A Matter for the Jury (23 page)

‘He is talking to Andrew Pilkington outside. I tried to get him to see Cottage, but nothing doing. He said he would see him later.'

Barratt shook his head. ‘He doesn't like talking to clients during a trial. He says it breaks his concentration. He will be as good as his word – he will go to see him later.' Seeing Ben's look, he smiled. ‘Don't worry. You will get used to it.'

Before he could reply, Philip Eaves called for silence and asked whether everyone was ready for the judge to make his entrance. Mr Justice Hardcastle entered court
in his red robes, flanked by the High Sheriff and the chaplain – another relic of the assize. They would quietly disappear after lunch, by which time the real work of the assize would have begun.

32

Billy Cottage's case
was called on just after 11.15. A jury panel had been assembled and was waiting outside Court 1. Martin Hardcastle had asked that they remain outside until he had addressed the judge on a point of law. This was it, Ben thought. The battle for the life of Billy Cottage begins here.

‘My Lord, before the jury is sworn,' Martin said, rising to his feet, ‘there is a point of law I must raise, and it is one which must be dealt with now, as a preliminary point.'

‘Yes, Mr Hardcastle?'

‘My Lord, your Lordship has seen the indictment. The Crown proposes to try William Cottage for capital murder, the allegation being that he murdered Frank Gilliam in the course or furtherance of theft. While there is some evidence that whoever attacked Frank Gilliam later stole a gold cross and chain from Jennifer Doyce, it is the Crown's case that Cottage raped Jennifer Doyce, and that he killed Frank Gilliam to facilitate that crime. Moreover, I do not think my learned friend will dispute that the evidence he proposes to call will show that Frank Gilliam was already dead by the time the attacker, whoever he was, stole the cross and chain. The killing could not, therefore, have been in the course or furtherance of the theft; and it is clear that he stole from Jennifer Doyce, not from Frank Gilliam. I invite your Lordship to direct the Crown to prefer an indictment which
alleges non-capital murder, and to quash the present indictment.'

Mr Justice Lancaster had been listening intently, scribbling notes as Hardcastle spoke. Now, he looked up.

‘But Mr Hardcastle, it will surely be a matter for the jury whether they find that the murder was committed in the course or furtherance of theft. If they are not sure of that they will convict, if at all, only of non-capital murder. They are entitled to return that alternative verdict, are they not?'

‘They are, my Lord.'

‘Then, it would seem to me that your application is premature.'

‘My Lord, with respect, no. This is a case where it would not be possible for a jury, properly directed, to return a verdict of capital murder. The evidence does not allow it.
I submit that your Lordship would be obliged to withdraw the question of capital murder from them at the close of the prosecution case. Nothing but prejudice to Mr Cottage can result from allowing them to consider it until that point, and then have it withdrawn from them on what may seem to them to be technical grounds. The right course is to deal with the matter now, and withdraw that question before the trial begins.'

The judge nodded.

‘I see. Yes, thank you, Mr Hardcastle. Mr Pilkington, what do you say about that?'

‘My Lord, in my submission, a jury, properly directed,
would be fully entitled to convict of capital murder. Grateful as I am to my learned friend for telling me what the Crown's case is, perhaps I may be permitted to explain that to your Lordship myself?'

Both the judge and Hardcastle smiled.

‘My Lord, I do propose to adduce evidence that William Cottage raped Jennifer Doyce. I do contend that he killed Frank Gilliam to facilitate that crime. But I do not concede that the rape was the only purpose in his mind on that night. Indeed, the evidence shows that Cottage also stole the gold cross and chain she was wearing…'

‘Mr Hardcastle says that he stole it from her, not from Frank Gilliam, the person he killed.'

‘With respect, my Lord,' Pilkington replied at once, ‘that makes
no difference at all. I am sure your Lordship is familiar with section 5(5)(e) of the Homicide Act 1957, to be found in chapter twelve of
Archbold
, which provides that:
“theft includes any offence which involves stealing or is done with intent to steal”.
There is no suggestion that the person who is killed must be the victim of the theft. Take, for example, a case in which a bank robber kills a security guard in the course of a robbery. The robber is not stealing from the guard, he is stealing from the bank. But surely my learned friend would not argue that a charge of capital murder would be misconceived under the Act? It is the very mischief Parliament had in mind when the Act was passed and the categories of capital murder were defined.'

Mr Justice Lancaster was nodding.

‘Will the evidence show that Frank Gilliam was dead before the cross and chain was stolen?'

Pilkington hesitated.

