have got to him. Who and why? This has got to do with the murder of his brother. That’s what’s behind this — he thinks I’m responsible. OK, so I did—’
Fox raised a hand, calling him up short. ‘Terry, be very careful what you say.’ He nodded at the two barristers. Gready heeded the warning. He knew that if he gave any hint that he might have been involved in any way, his defence counsel would be compromised and no longer able to act for him.
Primrose Brown, notebook in front of her, looked across the table at him, very seriously. ‘Terry, I’m afraid that evidence from Michael Starr has holed you below the waterline. It is very damning, and I could see that the jury were with him. In all my years at the bar, I honestly cannot remember many more convincingly damning witnesses.’
He looked at her with fury. ‘You’re a top criminal brief and you’re throwing me under a bus on the evidence of one total shit who’s switched allegiance?’
‘I’m not throwing you under any bus, Terry. I’m just suggesting we need to reconsider our strategy. We’ve hung a big part of our entire defence around you and Starr never having met — on your assurances.’
‘I’ll fucking kill—’ He halted in mid-sentence, realizing that anger wasn’t going to get him anywhere. He looked at the three of them and didn’t like what he saw in their faces.
‘Let’s just review everything calmly, Terry,’ Nick Fox said. ‘That Financial Investigator is smart, and Starr was pretty convincing. We’re not in a good place right now.’
‘Really, Nick? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work that one out,’ he retorted, bitterly.
After an uncomfortable silence Brown said, ‘Nick is right, Terry. On what we’ve heard so far, to be brutally honest, we’re going to struggle to get an acquittal. Your best bet might be to change your plea.’
‘Change my plea? To guilty?’
She nodded. ‘I’m afraid we are looking at the likelihood of a long custodial sentence, but we might be able to work on the tariff, using your previously good character to reduce the length of sentence.’ She picked up her pen and unscrewed the top. ‘Let’s start with all the charities you support.’
Gready shook his head. ‘No way, Primrose, you are wrong. You are being defeatists — all of you. We’re not rolling over, paws-up. We are going on the attack!’ He caught Fox’s eye. Nick knew something neither Primrose nor her junior did, nor anyone else in the courtroom apart from themselves: that they had two jurors in the bag, including the foreperson.
Gready continued. ‘I’ve been watching the jury, and I think a lot are on my side. That Financial Investigator hasn’t been able to link me conclusively to any of those offshore shell companies, nor to LH Classics. She has delivered a credible circumstantial story of sorts, she might have convinced some of the jurors, but by her own admission under your cross-examination, she admitted she doesn’t have hard facts. And as for Starr, he’s nothing more than a crafty but not-very-bright opportunist who’s tried to fit me up. Well, he’s not succeeding. Put me on the stand. I know how to handle myself. I know what to say, trust me, I’ll have the jury eating out of my hand.’
It was an eternal dilemma that defence counsels had. Whether or not to put the accused into the witness stand. If they didn’t, in anything other than an open-and-shut case, the jury would wonder why the defendant was being kept silent. But if they did, the client might say something stupid under cross-examination and all but convict themselves. It was a risky tactic either way.
For days and maybe weeks on end, the jurors would listen to the evidence, with the defendant silent in the dock, unable to speak. Someone who was at the same time both the fulcrum of the trial and an inanimate third party. Putting the defendant on the witness stand was the defence’s one opportunity to show the jury that, contrary to the monster painted by the prosecution, this was actually a decent, caring fellow human being. But it could backfire terribly on your case if that person came across as cold, or arrogant, or pretty much conceded their guilt under cross-examination by a cunning barrister.