Although there was complete silence in the court, his reply was almost inaudible as he answered with one word “Guilty.”
From his lofty position on the bench, Sir Campbell glared down at the hapless figure before him. When he began to speak to Timothy, he spoke with a voice of great authority yet he betrayed no sign of emotion.
“Have you anything to say before I pass judgement upon you?”
At this point, the counsel Jerome got to his feet, and indicated he would be speaking on behalf of his client. “Your Honour,” he said, “My client has said all that he can say in his defence, and in mitigation at the last hearing before yourself. He can only reiterate that he is both deeply sorry, and ashamed, to find himself in this position which is I must say one of his own doing entirely. At the start of the murder enquiry, my client insists he did only what any other person would have done if they found themselves at risk of being linked to the case, even though he was totally innocent. It was only because he was a member of the present government that he wished to save himself, and his party, from any embarrassment should it become known he had conducted an extra marital affair whilst attending to constituency matters. Now, with hindsight, he totally regrets taking the action he did at the time, because he is fully aware of the lives he has blighted, and if it were possible to turn back the clock, he would do so without any hesitation whatsoever. Therefore, all my client can do now is throw himself on the mercy of this court and ask your worship to be mindful of any effect a lengthy custodial sentence might have upon him.”
The glare on the face of the judge was still there for all to see, and to those who knew him, it was quite obvious he was far from pleased. “Mr. Jerome,” he said, “Let me thank you for that eloquent speech on behalf of your client. Now, let me put matters in perspective. First of all, I think the only remorse felt by the defendant is due to the fact he has finally been found out. If he felt truly ashamed about his conduct, and his association with a common prostitute, he should have come clean and said so at the time, but he didn’t. Instead, he chose to lie to parliament. Then, as if that wasn’t enough, he chose to come here, and to commit perjury in order to prevent the truth from coming out. I think it is fair for me to say that, had he not lied to the house, it follows that he would not be here today facing such a serious charge. In fact, had he chosen that course of action, he would have found that, although his political career might have suffered along with his reputation, he would still have his freedom.”
“I cannot find any extenuating circumstances in his plea for mercy, put forward with such eloquence by his learned counsel, and I am going to pronounce sentence accordingly.”
Timothy Harris had remained standing throughout the short proceedings. Now, the judge addressed him directly.
“Timothy Harris, I take exception to any person who commits the act of perjury. I find it even more disagreeable when a person commits such an act in my court. Although I am mindful of the fact that you have chosen to come here today and plead guilty, I cannot allow that to sway my judgement in this case. In view of this, I feel I have been left with no alternative, but to sentence you to serve six years in prison. During your period of incarceration, I trust you will find ample time to meditate upon the actions which have brought you here before me, and prior to your release, you will have spent as much time as possible preparing to rehabilitate yourself to fulfil a useful role within society.”
With a nod to the bailiffs who were present in the court, he cried, “Take him down.”
Barely able to stand, Timothy Harris was led away from the court supported by the bailiffs on duty.
Once again there was another mad scramble by the assembled members of the press to get their stories into print in the shortest time possible. It was going to be another story which would figure prominently in the papers for quite some time. Timothy Harris was in the news again but, for all the wrong reasons.
With the perjury trial completed, attention swung towards the Merseyside Police enquiry being carried out by the West Yorkshire Force. Despite numerous attempts, the three protagonists, aided and abetted, by their own police federation, successfully avoided all efforts to give any worthwhile statements to the body carrying out the enquiry. All three had been certified as being under too much stress and illness to attend the proceedings and, one by one, they were allowed to leave the force on the grounds of sickness which ensured a more than generous payoff together with their police pensions intact.
In their report, the investigators singled out the Chief Constable for some stinging criticism, not for being a party to the contaminated evidence presented at the trial, but for not coming forward to reveal that Timothy Harris, his brother-in-law, had lied during the libel trial. The report concluded that, by not exposing Timothy Harris at the earliest opportunity when he was in a position to do so, some of the more serious matters could well have been avoided.
Detective Sergeant West bore the brunt of the blame. The authors of the report found, in their opinion, he was the person who ensured Royston Chambers produced the false confession when it was needed most, just before the beginning of the trial. In addition, they found he had coerced Bridget Riley into giving evidence, which he knew to be completely false. Close examination of the station arrest book, followed by internal enquiries, revealed many occasions where suspects had been arrested, and subsequently released without charge yet no details of the alleged offences were found in the arrest book. Almost all the complaints investigated related to Detective Sergeant West being instrumental in having known prostitutes arrested on charges with false evidence planted upon them. These victims were almost always released without charge, usually at the behest of Detective Sergeant West, although it was noted that all of the prostitutes interviewed claimed there was usually some form of payment in kind at a later date.
As a result, Detective Sergeant West was arrested, and charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice. Although the charges were laid against him, they remained on the book due to the serious deterioration of his health.