‘My Lord, we cannot say exactly at what time Frank Gilliam died. But I am prepared to accept that the jury could very properly draw that conclusion, and I would not seek to resist it. Nonetheless, it is also open to the jury to conclude that the killing of Frank Gilliam facilitated whatever offences Cottage intended to commit, or did commit, on that evening, and if they draw that conclusion, the killing was in the course or furtherance of theft. There is no language in the Act which prevents that result. It is a matter for the jury.'

He paused to observe the judge's reaction. Mr Justice Lancaster thought for some time, his head down over his notebook, before looking up again.

‘I am against you, Mr Hardcastle. There is evidence from which the jury could conclude that the killing was in the course or furtherance of theft.
I will direct them carefully about that, and about the alternative open to them. And, of course, let us not forget that before they convict of anything, they must be sure that it was William Cottage who was the attacker.'

Hardcastle stood and bowed.

‘As your Lordship pleases. In that event, may I invite your Lordship to rule that the Crown should not be permitted to adduce evidence of rape? If the underlying crime is really theft, the allegation of rape can have no effect but to prejudice the jury against him.'

Pilkington leapt to his feet.

‘My Lord, I have already made it clear that the Crown does not suggest that the theft was the only…'

But the judge was holding up a hand.

‘Mr Hardcastle, I am rather surprised by your submission. It sounds rather macabre, but is it not in Cottage's interest to have the jury focus on the rape, rather than the theft?'

Hardcastle smiled broadly.

‘I don't press the point, my Lord,' he conceded.

‘Very well,' the judge said. ‘Let's proceed.'

Throughout this exchange Billy Cottage had sat impassively in the dock, but now Philip Eaves ordered him to stand.

‘William Cottage, you are charged in this indictment with capital murder. The particulars of the offence are that you, on the night of the 25 to the 26 of January 1964, in the County of Huntingdon, murdered Frank Gilliam, and the murder was in the course or furtherance of theft. How say you? Are you guilty or not guilty?'

Billy looked around the court before replying.

‘Not guilty.'

Martin Hardcastle had already decided that, unless his professional instincts literally screamed otherwise, he would not exercise any peremptory challenges. This would be a trial about the merits of the case, not about lawyers' games. The defence would accept the first twelve citizens selected at random and trust them to do their duty. The result was an all-male jury, but with three generations represented and with dress varying between the most formal business suits and sports jackets with grey slacks. Running an experienced eye over them, Martin concluded that they were as good as he was likely to get.

33

Mr Justice Lancaster
nodded in Andrew's direction.

‘Yes, Mr Pilkington.'

Without undue haste Andrew placed his notebook on his podium and turned slightly to his left to face the jury.

‘Much obliged, my Lord. May it please your Lordship, members of the jury, I appear for the Crown in this matter. My learned friends Mr Hardcastle and Mr Schroeder appear for the accused, William Cottage.'

Hardcastle remained staring fixedly ahead. Ben, however, turned slightly and gave an almost imperceptible nod of the head in the direction of the jury.

‘Mr Cottage is the man seated in the dock at the back of the court.'

The jury glanced nervously to their right. Billy Cottage sat motionless beside the prison officer, his eyes apparently fixed on the floor of the dock.

‘You already know, members of the jury, that the accused is charged with capital murder. His Lordship will direct you as to the law later in the trial but, with his leave, I will make it clear now that it is no part of your duty to consider the consequences of your verdict. That is a matter for the law. Your duty is to consider the evidence and to say by your verdict whether or not the Crown has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. Under our system of law, no accused has any obligation to prove his innocence. It is always for the Crown to prove his guilt. His Lordship will direct you later in the trial and, with his leave, I make it abundantly clear now that you may not convict Mr Cottage unless the evidence proves his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Crown contends that the evidence does so, and does so very clearly, but that is a matter for you to decide.'

Pilkington gestured to Paul, who was sitting quietly but attentively beside Philip Eaves.

‘With the usher's assistance, I would like to provide you with two documents. The first is the indictment, which is the formal statement of the charge against the accused and which you have already heard read to you by the learned clerk of assize. The second has two pages, and I am grateful to my learned friends for their agreement that you may have this exhibit now, so that you can see the various places to which I shall refer during my opening speech. The first page is an Ordnance Survey map, showing the town of St Ives and the section of the Great Ouse river between St Ives and Holywell Fen, which lies about a mile to the east of St Ives. The second page is a street plan of the centre of St Ives. There will be one copy of each document between two.' He turned briefly towards the bench. ‘My Lord, the map and street plan will be Exhibit One.'

‘Yes,' the judge replied.

Paul briskly distributed the documents and resumed his seat.

