[speaker001:] So what we do is... is what this... er solicitor would have done in relation to it.
[Drake:] Yes.
[speaker001:] And it it really is covered by the passages in erm... erm, just, I just reiterate that that that expressly referring your Lordship to it, professional duty except in so far as it may be necessary to elucidate the rules... that that was at page eight hundred and forty one at the bottom... and it goes over the page to eight four two... and then proceeds to general proposition to those two experts ordinary witness may not... may not give their opinions towards matters legal or moral obligation. My Lord to say that that evidence will not assist you and shouldn't be received.
[Drake:] .
[Cox:] My Lord if I could question it. It is not, er this evidence does not go to a matter of law er er and the duty but it matter of practice and my Lord what this case is dealing with is about what if, what is or should be the practice of a solicitors engaged in commercial conveyancing as to the advice that is given to clients... and er my Lord the er... commercial conveyancing is obviously a matter which particularly concerns.
[Drake:] Can I, can I take it this way. Analysing your... opening to me... you were saying that there's expert evidence... that... solicitors instructed in the purchase of a property must... ask about financial arrangements and advise about them.... Secondly it is the solicitors... must advise about clause twenty two... and thirdly... well that's about it really, isn't it.
[Cox:] Well my Lord and yet
[Drake:] Because the other's factual.
[Cox:] Yes but my Lord d dealing also with the suggestion by the defendants that it would have been improper to advise him to serve completion notice when he wasn't in a position to complete and the solicitor deals with the the expert deals also with that position as to what is the practice of a solicitor in that situation if there's a potential er problem for that particular solicitor to what the advice should be as to how the client should deal with the that.
[Drake:] Well that depends on the... terminology of the... of the rule doesn't it. Does that require expert advice?
[Cox:] Well I think that the way the case is put is that.
[Drake:] Let's just have a look at them have you got the general conditions here?
[Cox:] Yes there is, there is a bundle... er a and what it deals with is the availability to a purchaser of the service of the special notice to complete er if the vendors are not completing and then if don't comply with it within a certain time limit, the contract is rescinded. Now of course that, it is the defendant's case I anticipate, erm... is er, although there's nothing specific in the rule about it, is said to be er only a possibility for a plaintiff if the plaintiff when they sell, he or she served the notice to complete is in a position to be able to complete himself... and here.
[Drake:] Well he's got to be in a position to complete by the time the notice runs out.
[Cox:] Well... I I think its, the way that the plaintiff puts the case on that point my Lord is that even if the defendant Mr took the view er that it would not have been proper for such a notice to be served, in view of what the plaintiff was saying to him about his wish to get out of the contract, the fact that it was available to him should have been brought to his attention and then as Mr was saying that I... sorry I don't feel I can do this on your behalf because it's not proper in the circumstances or whatever... erm, should then have gone on to advise the plaintiff either to do it himself or to go and seek independent advice.... But should, to say nothing at all, the matter not being drawn to the attention at all was, was not right. So the those are the issues, the factual issues of the matters at issue. But my Lord what... erm I
[Drake:] Er, a notice to complete is a, is a notice to complete and not a notice to withdraw.
[Cox:] Certainly, certainly I I accept that. But I I don't erm from the nature of Mr Justice in the Midland Bank that there's a a... well known but w what I say... is that in this case er what your Lordship will be dealing with are essentially what are matters of practice for conveyancing solicitors when faced particularly with clients er making financial arrangements to enter into this and the duties of in that particular situation.
[Drake:] Does it really help to call them, label them that of practice er... Mrs because... the end of the day they're not matters of practice, they're matters of law. Either they're under duty... or they're not.
[Cox:] Well if that were so my Lord then there would never be any any solicitor's negligence claims, in which any expert was ever called to give evidence... because it's always going to be eventually a matter of law as to what the defendant's duty is but what the er... what the plaintiff had not said at any stage is that a matter of law is ever going to be admissible and in fact the is Justice our in the course of er er a case in which he, despite expressing reservations about the admissibility of the evidence, plainly admitted it because he was within the course of his judgement.... Er, he may be concerned but my Lord erm, there has been reference to the er the professional negligence and and my Lord there is a bit I have in court, I'm afraid the second edition because the third edition which is the latest, was not available to me this morning, but there's a paragraph in it and I want to refer your Lordship to it, I wonder if I might read it and er hand it up to your Lordship. What I'm just checking to see is erm,... it appears in, does your Lordship have the?
[Drake:] Is this actually a book that er... is going to be of any assistance to me? I think
[Cox:] Well my Lord it might
[Drake:] those authors are still alive aren't they... hopefully.
[Cox:] My Lord in my submission it will be yes, because of there's some er reference.
[Drake:] Well why don't you just adopt their verbiage as part of er... won't have to pay any copyright fees for doing that.
[Cox:] Can I just ask you to look at page three hundred and forty of and.
[Drake:] Yes... have you got it?... I don't think we've got it.
[Cox:] Er I thought your Lordship had it, I'm sorry... I thought I'd your Lordship.
[Drake:] No I haven't got it.
[Cox:] Oh I'm sorry... my Lord perhaps I could read the passage out and then er I can hand it up to your Lordship but it... after setting out the dictor from Mr Justice in the Midland Bank. Erm the editors say that, and I rely upon this because it's important in my submission, that it is submitted that a wider view might be taken as the function of a solicitor as expert witnesses. While of course the extent of the solicitor's duty is ultimately a question for the court, surely this is a mixed question of fact and law. Even if there is no directly relevant practice of the profession, the evidence of other practitioners as to what they do in similar cases and why, is likely to be of benefit to the court. A knowledge of the working of a solicitor's office, particularly er o of those departments handling non-contentious business, cannot be automatically imputed to the judge or to council... and he may as well make it is not uncommon for an expert witness to give evidence of what he would have done in a particular situation after consideration and er I resign on that because in my submission er the issues in this case are clearly issues of mixed fact and law and my Lord it is seen from the report handed up that there is particularly in relation to the erm financial aspect of the case, reference to a provision within a... professional conduct of solicitors guide as to what the nature of the er duties of the solicitor in the situation is. Er and I rely
[Drake:] Well, that's that's not in dispute you can, you can put in that er... that guide.
[Cox:] Yes.
[Drake:] Although in fact you haven't pleaded it... er.
[Cox:] No my Lord it's not pleaded certainly, but it, but it's part of the expert report.
[Drake:] It should be, it should be if it's part of the basis upon which you are making an allegation that a duty arises.
[Cox:] Well my Lord I don't know
[Drake:] You are saying that
[Cox:] whether it could properly be said that it's a duty because it's not, it's a guide, er the question arises as to whether it's a duty but of course it's here, it's always been in the expert's report incorporated in it the reference to it... erm... but er... Lord in my submission... er it is undoubtedly correct that your Lordship would be greatly helped by hearing evidence from a solicitor engaged regularly, frequently, in commercial conveyancing work as to what the extent of the practice, the accepted practice and the professional... standards operated by solicitors in this field and
[Drake:] see what his qualifications are shall we? He's an expert and to to tell us what the practice is.