Detective Inspector Peter Taylor was exonerated on all charges as there was nothing to indicate that he had played any part in the affairs concerning Timothy Harris, neither could he be traced to having any links with the arrest, and release of the prostitutes, or the confession supplied by Chambers. Within a week, the report had been consigned to the waste paper baskets, and life returned to normal within the force without the services of the corrupt officers.
Michael Mulrooney had been kept very busy indeed. Apart from his normal caseload, he had been to see the consultant at the hospital. The purpose of his visit had been to see if the consultant could communicate sufficiently with Mrs Harris for information about the birth of her sons to be disclosed in order that investigations might continue. She was also asked to approve an exhumation order to remove the body of Anthony Harris to allow DNA samples to be obtained in order to assist with the enquiry. Although able to hear, and understand the questions posed, this was no easy process. Everybody was well aware of the tremendous strain this imposed on Paula, and each session was conducted with as much sympathy and compassion, as was humanly possible. Despite this, all concerned found it a very trying experience and they were mightily relieved when it was finally over.
Michael had also been to see Harry Thompson in prison. At this visit, he had arranged for him to supply DNA samples for analysis. He had also been to see the lawyers acting on behalf of Timothy Harris, where he acquainted them of the fact that, if Timothy Harris was the paternal father of Anthony Harris deceased, then it was almost certain he was also the father of Harry Thompson. In support of this claim, he presented them with the evidence of the birth of the son Timothy Harris had never met. Initially Timothy Harris refused all requests to cooperate until it was pointed out to him, permission had been given by his wife for Anthony’s body to be exhumed and this could be carried out without his involvement. The news concerning his other son hit him the hardest of all. Without
the evidence provided, he wouldn’t have believed it, and this caused him a great deal of pain and anguish. Alone in his cell at night, he found himself reduced to tears as he finally came to terms with his losses in terms of real life. At times almost suicidal, he blamed himself for the incarceration of his new found son. How he wished now, he’d never met Angela Clarkson, and become so besotted with her, and dozens more like her. With so much time on his hands, he had ample time to reflect upon the mess he had made, not only of his own life but of so many others. For Timothy Harris life was hardly worth living now.
With all the good luck messages still ringing in her ears, Irene Yarwood had arrived in London for the appeal to the House of Lords. As a result of the recent turn of events, the only issue in doubt concerned Article Six of The Human Rights Act, and whether, under that Act, the human rights of Harry Thompson had been abused. If their Lordships found that they had, then the Clarkson verdict should be overturned, following which, there was a strong possibility the Wilson verdict would then be deemed to be unsafe. She knew that a verdict in favour of her client was bound to provoke outrage in all the press, none more so than those papers which were bitterly opposed to Britain being in Europe, and the Common Market. She was quite prepared for all the criticism which would be directed at her, and her client. She permitted herself a wry smile at such happenings, especially in view of the fact none of them knew that once the new DNA results were to hand, they would alter the hard held views of them all once these findings were made public. This would happen soon enough once the application to exhume the body of Anthony Harris was heard. For a moment, she shuddered nervously at the thought, and the immense attention it was bound to attract from the media, and the press.
At the appointed hour, their Lordships took their places, then, with all eyes upon her, Irene began, “Your Lordships, the issues here before you are relatively simple. In these cases, I represent the defendant, Harry Marcus Thompson, who was found guilty of the murder of Miss Angela Clarkson, and Miss Diane Wilson. My client has always maintained he was innocent of these charges, and to a large extent, this conviction has been thrown into doubt with the publication of the West Yorkshire Force enquiry into malpractice at and within the Merseyside Police force. This enquiry has revealed the witness, Bridget Riley, committed perjury against my client when she gave her testimony at that trial. The enquiry has also revealed she only gave that perjured evidence under duress following the threat of arrest by a serving officer on the Merseyside Force.”
At the trial of my client, the Merseyside Force colluded with a Mr. Royston Chambers, a felon with many previous convictions, to produce before the court a confession, allegedly given to that person by my client. My client has always maintained he never made any confession, of any kind, and it was nothing more than a figment of the imagination of Royston Chambers. This gentleman has since appeared before an appeal court, and retracted every word of that confession. Enquiries by the West Yorkshire Force have now revealed this was indeed the case, and the prisoner was coerced into making the whole thing up by the same serving member of the Merseyside Police Force. Take away these two vital pieces of evidence from the prosecution case, and there is almost no case left for my client to answer.”
“Once the murder enquiry was announced, the Merseyside Police launched an appeal for local male persons to come forward voluntarily to provide DNA samples for analysis. This was in order to eliminate as many people from the murder enquiry, with the promise that all non-matching samples with those obtained from the deceased would be destroyed. We now know, from evidence before your lordships, this did not happen in the case of the sample provided by my client. Out of all the samples provided by the public at large, my client’s sample was the only one retained in the end. As you will see from the new evidence before you, samples were taken from the dead woman Clarkson, and these showed a positive match with the sample supplied to the police by her last client, Timothy Harris. This man admitted to having sex with this woman, but subsequently, the police were able to remove him from their list of suspects. Despite the fact that the sample taken from the dead woman did not match that supplied by my client, the police did not authorise the destruction of it, and had they done so, they would not have been in a position to compare it with a sample recently taken from the clothing of both women. At this stage, I need hardly remind you that all of the other samples, voluntary provided by the members of the public, had already been destroyed as promised by the police.”