‘If you will look at the indictment with me,' Andrew continued, ‘you will see that it alleges that the murder of Frank Gilliam occurred during the night of the 25-26 of January of this year. It occurred at Holywell Fen in the County of Huntingdon.'

He paused for a sip of water.

‘Members of the jury, you will hear from Charles Edwards, the licensee of the Oliver Cromwell public house in Wellington Street in St Ives, that a young couple came into the pub during the evening of Saturday 25 January. Mr Edwards noticed them because the Oliver Cromwell is a mainly male establishment, and it was rather unusual for young women to be drinking there. He was able to recognise them later from photographs shown to him by the police. The man was Frank Gilliam. Frank was twenty-three and he was training to be a bank manager. The young woman was his girlfriend, Jennifer Doyce. Jennifer survived the events of that night, and you will hear evidence from her either tomorrow, or the day after tomorrow. But she was badly beaten, she was raped, and you will hear that she is very lucky to be alive. You will see, when she gives evidence, the effect her ordeal has had on her. Jennifer Doyce is twenty-one years of age and, before that night, was training to be a librarian here in Huntingdon.'

‘Members of the jury, the accused, William Cottage, was employed by Mr Edwards as a part-time barman, and he was working at the pub on the night of the 25
of January while Frank and Jennifer were there. His full-time daytime employment was as the lock keeper on the river at Fenstanton, but he worked at the Oliver Cromwell at night to earn some extra cash.'

Andrew paused to turn and glance briefly at Cottage, drawing the jury's eyes with him.

‘Frank and Jennifer had plans for that night. They were going to walk the mile or so along the river to Holywell Fen. If you will look with me at the St Ives street plan, you will see that Wellington Street ends at its junction with Priory Road.'

He waited for the members of the jury to spread their plans out in front of them.

‘You will see the Oliver Cromwell marked on the plan with the letter A. If you turn left on leaving the pub and walk to Priory Road you will come to a small corner shop. It is marked with the letter B. The shop is the last building on Priory Road, and if you continue you will come to a gate with a turnstile, which leads into the meadow. The gate is marked with the letter C. Once you pass through the gate, you are free to walk along the bank of the river towards the Fen. If you look at the Ordnance Survey map, you will see the Fen marked with the letter D.'

Andrew looked up from his notes to smile at the jury.

‘Members of the jury, at first blush it may seem strange that Frank and Jennifer were going to walk almost a mile to Holywell Fen along the river late on a bitterly cold night. But there is no mystery about it. They were in love. They wanted some solitude to be together, and Holywell Fen offered them that opportunity, because moored by the river at the Fen is a houseboat called the
Rosemary D
. The boat belongs to a couple called Douglas. Mr and Mrs Douglas abandoned her quite some time ago when they had occasion to leave the country rather suddenly. When they did, they left behind all her fixtures and fittings and all her domestic contents, leaving her habitable and rather comfortable. You will hear that the
Rosemary D
had become a favourite haunt of courting couples. The boat was not locked, so it was easy to climb on board and enter the living quarters. That is where Frank and Jennifer went when they left the Oliver Cromwell. Jennifer will tell you, quite frankly, that it was their intention to have sexual relations with each other for the first time, and that they had begun to do so before they were attacked.

‘We know that they walked in that direction because, on the way, they stopped briefly at the corner shop, letter B on your plan. The shop was not generally open at that hour, but Mavis Brown, whose father owns the shop, was doing some late-night stock-taking when she saw Frank and Jennifer looking in through the shop window. She opened the shop for them and sold them two packets of Woodbine cigarettes. Members of the jury, police officers later found those two packets in their clothing with three cigarettes missing from each, stubs of two Woodbine cigarettes were found in an ashtray in the sleeping quarters of the
Rosemary D
. Miss Brown was later able to identify Frank and Jennifer from photographs. I will return to Mavis Brown in just a moment, because she provides another important piece of evidence.'

Andrew paused and sipped more water.

‘William Cottage left the Oliver Cromwell shortly after Frank and Jennifer, even though his evening shift had not actually finished. It is the Crown's case that he followed the couple as they walked towards the
Rosemary D
. It would not have been difficult to follow without being seen. They had left the street lights of St Ives behind. There might have been some moonlight, but it was a damp, cloudy night, probably quite dark. The Crown say that William Cottage followed Frank and Jennifer all the way to Holywell Fen. He waited until they were aboard the
Rosemary D
, and distracted by their passion for each other.'

Andrew again gestured to Paul.

‘Members of the jury, I will now show you another document. Again, I am grateful to my learned friends for indicating that they have no objection. This, with your Lordship's leave, will be Exhibit Two.'