[Cox:] Yes my Lord er... you can see that er on page one... in paragraph one two, he is a partner in a firm of he qualified as a solicitor in nineteen seventy three and became a partner in nineteen seventy six and since qualifying, so that er some twenty five years ago, he has dealt primarily with commercial and residential conveyancing... and his contained in paragraph one and three... er he's been asked to advise on the extent of the duty of professional care and skill in relation to Mr financing the transaction... and the extent to which they were under an obligation to advise Mr of any opportunity to rescind.
[Drake:] Well that doesn't show any er expertise in what goes on in a solicitor's office... at all.
[Cox:] Well my Lord.
[Drake:] We may know what practices and particularly his own... what what he can he tell me about what er... the practice of solicitors up and down the country?
[Cox:] Well, he's b the second part, he's basing his opinion on clearly what the plaintiff's case is about what he was, what he was telling Mr to do. I accept that erm and of course he's dealing with it, approaching it from the basis that that factual issue is one she's resolved in favour of the plaintiff... erm it may be that there's very little issue between us, it may be... that the defendant would concede... if your Lordship were to find... that er the plaintiff had been asking Mr on several occasions to get him out of the contract, it may be conceded, I know not. The that condition should or would have been drawn to his attention, that is the major factor in this dispute which goes. But the expert is dealing also with the financial aspect of the claim..
[Drake:] But er... isn't the situation here that er vi advisor to very eminent solicitors and so are... the defendants in this case
[Cox:] Yes... indeed.
[Drake:] W w what w what am I to infer from this expert reports? That they are solicitors who would have handled the situation differently from er the defendants.
[Cox:] Well my Lord the issue is that the defendants deny they were under any duty to offer any advice about financial.
[Drake:] Yes... but I can't receive expert evidence on that because that's the very thing I have to decide isn't it?
[Cox:] My Lord it will be helped in that situation in my submission by evidence from... which is dealing with what is the accepted and standard practice in that solicitors in handling these forms of transactions... and what advice is given my Lord undoubtedly that must be of benefit to the courts.... I know not, it may be that Mr is saying this is something that that never it's never... I've never understood it to be er part of my practice or part of any solicitors practice to offer such a and if we have a solicitor er who has constantly practised in his skills for a very lengthy period of time, that is saying oh yes it is because this, as far as I'm concerned, standard advice which solicitors should give to clients transactions. Your Lordship must be helped in that considerably, by that evidence. To resolve that conflict between them.... I can't fault a solicitor er to say that that there's no practice unless I call an expert to give that opinion. Mr who's the defendant of course,.
[Drake:] You haven't pleaded any practice... Mrs, you haven't pleaded any practice.
[Cox:] Well, my Lord the case is about the practice of solicitors and I've pleaded upon the practice, that's part of the statement.
[Drake:] It's not about the practice of solicitors, it's pleaded that there's breach of contract.
[Cox:] My Lord it's pleaded that there's common practice in the statement of claim.
[Drake:] Well you haven't pleaded a term of the contract that there's a practice... to which all solicitors are subject that they have got to do this that and the other.
[Cox:] My Lord with the greatest respect that that clears my submission from the pleadings, er in the statement of claim.... In paragraph four... specifically paragraph four page seven. That... the negligence or rather the breach of the implied term, was failing to ensure as is the common practice amongst solicitors that the proposed source of finance had in fact agreed both finance for the transaction and the term thereon. That is clearly pleaded my Lord now unless I can call Mr to say... er yes it is... er I cannot deal with.
[Drake:] Does common practice means... does common practices means it's a practice which is common or
[Cox:] Well, yes.
[Drake:] Not common to all of them but
[Cox:] Yes
[Drake:] common amongst them.
[Cox:] Yes... the that is the a practice. Now I... unless I can call Mr to give evidence that it is, I cannot deal with Mr er contention which may be, anticipated in the witness box,. Because er unless I can call... er a conveyancing solicitor to say yes it is common practice... er the plaintiff is proceeding very much at a disadvantage.... I I it's clearly the defendants case that it's not malpractice and as Mr is undoubtedly going to say.
[Drake:] There's plenty there's plenty of legal authority of course on this very question isn't there?
[Cox:] Well my Lord no there isn't, that that is in my submission, there isn't.
[Drake:] Oh isn't there
[Cox:] In my submission there isn't.
[Drake:] Well you surprise me. I seem to remember several cases in which the court considered to what extent the solicitor involves himself... in the financial arrangements for a conveyancing transaction.
[Cox:] Well... my Lord not er so far as I'm aware. We are dealing specifically with a lack of information for commercial conveyancing... and the extent that the conveyancing solicitor duties in that situation. That is the, that is the key to it in my submission. Because that is what is at issue between the parties. The er... the defence case is that er... there was no duty a and in my submission it must be of assistance to your Lordship to determine that issue... to hear evidence from both sides upon whether there is such a practice and if there is what the extent of it is.... A a and that is my submission, it is not a matter of law but a matter of... fact a and practice.
[Drake:] Thank you Mrs. At this stage I take the view it is very unlikely that there's anything in this expert evidence that will be of the slightest assistance to me and I'm not going rule it out. Question of omitting it doesn't arise unless until... we get to that part of the... plaintiff's case... and erm I shall hear the evidence of the plaintiff and the other witnesses first... and the advocation can be renewed in due ti in due course... at the proper time. I'm not encouraging it because as I say... I really, present time I can't see that it's going to be of any assistance to me to have... the opinion of... solicitors from er from any part really, from the defendant or or someone else. On these matters.
[Cox:] My Lord er... those er in essentially are the matters to which erm I wanted to draw your Lordship's attention in. Er, my Lord may I say that er in relation to the witness statement... erm, clearly the credibility of this, the plaintiff Mr is going to be substantially in issue er and therefore er I propose er not to simply to tell him... er and say erm in your witness statement your evidence erm but clearly to take him to those areas which are in dispute and to ask him to deal fully with them in I appreciate it's going to erm... take some time to do that but it is important in my submission that your Lordship has the ability to er assess... the plaintiffs.
[Drake:] Yes.
[Cox:] Erm... and my Lord I hope that
[Drake:] Do you in fact wish me to read the evidence in this case?... you have decided that have you?
[Cox:] Well my Lord as I said as I said at the beginning I think the both Mr and myself considered that it might... er assist your Lordship considerably if you have some time now to read... er the witness statements and the... reports from the expert... which are in bundle three and indeed erm.
[Drake:] The experts... er they deal with the the damages
[Cox:] Yes
[Drake:] don't they?
[Cox:] Yes and I I I think y my Lord the plaintiffs will be cross examined quite considerably on the damages claimed and I think it might help your Lordship to see... erm the way.
[Drake:] The case in which the the evidence on damages is going to... possibly erm enable me to form a better view of the credibility of the witnesses.
[Cox:] Well my Lord I think
[Drake:] Or or why or do we need to try this, go into this business of a fairly complicated damages assessment as part of the liability claim.
[Cox:] Sorry my Lord.... Well... my Lord I must say it had occurred to me erm that... certainly on the basis on which I'm contending for damages to be assessed with the plaintiffs... and it is completely irrelevant, er er many of the matters to which the defendant's expert goes to as to the damages and the extent to which they were caused by the negligence of the defendant, the breach of duty.... Erm, but my Lord er I think the difficulty is that as far as my learned friend is concerned er he takes the view and it's probably better for him to develop this your Lordship, that the matters cannot properly be separated and he wishes your Lordship to deal with them in total so that er the whole picture can be seen at liability stage.