“When this, the Clarkson case, came to trial, the prosecution stressed they were not offering any DNA evidence against my client, relying instead on the perjured evidence before you.”
“Later, during the appeal hearing, the prosecution were allowed to introduce DNA evidence taken from the underwear of the dead women, and according to their expert this new evidence proved to match the sample from my client which had not been destroyed. I respectfully submit that this piece of gross deception was a breach of the rights of my client under article six of The Human Rights Act.”
“During this appeal, and as you will see from the transcripts before you, the counsel for the prosecution stated, and I quote, ‘With this new evidence which was not available at the murder trial, it was just as if Harry Thompson had gone to the police and confessed to the crime. I respectfully submit that this serves to underline that breach of my client’s human rights because, under Article Six of the said Act all people, not just my client but all people have a right to silence, and this right, was taken from my client.”
“In making this appeal, I must now refer your Lordships to the recent ruling in the European Courts, which ruled that all people had a fundamental right to silence, and the exercise of this basic right should not be held against them in any court of law.”
“In conclusion, may I say if you find in favour of my client on this basic issue, I trust you will bear in mind my earlier remarks regarding the perjured evidence, produced at the trial, which weighed so heavily against him.”
As Irene sat down, Sir Gordon Nuttall-Jones rose from his seat. He cast a long look around the court which took in their lordships who were waiting for him to begin. He cleared his throat quite loudly, as if he needed to summon all eyes upon him, then rather tentatively, he began, “Your Lordships, You have just heard from my learned friend that much of the evidence presented at the trial of her client was perjured, and false. With the benefit of hindsight, which none of us had at the time of the trial, and after reading the evidence produced in support of this, I have to say without any hesitation, I agree with her. I need hardly say more than, if this had been known at the time of the trial, then it is highly unlikely her client would have been found guilty of anything, let alone murder. In these circumstances, however, that would have constituted an even bigger travesty of justice because a murderer would have been found not guilty.
“It is only now, with the superior knowledge available to the forensic scientists, that human samples can be taken from clothing and analysed. In this case, samples of semen, collected from the undergarments of the deceased women, were found to match a sample from Harry Thompson which proves conclusively that he was at the murder scenes and it is impossible for him to deny it. Quite simply, those facts cannot lie.”
“Whilst I can support the Human Rights Act as being an important piece of legislation, albeit long overdue, I must plead with your Lordships that the interpretation which you are being asked to place upon it today borders upon the ridiculous. Here we have open and shut cases, proving that a person who may well have escaped punishment in the first instance due to the circumstances already stated, may well be acquitted simply because somebody did not ask him, or his defence team, whether or not his sample could be used in another test. Obviously, I need hardly point out, had this same test been available from the start, then this issue could not have arisen and my learned friend’s client would be stuck behind bars where he clearly belongs.”
“All I can say is, if you find for the defence
on this issue, it will be a very sad day indeed for British justice.” As he sat down, he looked across at Irene and the look on his face said it all.
Irene sat there listening impassively. She made no move to object to anything which had been said by Sir Gordon, she knew she could have stepped in when Sir Gordon remarked about her client being at the scene, but this wasn’t the time, or the moment. First, and foremost, there was still work to be done regarding other people, and other suspects so, for the time being it was simply one step at a time.
With the legal arguments, and submissions, out of the way, it was up to their Lordships to consider their verdict. The chairman was the first to leave, closely followed by his fellow members, then the protagonists slowly drifted away from the chamber and the building. Without being over-confident, Irene was in an ebullient mood. She thought things had, more or less, gone her way and, because of the ruling in the European courts on the Hurst case there was an established legal precedent already on the books. Therefore, she was reasonably certain that their Lordships would rule in favour of her client. She also knew she could show that there was no material or credible evidence, which could be shown against Harry in relation to the first charge of murdering Diane Wilson and his conviction on this charge was decidedly unsafe. In this case, all anybody had to go on was the fact they had sex at some time during that day, and later that day she was subsequently and mysteriously killed.”
When their Lordships returned to deliver their verdict, although all persons present studied their faces intently, none of them gave any clue regarding their deliberations. The presiding judge sat down, and after ensuring his colleagues were also seated, he began, “These appeals have proved to be extremely trying in that my learned colleagues and myself believe that, even though the defence have shown, quite rightly I might add, that a right to silence exists we feel it is not beyond criticism when applied to appeals of this nature. However, we have to add that, in these cases, had the prosecution done their homework properly and had they followed their own promise to destroy all of the samples provided, then, we do not think we would be here today. Now, it is not incumbent upon us to criticise the defence for bringing this action, albeit due to a loophole, provided in chief by the prosecution, but in delivering our verdict, we do so in the hope we are not merely opening the floodgates for cases of a similar nature.”
Beyond Innocence Page 30