‘Yes,' the judge said.

Paul walked across to Andrew, took the copies with him and distributed them to the jury.

‘Members of the jury, again, one between two. This is a floor plan of the
Rosemary D
. You will see that as you board her, you have the forward deck, and then to your right a door. If you go through that door, you are in the living quarters, with a small kitchen, a lounge area and a toilet. The living quarters are marked A on the plan. Then, if you make your way further aft, you walk through a narrow door into the sleeping quarters, marked B on the plan.'

Andrew allowed the jury to take in the other details shown on the plan while he refilled his water glass from a carafe.

‘I am now going to jump ahead somewhat. You will notice, members of the jury, that the plan also has some shapes marked on it. These shapes reflect what was found on the morning of Monday 27 January. At about 8.30 on that morning, a man called Archie Knights, a retired Army officer, was walking his dog along the river bank by the Fen, as he often does at that time of day. Mr Knights will tell you that he noticed something out of place, that the door leading to the living quarters was ajar. He decided to investigate. He will tell you that what he found shocked him. It was the scene of a frenzied, violent attack. He hurried to the nearest phone and called the police. Shortly afterwards two officers, PC Willis and PC Hawthorne arrived, and also observed the scene. Frank Gilliam was lying on the floor by the side of the bed. The position of his body is illustrated by shape F. He was dead. You will hear from the pathologist who performed the autopsy that he died from a fracture of the skull and internal bleeding resulting from massive head injuries. The evidence will be that those injuries were caused by repeated blows from a large and heavy blunt instrument. Lying on the bed on her back was the apparently lifeless body of Jennifer Doyce. She had also suffered severe head trauma, almost certainly inflicted by means of the same weapon. Her dress had been pulled up and her underwear pulled down, and there were injuries to her genital area which suggested that she had been violently raped.'

Andrew saw the jury tightening their lips, and paused to allow them to breathe under cover of drinking some water.

‘Mr Knights had thought that Jennifer was also dead, so he had reported two deaths to the police. But when PC Willis looked at Jennifer more closely, he noticed a slight movement of her eyelids, and he realised that she was still alive. She was taken to Addenbrookes Hospital, where she underwent surgery, and made what her doctors say has been an almost miraculous recovery. You may think, members of the jury, that she may well owe her life to PC Willis's attention to detail and quick thinking. During the course of the investigation, the police sent frogmen to dive in the river alongside the boat, just in case the assailant had thrown his weapon overboard, and in due course, the divers recovered a heavy metal winch handle, which would have been kept on the forward deck of the
Rosemary D
. When the winch handle was tested, it was found to be stained with blood matching the groups of Frank's blood and of Jennifer's; group A for Jennifer, group O for Frank. The Crown say that this was the murder weapon. You will see the winch handle later in the trial.'

‘It is the Crown's case, members of the jury, that the man who murdered Frank Gilliam, and who raped and viciously assaulted Jennifer Doyce, was this accused, William Cottage. Why do we say that? We say that there are three chains of evidence that put the case beyond any reasonable doubt, indeed beyond any doubt at all.'

‘Firstly, a police scene of crime officer found a fingerprint on a window ledge in the sleeping quarters. The fingerprint was mixed with a small quantity of blood of group A, Jennifer Doyce's blood group. The fingerprint was that of the accused, William Cottage. When interviewed by Detective Superintendent Arnold and Detective Inspector Phillips, Cottage lied to the officers by denying that he had ever been on board the
Rosemary D
.'

‘Secondly, when police officers went to Cottage's home, the lock keeper's house at Fenstanton, to arrest him in connection with this matter, they saw his sister, Eve, wearing a distinctive and quite valuable gold cross and chain, which she claimed had been given to her by her brother, the accused. Members of the jury, that gold cross and chain has been identified by Jennifer Doyce as the one she was wearing when she left home to accompany Frank Gilliam to the
Rosemary D
on the night of the 25 January. She will tell you that she was still wearing it when she boarded the boat. When the police searched the boat, there was no sign of it, but marks on Jennifer's neck suggest that it was taken from her neck during the assault on her. The Crown say that William Cottage stole that cross and chain in addition to assaulting and raping Jennifer Doyce, and that the theft was part of a crime spree in the course and furtherance of which he murdered Frank Gilliam. When interviewed by the police, Cottage said that he had found the cross and chain, but he gave several mutually inconsistent accounts of where and in what circumstances he found it, and I anticipate that you will have no hesitation in concluding that he told the police a pack of lies about it. He had that cross and chain because he took it from Jennifer's body in the course of his violent and frenzied attack on her, and on Frank.