[Drake:] Yes.
[Cox:] To enable him to cross examine the plaintiffs as er he sees appropriate.
[Drake:] Yes alright.
[Cox:] Er my Lord it's been.
[Drake:] I'm I'm a bit reluctant to embark on a, on reading reports of this nature... which are liable to mean very little to me till I devote, until I've obtained the view from the
[Cox:] Yes.
[Drake:] from the... general history of what the case is about.
[Cox:] Yes... my Lord I I I'm not going to invite your Lordship t to take a great deal of time reading reports that state in detail erm but I think the witness statements and I think probably the documentation that might help your Lordship at this stage er to see something of the and to ensure that where evidence is given it can proceed fairly... fairly quickly.
[Drake:] Mr is er... twenty five pages. Mr is er... eighty pages.
[Cox:] My Lord I'm more than happy to for your Lordship not to... not look at the details of the accountant's evidence at this stage a and concentrate on the witness statements and the documentation which which deals with liability matters.
[Drake:] So it's bundle.
[Cox:] It's part A trial bundle
[Drake:] Trial bundle
[Cox:] Two... one of two of the pleadings.
[Drake:] Part A one and two...
[Cox:] And then er... part B... bundles one, two and three er... my Lord you want to look at the documentation which is dealing specifically with the purchase of the wine bar. It starts at page... one seven eight... pages one seven eight to forty effectively deal with the... the crucial aspects of.
[Drake:] Er I'm sorry I hadn't quite understand, understood how you, trial bundle A one is the pleadings bundle.
[Cox:] Yes my Lord the witness statements.
[Drake:] Yes I... well I did have one of those.
[Cox:] Yes.
[Drake:] But I give it back to er... cos I have two pleadings bundles.
[Cox:] Ah yes, one was paginate I think and one wasn't my Lord.
[Drake:] And the pleadings bundle which I've got also seems to be... erm from your side but it's er seems to be the trial bundle that was lodged with the court rather than the one that you've a different order and different pagination.
[Cox:] ... yes... does your Lordship have trial bundle two part A, the witness statements.
[Drake:] Pardon.
[Cox:] Does your Lordship have part A trial bundle two?
[Drake:] Yes I do.
[Cox:] Yes... the witness
[Drake:] I have one and two now and I give this back to the associate, he can keep that... and you can keep this one.
[Cox:] And er... my Lord
[Drake:] You can have that one back.
[Cox:] The... the documents that my learned friend and I think would be most useful to your Lordship to read at this stage would be pages one seven eight four two five.
[Drake:] Where do I find those?
[Cox:] My Lord trial bundle part B er and then... er bundles one and two.
[Drake:] You're not asking me to read the part er... B... at all at this stage.
[Cox:] my Lord. My learned friend and I thought that if your Lordship wanted to look at the documentation so that your Lordship is familiar with some of the documentation which is going to be referred to in the evidence, er simply to enable your Lordship to be... er a little more familiar with the nature of content of some of the documentation then the crucial documents are those of pages one seven eight to four two five, bundle B.
[Drake:] What... oh D
[Cox:] Bundle B.
[Drake:] Yeah.
[Cox:] Which is in part one and two, files one and two.
[Drake:] Yeah.
[Cox:] Er er that together with the witness statements my Lord I think.
[Drake:] Well that is, that's getting on for two hundred and fifty pages of document.
[Cox:] My Lord yes of course. But I think it's time, I think we both agree that the time er... well used because it's for the because your Lordship will have a better understanding of the evidence when the plaintiff and the defendant give it from the witness box.
[Drake:] Yes well... it strikes me that this case involves some very narrow issues really... it's generated an awful lot of paper.
[Cox:] It has my Lord.
[Drake:] Well now how long is this going to take me?
[Cox:] Well... erm... my Lord I don't know whether you'd like to take... certainly... the rest of the afternoon... and sit again tomorrow at ten thirty to get a clean start, having read all the documentation or whether you feel that you could read it before then. I think that there's a lot for your Lordship to read... but I think it might be beneficial in the long run, it was certainly, our experience has been that it certainly would take time... in the long run but to deal with it this way.
[Drake:] Yes, well er what do you say Mr.
[Bate:] Well my Lord as a time saver it would quite er how my er learned friend went through the documents,i it in the contents she would otherwise make and one suspects that it would take a great deal longer.
[Cox:] My Lord it may help to say that if your Lordship does this reading my Lord, I don't... intend... to take your Lordship through the documents any more myself in opening, because I think once your Lordship has has seen the extent of it, I'm going to call... Mr to give evidence and go to through the documentation that way, once. Er, and I don't intend to take up any more of the court's time simply opening myself documentation and making points upon it. obviously preferable to get evidence given about the documentation which is why I advise, consider it necessary for your Lordship to familiarise yourself with it now.
[Drake:] Well if I'm going to read this... er at all properly it's going to take me all afternoon isn't it?... That's that's what the parties want.
[Cox:] My Lord I think it's right that that it's clear from the discussions I've had with Mr that the plaintiff is going to be in the witness box for some considerable time and I think if your Lordship's had an opportunity to read the witness statement, seen the areas of dispute, the nature of the the fact that arised and had a look at some of the documentation, it would be much er er a much speedier process than it would otherwise be.
[Drake:] very well then I I'll adjourn into chambers and I don't require the attendance of the parties or council until tomorrow morning.
[speaker001:] Members of the jury and you'll be pleased to hear that I'll be doing that quite quickly. Can I start however by telling you what this case is not about. It's not about police corruption. It's not about racism in the police force, it's not about dishonesty amongst police officers. It's not about violence or brutal police officers... and I say that because for the last few years there's been an awful lot of publicity... about the particularly in the Metropolitan area... and I ask you you will have read some terrible things about certain police officers. Put those out of your mind. Indeed yesterday you may well seen on on the news, heard on the radios, seen in the papers, forget such attacks. It's also not about macho, gun, gung ho policeman as has been suggested. What it is about, members of the jury, is a very professional police force doing the best they could in the circumstances.... And what do they try to do, they were trying, above all else, to protect you and I, the general public. And this is a police force, you will remember, Mr telling you... very remarkable characteristic. Never in it's entire history has it shot a gun in anger at a human being.... And what does that tell you, members of the jury, about this police force? What does it tell you about their professionalism?... Now in this case the police have the burning proof... we have to satisfy you of in particular three things. Firstly as you have probably already gathered, we have to satisfy you that there were reasonable grounds to believe that Lawrence was in the flat, the plaintiff's flat. Secondly we have to satisfy you that in order to that flat they used only reasonable and necessary force.... And thirdly we have to satisfy you that in the circumstances of the operation the police were justified in restraining Mr with handcuffs for the short period of time that he was restrained and in addition Mrs who you will remember was restrained... in her lounge, she was told she couldn't leave the lounge, again for a few minutes. And members of the jury we don't that we have to prove that to you.... And in a nut shell, it is our case, we say the police, what the police did was reasonable in the circumstances and indeed to go any further and say what they did was necessary in the circumstances. There was no realistic alternative. Of course in he many years later to debate whether other alternatives could have been adopted. What other courses of action could have been pursued. We say to you, taking all the facts into consideration the officers did in due course, there was no other. There may be few actual options that lawyers can ponder over. But there was no other realistic option.... And why do we say that? Why do we say there were reasonable grounds? Well members of the jury... it is because we've set the course that... acting upon in itself would not have been enough.... That's and he couldn't and then mount this sort of operation. Having seen just one or two pieces... of the jigsaw, but the police didn't act on one or two pieces... they put the rest of the jigsaw together and what did they have. Well they had the information that you will hear in due course, in just a few moments, from the caller. The person who phoned up appeared to be perfectly genuine. There was nothing about the man's voice, nothing about what he said that cast any doubt on his motives.... And he told them... that... was in the flat that you know about and that there was suspicion that other occupants of the flat were in danger. Now what do the police know at the time. When they heard that information they knew that Lawrence was indeed on the run from prison, that he'd escaped. They also knew that he was a violent man, a man prepared not only to handle shotguns, but to saw off the barrel and to shoot sawn off shotgun at human beings. They knew all that. But they knew a little bit more than to put the together. They also knew that Lawrence was a and knew and there's one final piece of information members of the jury, that which the police knew. The knew Mr himself was no angel. That he had the long record of offenses, mainly dishonesty and some for violence against the police.... And they put all those factors together and they weighed up the alternatives and you've heard some of them already. The, they weighed that up. The idea was of staking out the estate and counting on someone at the appropriate moment. They weighed up the prospect of knocking on the door... and members of the jury, you have to consider in due course whether they got that act right. And you will do so by listening to all the other officers who will give evidence in the case.... The this is what the police say. They had to risks didn't they. One risk was... that if they didn't act there was a gunman on the loose, desperate, he's after all escaped from prison, possibly in a confined space in a block of flats with a vantage point. That was one risk. They risk leaving him there and him going on to do damage to personal property. A very serious risk. On the other hand there was the risk which in fact... materialised which is that in mounting such an operation they would... frighten innocent members of the public... it was open to the jury, we don't swing from the fact that... Mrs and her children were clearly frightened, no doubt about that, it must have been a terrifying experience. But those are the two risks the police had to weigh up... and what they will tell you is that one risk, a gunman on the loose, is a potential to main and kill, one is far, far more serious than the risk of causing some temporary... fear and fright of little children.... And the that Mr and other officers never like to mount an armed operation, never. If they can avoid it, they never would. But it was the only option available to them.... And you'll hear two sorts of evidence in this case. You'll hear evidence from those officers that took the decision to get into the flat. That's the first and they'll be the ones that will be able to tell you why they've taken that decision and why we say it's a reasonable decision. Then you'll hear from the second of officers... namely the officers that went into the flat that were carrying the guns, carrying and who conducted the operation and from their evidence you'll be able to judge whether or not the force used was reasonable and was necessary.... Members of the jury whilst you're listening to these officers... ask yourself a number of questions as they're going along. Do they all look to you as professional... men and women?... Are they considered in their judgement? Are they temperate? Do they keep their cool? Are they? Firm, perhaps. Decisive, do they show any compassion? And weigh those matters up in your mind as you hear one evidence after the other. And ask yourself a question, are they really a sort of dirty Harry or sweeney sort of officers you would be lead to believe. in front of your mind because the picture's intended by the plaintiff's is that these are... reckless, violent, thuggish officers, stealing into a place with no regard for anyone else. We say nothing could be further from the truth and indeed to get any if you read just one newspaper this morning we will say from that which you will actually see in the witness box. Because after you listen to the evidence will be that these are professional officers doing a very difficult job and members of the public, members of the jury create very dated job... they have the one objective I've told you about... to protect members of the public from further harm from what they thought was an armed criminal on the run. Finally members of the jury by way of opening tonight, ask you to be warned about two things. Firstly... it is inevitable and natural and quite proper that you should have a sympathy, in particular for Mrs and her children and. None of us it is a matter of extreme regret that they were terrified in the way they claim they were, but that sympathy must not be allowed to cloud your judgement on the issue about whether the police were reasonable.... Secondly members of the jury, please don't do what the press are always doing which is act on the basis of hyper. If the police had a crystal ball... and a gypsy woman they could bring in and ask her to look and see what was in the flat, we wouldn't be here today would we? But they don't have a crystal ball, all they have is their judgement and they do what's best in the circumstances. The questions maybe that if... they did what was reasonable, did they carry it out in a reasonable way. Members of the jury that's all I wish to say to you... by way of opening the case. And I'll now call a number of the officers to explain their case of their own. Thank you.... My Lord call Elaine. Take the book in your hand and repeat after the. I swear by almighty God.
[Elaine:] I swear by almighty God.
[speaker001:] That the evidence I shall give.
[Elaine:] That the evidence I shall give.
[speaker001:] Shall be the truth.
[Elaine:] Shall be the truth.
[speaker001:] The whole truth.
[Elaine:] The whole truth.
[speaker001:] And nothing but the truth.
[Elaine:] And nothing but the truth.
[speaker001:] Thank you. Miss could you just confirm your full name and your address?
[Elaine:] Elaine, do I have to give my home address?
[speaker001:] Give your work address.
[Elaine:] Work address
[speaker001:] And Miss it's an extremely big court with a very very high ceiling, it's very difficult for all us to be heard. Can you do your best to... direct your answers to the other end of the court.
[Elaine:] Yes.
[Drake:] I told the witnesses yesterday, you may sit down or stand just as you wish.
[Elaine:] Thank you.
[speaker001:] Miss what was your job in December of nineteen eighty eight?
[Elaine:] I was... a civilian controller operator.
[speaker001:] And where were you working at the time?
[Elaine:] At.
[speaker001:] And can you tell the jury, as briefly as possible, what that job entailed?
[Elaine:] Basically it was receiving telephone calls from the public erm and using that information to put on a computer to send officers to incidents... various incidents.
[Drake:] Erm I I missed at the beginning perhaps, that's your present job still is it?
[Elaine:] No that's not my present job, I've changed jobs since then.
[Drake:] What do you do now.
[Elaine:] I'm a crime officer at.
[speaker001:] Miss do you remember taking a telephone call from somebody about a Mr Lawrence.
[Elaine:] Yes.
[speaker001:] Can you remember roughly what time of day that was?
[Elaine:] It was approximately... five fifteen, five twenty P M.
[speaker001:] And was the caller male or female?
[Elaine:] Male.
[speaker001:] And from the caller's voice were you able to come to the view as to his age?
[Elaine:] It was five years ago but... I believe his was... he sounded fairly young I'd say about in his twenties.
[speaker001:] Did, did he have any... obvious accent?
[Elaine:] Not that I can recall.
[speaker001:] Miss what did the man tell you?
[Elaine:] Erm, I can't remember the exact conversation but the basics of it were that we were looking for somebody called Lawrence... and he was at the present time at erm... and that he was in possession of a gun and that the caller was concerned for the safety of the occupants of those premises.
[speaker001:] Miss did you ask the caller... for his name?
[Elaine:] I did yes.
[speaker001:] A and what did he... tell you?
[Elaine:] He wouldn't give me his name because he was concerned that something would happen to him if he gave me his details.
[speaker001:] Miss were you able to... come to any view as to whether the call was genuine, from what you heard?
[Elaine:] As far as I was concerned the call did sound genuine... yes.
[speaker001:] Er Miss what did you do next?
[Elaine:] I reported it to my section inspector Mr.
[speaker001:] So he. Miss or is it simply that er when the male rang up to say about Lawrence at has a gun and that he is the caller who is concerned for the safety of the occupiers. Did you say anything to the effect that... Lawrence was being harboured at the flat at or did he merely say he was concerned for the safety of the occupier?
[Elaine:] From what I can recall he just said he was concerned for the safety of the occupiers.
[speaker001:] my Lord does your Lordship have any questions?
[Drake:] No thank you very much, Miss you are free to leave is you wish to
[Elaine:] Thank you very much.
[Drake:] Or stay and listen to the rest if you want.
[speaker001:] My Lord next. Raise the book in your right hand. I swear by Almighty God.
[Clive:] I swear by Almighty God.
[speaker001:] That the evidence I shall give.
[Clive:] That the evidence I shall give.
[speaker001:] Shall be the truth.
[Clive:] Shall be the truth.
[speaker001:] The whole truth.
[Clive:] The whole truth.
[speaker001:] And nothing but the truth.
[Clive:] And nothing but the truth.
[speaker001:] Inspector can you give the court your name and address?
[Clive:] I'm Inspector Clive Richard... of... I'm currently on the road traffic division in Bedfordshire. At the time of this incident... I was patrol inspector at.
[speaker001:] Again Inspector, just to help the jury and myself indeed, what does being a control inspector mean?
[Clive:] I was in charge of a shift of, at that time, approximately twenty constables er four or five sergeants who do normal patrol work in uniform at.
[speaker001:] Were you involved inspector, in the events leading up to the search of?
[Clive:] Only in that I received the message from Mrs... of a telephone call.
[speaker001:] Perhaps it's quicker if I ask you, you just heard about it.
[Clive:] Yes.
[speaker001:] Can you confirm that... what she told you?
[Clive:] The information Mrs gave to me was as she stated that erm an anonymous phone call had been made to the police station, which she had received.... [clears throat] The information was that there was a Lawrence at that address in Luton, that he had a hand gun and that they were, the caller was concerned for the safety of the occupants of that flat.
[Drake:] I you may memory, you added he had a hand gun... that's what she told you?
[Clive:] Yes, that's.
[Drake:] She told us just now merely that he said he had a gun... but you you remember that it is a hand gun.
[Clive:] Hand gun yes sir.
[Drake:] Yes.
[speaker001:] Inspector did you at the time, know of Lawrence?
[Clive:] Only by reputation. I was aware that he... was an escaped prisoner.... I didn't know him personally and I I wouldn't recognise him.
[speaker001:] And on... receiving that information, Inspector what did you do?
[Clive:] My task was to assess the validity of the information... taken over the phone... and the only way I could do that... was to contact someone who knew the Lawrence situation.... I telephoned the C I D department at in an effort to trace the officer... who was dealing with that case.
[speaker001:] Did you trace that officer?
[Clive:] I didn't sir... no erm, Detective Sergeant was the officer dealing with this erm Lawrence. He was not available.
[speaker001:] Did you speak to anyone else about the situation?
[Clive:] On telephoning... the criminal investigation department at I spoke to Sergeant... it was he that in fact suggest I called erm Sergeant.... Then in the long run I did in fact to Superintendent about the information we had gleaned from this telephone call.
[speaker001:] Now about what time did you speak to Superintendent?
[Clive:] I don't remember exactly Sir, but certainly... between the call at five twenty P M and... what, say by six o'clock that evening.
[speaker001:] By the time you spoke to Superintendent had you... learned anything about the address that had been given to you?
[Clive:] It was ascertained that that address erm, was occupied by the family... again I don't know the.
[speaker001:] Did you know anything about... Mr at that time?
[Clive:] I didn't sir, no.
[speaker001:] What information were you able... to pass on to Superintendent?
[Clive:] When I found out the identity of the person owning or occupying the flat at... I made enquiries at the police station's department... in that office erm they... they keep records of any, any information about... persons in the area and beyond. Information kept for... police eyes only.
[speaker001:] A as a result of... looking at that information, the collators department. Did you learn anything?
[Clive:] Yes I learned that was in fact known to... Mr.
[speaker001:] So did you pass this information.
[Drake:] Well, did you... did they tell you a little more than that... I mean did they tell you that er... Mr played cricket with him or something like that... or or what? He's known to him.
[Clive:] A known associate sir.
[Drake:] aware that had a criminal record himself... as the department said.
[Clive:] Yes they did tell me that your Lordship.
[Drake:] I mean what we've heard... that in fact erm... they had met in prison, but was that known to you at that time or simply that they were known to each other and that had a record?
[Clive:] The actual information... you quote my Lord wasn't known to me erm it was on the cards certainly and all this information was passed to Superintendent. I made copies of the information... and these this was given to Superintendent.
[Drake:] I see well... it's perhaps ultimately the important thing but erm.
[Clive:] What I was trying to say my Lord was that I didn't know was associated or was associated at that time.
[Drake:] I I I I'm... until you spoke to the collators department, they told you simply that they knew each other.
[Clive:] That's correct my Lord.
[Drake:] And that had a record.
[Clive:] That's correct my Lord, yes.
[Drake:] I see... and you arranged for... more information to be passed on to Superintendent is that it?
[Clive:] That's correct my Lord, yes.
[Drake:] Right
[Clive:] No sir, my job was then to pass over to Mr who made the... ultimate decision as to what to do about the incident. It clearly wasn't something that the patrol section could do at that time.
[speaker001:] Thank you very much. Because we talking about the collators department, are those the one's intelligent?
[Clive:] Yes sir.
[speaker001:] Did you actually see... either er car or card?... or was it all done over the telephone with somebody else looking at the card?
[Clive:] I actually went to the office and er retrieved the card sir.
[speaker001:] And would you say from... one of those cards, you found out that was er... an associate of or the other way round?
[Clive:] No sir. I I can't be sure where I got the information from but from that time until the end of my shift at ten P M I was gleaning information from all different directions... about the and the connection.
[speaker001:] But we have the original cards here as my learned friend will correct me if I'm... I'm wrong. Neither card in fact, although they do give mention of the associates for both men, neither card says that associate of the other. So it obviously didn't come from the cards.
[Clive:] No sir, it, I couldn't remember but erm I'm not surprised er... between I was able to ascertain that the two were known to each other.
[speaker001:] Well you see it may be important where the information came from, you didn't get it from the cards, you say you were getting information from... all directions. I know it was long time ago, but... can you now possibly recall where the information came from?
[Clive:] I can't to be honest, no.... I can remember ge obtaining the collator's cards... erm and doing other enquiries but as to where that actual information came from I cannot be sure at this time.
[speaker001:] What erm... what sort of other enquiries, the asking other police officers and that sort of thing?
[Clive:] That would be part of it sir, certainly yes.
[speaker001:] Would it have any other... major part or is that the major part?
[Clive:] Sorry I don't understand.
[speaker001:] Would the other, these other enquiries you made, would the major part of them be asking other police officers or... is there any other way of getting information?
[Clive:] To myself it's a matter of... well my first reaction was to ask the C I D... if they knew the situation between o of, that was my first response actually to when the phone call came in, but I knew very little about. It was then we found out who oc, who was the occupant of that flat then we started to look at the connection between and.
[speaker001:] And that's the only other question I have.... How physically do you find out who's the occupant of a flat? You've got an address, if you give that to the collators departments they can... give you a name for the occupier can they?
[Clive:] The obvious way is through the voters register, erm as to whether... as I say I don't know, can't remember exactly where we got the details of the occupant from but t in the course of that evening the details of the occupants were found.
[speaker001:] Well... yes it may be important and if if you can't to say but... did you yourself... in any event look at the voters register, the electoral role?
[Clive:] I didn't sir no.
[speaker001:] So again, the information as to who was the occupier was obtained by somebody else and given to you verbally.
[Clive:] I believe so sir, yes, erm I can't be specific at this time. Thank you sir.
[speaker001:] I my examination my Lord, does your Lordship have any questions?
[Drake:] No thank you. Yes all the witnesses can leave when they've given their evidence if they wish to.
[speaker001:] My Lord I call... Detective Constable.
[Drake:] How do you spell the name?
[speaker001:] My Lord you spell it [spelling] [].
[Drake:] Good.
[speaker001:] . Take the book in your hand and repeat after the. I swear by Almighty God.
[Michael:] I swear by Almighty God.
[speaker001:] That the evidence I shall give.
[Michael:] That the evidence I shall give.
[speaker001:] Shall be the truth.
[Michael:] Shall be the truth.
[speaker001:] The whole truth.
[Michael:] The whole truth.
[speaker001:] And nothing but the truth.
[Michael:] And nothing but the truth.
[speaker001:] Would give your full name and address.
[Michael:] Er, Michael David... er currently stationed at.
[speaker001:] And er what's your current rank?
[Michael:] Detective Constable.
[speaker001:] And in nineteen eighty eight where were you based?
[Michael:] A at.
[speaker001:] And were you a detective constable then?
[Michael:] Yes I was.
[speaker001:] And what was your job at the time?
[Michael:] Er I was a field intelligence officer.
[speaker001:] Detective could you just say to the jury what a field intelligence officer is?
[Michael:] Er my job was to er... obtain intelligence on... er active, known criminals and also to develop intelligence that had been obtained by other officers.
[speaker001:] Now before we come to the matter that the jury in this case, could you tell me... had you ever been to the estate?
[Michael:] Yes.
[speaker001:] Prior to this?
[Michael:] Erm yes.
[speaker001:] A and... h had you ever been there to conduct any surveillance operations?
[Michael:] Er yes on a couple of occasions.
[speaker001:] Tell the jury... what it was like conducting a surveillance operation on that estate.
[Michael:] Er, very, very difficult er... on each occasion after about an hour er we were approached by people, knocking on the windows of our cars, asking us what we were doing.
[Drake:] And you were in plain clothes were you
[Michael:] Yes I was
[Drake:] And in a plain clothes car
[Michael:] Yes I was.
[Drake:] A plain car.
[Michael:] Yes.
[speaker001:] Was your intention to be... not seen.
[Michael:] Er... yes.
[speaker001:] So it didn't work.
[Michael:] Er, no obviously.
[speaker001:] Now when... Mr did your... did you have an involvement in the decision to mount the operation at in September of nineteen eighty eight.
[Michael:] Er, not in the decision, I I spoke to Mr and he asked me certain questions.
[speaker001:] Yes... well... at that time, what did you know about Lawrence?
[Michael:] Er... I'd known Lawrence since, it was either, nineteen eighty five or nineteen eighty six. Erm... I knew that er... he had escaped from prison. I knew he had previous convictions. Er, I knew that er he had access to firearms.... I knew that... er the circumstances of him being in prison involved er a firearm and using that firearm. Where he actually shot somebody with a sawn off shotgun.... I had been told that er... he'd made threats against his wife... and er his wife was living with somebody else at that time and he'd made threats against him.... Er, I'd been told er that he'd been in prison with Mr... er I believe it was in nineteen eighty six... and I'd also been told that in the past... er and er had planned armed robberies together.
[speaker001:] Did you convey any or all of that information to Superintendent?
[Michael:] I told him everything I knew.
[speaker001:] Did you obtain any of that information... from the collators card... or did you know it yourself?
[Michael:] No I knew it, I I phoned Mr er from my home address and er I I knew the information.
[speaker001:] A and just in case it... er should become an issue... can you now produce the originals of both collators cards?
[Michael:] Yes I can
[speaker001:] .
[Michael:] Yes.
[speaker001:] A and did those cards have photographs... of the person they concern?
[Michael:] Yes they do.
[speaker001:] And just tell us the names of the two cards you've got there.
[Michael:] Er... it's the cards regarding David... and er the other cards involving Lawrence.
[speaker001:] And my Lord this stage against those cards.
[Drake:] Now let me just have a look at them... thank you.
[speaker001:] My Lord I can tell you that I do have a copy for the jury if your Lordship thinks.
[Drake:] Well we'll see if there, if there... well the jury can have a look at them if they want, certainly... if er if neither side think they're going to be of any assistance then there's not much point in producing them.... It doesn't actually say I I I was just looking, it doesn't s... seems to go up to September nineteen eighty six... but not to say that he... had escaped from prison.
[speaker001:] My Lord it may be... that the, it certainly should say that Lawrence escaped, I in my photocopy... caused the escape and who he escaped with.
[Drake:] Maybe I... ah it opens up and goes further on. Simple answer to that.... If it's all er arrested for shooting of Anthony... sent to prison for five years plus six months for possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life. July nineteen eighty eight escape from prison at with one other a Mr... believed to have been a white Mercedes lorry near the prison.... And obviously, for whatever relevance it is, he was later on caught because the next entry after that is in March nineteen ninety one he was released on parole from prison. So he must have been caught in the meantime and sent back.
[speaker001:] My Lord the reason I to make it clear is not... er unnecessarily it's just that to enable a police had tried to not show anything, well we've got the documents here and we're very happy to receive them.
[Drake:] Oh I... I think, I think they're here and Mr has referred to them, the jury can have a look at them in due course.
[speaker001:] My Lord yes.
[Drake:] Er... that... that I really said it it's got a history on to an ending with the bit I've referred to. And the other one which is er... Mr... and that er has details of various convictions with er... picture of his as a... rather younger man... er, various offences going back to nineteen seventy five... and occupying quite a long space but there.... Well I don't think we need to, the jury need read them now but they're there and available for you to see in due course... yes. Good.... Well I think it's much better once things are served I think it's better the jury know that they're being shown everything of relevance.
[speaker001:] Continuing told us what he knew about Lawrence. Could you now tell us what it is that you knew about Mr?
[Michael:] As I said I I had been told that er he was associated with and they had been planning... ar armed robberies in the past.... er I knew that he lived at.... I knew he had a wife, I didn't know whether he had children... er and I knew that er he had previous history of er... criminal nature.
[speaker001:] Again did you convey that information about Mr go Superintendent?
[Michael:] Yes I did.
[speaker001:] From your knowledge first of all, that Lawrence can I ask you to of how you would regard the prospect of trying to arrest him while he was armed.
[Michael:] Erm, from what I knew of... erm... I knew he'd... got access to firearms. I knew he'd used firearms in the past and because he was on the run from prison... he obviously didn't want to be rearrested.
[speaker001:] Yes Mr if you wait there there'll be some more questions. Yes, you got the cards, you can therefore confirm can't you that neither man an associate of the other on the cards.
[Michael:] Er yes that's correct.
[speaker001:] It may therefore become of some importance, who it was told you that they'd been in prison together and so were at least known to each other. Can you remember that?
[Michael:] Erm, before the event I was told by more than one... person.
[speaker001:] Well can you remember who they were?
[Michael:] No no.
[speaker001:] Can you even remember whether this had been volunteered to you, weeks or months before or is this something you found out by asking around that day?
[Michael:] Er it was volunteered to me before that day.
[speaker001:] Mr may I ask... you also had been told by somebody that they been planning armed robberies together. I don't suppose you can remember who told you that?
[Michael:] No... no I can't.
[speaker001:] You can confirm this that... there have been any convictions for er er er two men conspiring to commit armed robbery or anything of that sort have there?
[Michael:] No no no previous convictions.
[speaker001:] Mr got erm... I understand that no convictions, even for armed robbery itself.
[Michael:] No.
[speaker001:] I don't think Lawrence got any convictions for armed robbery has he, or that there are any subsequently?
[Michael:] Er, no he's got no previous convictions for armed robbery.... He's been suspected of committing armed robbery but no convictions.
[speaker001:] On the er second of December, did you speak to er... Mr the officer who just gave evidence?
[Michael:] No I didn't.
[speaker001:] So it couldn't have been you that told him... that er and were associates.
[Michael:] No.... I spoke to Mr.
[speaker001:] Do you know the circumstances in which er Lawrence was recaptured?
[Michael:] Er... no I I just know that he was er recaptured... in nineteen eighty nine I believe.
[speaker001:] For instance er could you tell the jury whether there was er any violence or any firearms involved in that recapture?
[Michael:] No... I I cannot recall. I don't think it was in Bedfordshire. I think it was somewhere else.
[speaker001:] But you are in you can't recall.
[Michael:] No... I did visit Lawrence in prison after he was recaptured... er and spoke to him about various things, including this er... this incident and he did confirm that he had been at flat er for a couple of days... er befo before the actual search.
[Drake:] answers my question... but it's of some considerable relevance isn't it. Did he tell you that he'd been at flat... I mean years before or near the date of this or what?
[Michael:] No it was during the conversation he er... he said that I hear that you went to flat... and I said yes and he said er... well you just missed me, I'd been there a couple of days before.
[speaker001:] Well your Honour there are a number of matters arising out of my Lord, there are a number of mat matters arising out of that.
[Drake:] Yes.
[speaker001:] Firstly it wasn't put... secondly is inadmissible... thirdly it wasn't marked as a question.... Fourthly I very much expect, although it's not obvious that erm my Lord how it's going to be said. Perhaps it's a matter that erm... needs to be discussed at rather more length than that.
[Drake:] Well... here you are. It's come out, it's part of, part of what we've heard.
[speaker001:] My Lord rules of evidence apply in this court. It is not admissible as evidence, it's been volunteered to the jury... erm my Lord it needs to be dealt with in more detail than that.
[Drake:] Alright well... to consider it in due course anyway, for the moment there it is.
[speaker001:] I am obliged. My Lord nobody any questions.
[Drake:] No as long as you've finished Mr because I think you erm... introduced the topic of erm... when he was recaptured.
[Denser:] My Lord yes. My Lord let me speak plainly, I introduced the topic of when he was recaptured, I asked nothing about what was.
[Drake:] No, I I agree with that but I wondered if you had stopped because you introduced the topic and... then when when this involuntary and unexpected answer came up you sat down and I thought you might have pursued your original questions.
[Denser:] My Lord no. I have an application to make to your Lordship er in due course when your Lordship feels it is appropriate for an application to be made.
[Drake:] Alright... fine.... Good, well thank you Mr.
[speaker001:] My Lord call Superintendent.
[Denser:] My Lord on reflection before er this officer gives evidence, er unless your Lordship rules otherwise I'd like to make that application now and er that would allow the er... jury a short period of erm rest until.
[Drake:] Well i is it simply an application that the jury be directed to take no notice of the answer you've just missed me, because it's not admissible evidence.
[speaker001:] No it's right, it is not just an application for that effect.
[Drake:] [LAUGHTER] I see [] alright well... or I I invite members of the jury, the council wants to to address me on some point of law which needn't concern you, so if you take a short break please. The council says it will be short, I don't know what it is yet.... Mr had better remain while this is going on.... Remain in court Mr.... Yes Mr.
[Denser:] My Lord this is course made I apologise for the of authority to support it. Er, in my respectful submission er some of inadmissible evidence put before a jury are simply too important and too central... for a jury to be directed to disregard and then safely... er to the which we known that the jury will disregard them. If for instance this was a criminal trial as to which will rule this to inadmissibility exactly the same. In my respectful submission there could be A, no question that the jury would be discharged and B, in the submission er some er judicial displeasure of an experienced police officer volunteering what any police officer must know is A inadmissible and B not an answer to the question. Now my Lord I'm... I make the application with no... with no joy at all but the for a day... this matter has proceeded on the basis that yes these two men might have known each other, but that's as far as it goes. Nothing else.
[Drake:] Well no... erm... didn't he, didn't Mr say he had... met?
[Denser:] Oh but my Lord yes, but what I meant was nothing else was put as a far more serious suggestion.
[Drake:] S so then the evidence is that they did know each other, begging what know exactly entails, but that's not in dispute.
[Denser:] No it isn't but what was not put was that... er if the police had got there a couple of days earlier they would have caught because I was half.
[Drake:] It wasn't put here, unfortunately of course in this case there have been no witness statements exchanged. It's another oddity about this case, an irregularity I would say, all these cases always have an exchange of witness statements. Why... weren't they exchanged in this case?
[Denser:] Well as I understand it the er... these lawyers for the defendants took the view that as all the statements had been prepared for the police complaints authority investigation, public immunity er... yes er public interest immunity attached to them. I don I should also say that following a very recent decision er in our submission that's probably right, that my Lord... as I say, I say to you with no joy, this really is desperate and er one cannot have, in our submission, in the minds of the jury by inadmissible evidence, the suggestion that yes we have been harbouring this man two days before. It.
[Drake:] But it's not part of the... the police case here, that they... knew at the time that they entered the flat. That that er had been in the flat two days before. This was something which has come out... that an officer was told by for better, for truth or for untruth a year or so later.
[Denser:] Yes my Lord but postulate this situation. The jury comes to a conclusion that... er... the police er took whatever degree of reasonableness was breached, that the raid shouldn't have been made on the day it was. When they come to consider the plaintiff's damages, it must be highly material... that they then may say to themselves, however, this would family was harbouring this dangerous criminal two days beforehand. Well, I think it's premature any isn't it Mr. On the state of the evidence at the moment, it may well be that there will be a request for to withdraw the case from the jury on the grounds that no reasonable jury properly directed could conceivably find er a anything other than reasonableness in the police... acting upon the information they had... and that's for me to decide. Well,e e er my Lord.
[Drake:] An an and to speak quite bluntly on the state of the evidence at the moment it seems that that is a very possible end to this case, in which case, in which case the jury won't even get round to having this matter.
[Denser:] My Lord there will be... as your Lordship will know, my friend and I have been er talking outside about questions. There are other subsidiaries used that do have to go through the jury, particularly what happens in relation to Mrs and the children, as my friend opened it to erm... opened it to the er jury.
[Drake:] But, but erm what subsidiary questions?
[Denser:] As regards Mrs er and the children, whether er it's now been admitted that she was arrested and kept in that living room, whether that arrest er was lawful or not. As regards res as my friend put it in opening, The police were justified in restraining Mr and Mrs... in the way that they were restrained. Those are matters that are going to have. But even if.
[speaker001:] Your Lordship may well find it was reasonable for... the police to act on this information. But that still leaves for the jury in submission, A, whether they used reasonable force... yes reasonable to act, but was it reasonable force to act, was it a reasonable method of acting, by which I mean time of er, time of the incident.
[Drake:] Well again that may be that erm the evidence will be such that I... think that I ought to erm give the decision on it. I don't know yet, let's hear all the evidence.
[Denser:] Well I'm it'll stop that your Lordship erm from... er er from so holding.
[Drake:] But I'm not going to discharge a jury in a case where I think it quite possible the jury won't be required to give any, to give any verdict.
[Denser:] Well my Lord so be it. The application's been made I didn't want to waste time before making the application and it had been
[Drake:] Very well, thank you Mr.... I must just stretch my legs while the jury are coming back... alright.... Yes Mr next witness.
[speaker001:] Lord I call Superintendent please. Take the book in your hand I swear by Almighty God.
[Michael:] I swear by Almighty God.
[speaker001:] That the evidence I shall give.
[Michael:] That the evidence I shall give.
[speaker001:] Shall be the truth.
[Michael:] Shall be the truth.
[speaker001:] The whole truth.
[Michael:] The whole truth.
[speaker001:] And nothing but the truth.
[Michael:] And nothing but the truth.
[speaker001:] .
[Michael:] Yes sir, I'm Michael Charles er police Superintendent in the at present stationed at er at the time of this incident I was the operations Superintendent at.
[speaker001:] Erm... Superintendent were you involved in the decision to forcibly enter the flat we know about?
[Michael:] Yes sir I was.
[speaker001:] And how did your involvement begin?
[Michael:] On the evening of... Sunday the fourth of November, er I received a telephone call at my home address [clears throat] from er Inspector.... He told me that the telephonist at the police station had received a telephone call from a man saying that an escaped prisoner, a Lawrence er was to be found at er the home of a David... and that the... er Lawrence was in possession of a hand gun.
[speaker001:] Superintendent what was your response or your initial reaction to that information?
[Michael:] I needed more... er information on both of those persons, David and Lawrence er and I asked Inspector er to... make enquiries regarding those persons and to come back to me with that information.
[speaker001:] And er did he get back to you?
[Michael:] Yes er he eventually... er I in fact spoke to a Detective Inspector... er at the police station er... he informed me that... er Detective Constable had a good knowledge of these persons and I therefore instructed that... er D C make contact with me... which he did... a short time later that evening.
[speaker001:] And er perhaps you could briefly confirm what information he gave to you.
[Michael:] He told me that he knew... both individuals... er that Lawrence er was an escaped prisoner. Er that he... had received a prison sentence er for in fact being in possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life.... He reminded me of the circumstances of the incident resulting in that conviction... which er was in fact that erm had actually... er fired a weapon at a person causing injury.
[speaker001:] Did he er... tell you anything about?
[Michael:] Yes sir... he told me... that er [clears throat] would know because they ha had been together in prison... and that he also had information that they had been planning armed robberies together.
[speaker001:] Superintendent did you... er ask... D C to give his opinion of a non-armed intervention?
[Michael:] Yes, er I... I asked P C if his relationship... er with was such that he would have any influence er... with regard to erm getting him to er surrender... er. His view was that... erm... if he was armed... he had been armed in the past, he had discharged a firearm, he felt that... er he would be in a desperate position erm, as he was an escaped prisoner and that he he wouldn't have erm any influence over him.
[speaker001:] Did you er Superintendent yourself consider whether... perhaps there should be some undercover surveillance of this flat?
[Michael:] Yes I did.
[speaker001:] What view did you arrive at?
[Michael:] There are a number of options erm that I considered.... I considered... erm arm unarmed officers actually making an enquiry er at the... flat.... But erm did not pursue this... er... because I considered it too dangerous erm and any information you gained would not be conclusive.... I considered... keeping observation actually on the flat... but because of its its location, did not feel that it would be possible for armed officers... or for that matter, any officer,... to maintain observation for any period of time without being seen.
[speaker001:] Just pausing there a minute, did you have did you I should say, have personal experience of that estate?
[Michael:] Yes sir I did.
[speaker001:] Did you then consider the use of guns, firearms?
[Michael:] Er yes.... Er, in the light of the information at that time and the options I had already considered... erm I thought... it was likely that we would need armed police officers.
[speaker001:] And er... Superintendent what did you do then?
[Michael:] It is necessary... I had come to that view for me, at that time it was necessary for me to contact one of the duty Chief Officers... and on this occasion it was the Assistant Chief Constable Mr, so I made contact with him.
[speaker001:] A and what did you tell, ask him?
[Michael:] Well I gave him all the information that had been given to me... and we discussed between us... various options that were open to us.... At the conclusion of which... we were both of the view that an armed police operation was necessary... and he therefore authorised armed police officers to be used and I was to command the incident.
[speaker001:] Can you remember roughly what time on the fourth that conversation took place?
[Michael:] That was at seven fifty P M.
[speaker001:] You said that you were in operational control. Does it follow, if it's not an obvious question. You had overall control of the further implementation of this operation?
[Michael:] Yes sir, that's correct.
[speaker001:] So responsibility was in your hands?
[Michael:] From that moment it was my responsibility.
[speaker001:] Please tell the jury, on a sort of general point here, when you were in charge of an armed raid, what are the considerations?
[Michael:] Well, the consideration first of all, is the safety to the public.... er... the next consideration is the safety of the police officers and then we also take into account that in this priority the the safety of the er the criminal and... an armed operation would not be taken if... it was possible to achieve the objective... er in some other way. But ultimately it is what is the safest option that I would have to go for.
[speaker001:] Who was to be in... in control of the tactics to be used for the operation?
[Michael:] Operational er... commanders of incidents erm have a, what is called a firearms tactical advisor, er a highly trained officer who is made available to people in the position that I then found myself, er in order that they can advise as to the tactics to follow and my tactical advisor on this occasion was er Sergeant.
[speaker001:] Is Sergeant someone you have worked with before?
[Michael:] On a number of occasions yes.
[speaker001:] H how did you view the prospect of working with Sergeant?
[Michael:] I I regarded him as a a professional, highly trained officer... er confidence in his judgement.
[speaker001:] Following the decision to mount the operation on the evening of the fourth of December, er did you have any further involvement indeed, as of that evening?
[Michael:] Yes... erm I had, I then actually went to the police station... to see if... any further information was to hand, er I spoke again to Inspector... erm... to ask if there was any further information he could give me.... He said that his assessment, the telephonist's assessment of the call was that that he was genuine. He added at this time that the further information was that the occupants of the flat at we were frightened of I also.
[Drake:] He had... what did you say?... He thought they were frightened or... the telephonist or what?