Guilty One (35 page)

‘Well, sometimes they do play there, but I wouldn’t say it’s popular, no. Because it’s so overgrown, it’s a bit too wild for some of the kids. Quite often there are insects and nettles and such …’

‘My goodness, it sounds to me like a difficult area to reach, even if you were a child?’

‘To some extent. You have to push branches out of the way, maybe get yourself a bit dirty. Most kids don’t mind that though.’

‘So would you say it took you, what … ten minutes to reach the tree house and the victim’s body?’

‘No, less than a minute.’

‘Less than a minute? For a grown man to push through all this greenery?’

‘Yes, I would say so.’

‘So it is
not the case
that this area of the park is accessible only to children?’

‘No, we couldn’t have that. We supervise all the play and so we need to be able to get into all the corners, in case kids are in trouble.’

‘Might it even be the case that some children would have difficulty reaching the house, possibly if they lacked the strength to hold the branches back?’

‘Well, yes, that might be the case, but most of the children just
crawl in under the trees. An adult would have to push the trees back.’

‘Thank you, Mr Cairns, nothing further.’

After the break, Daniel noted Kenneth Croll sitting far back in his chair, glaring at Sebastian. The boy turned away from his father, looking down at the table, as if shamed. Daniel had found a word-search in one of the newspapers that had been left in the common room. He placed it in front of Sebastian, turning to glance and nod at Croll.

Sebastian dipped his head and took the lid off his pen and began to circle the words, intent. Daniel observed the boy’s fragile neck: the nape with its tapering baby hairs. He had watched grown men weep at their trials and wondered what strength allowed Sebastian to maintain such concentration and composure.

The video screens were being checked. Madeline Stokes was in tears. Her face was white and twisted, and Daniel had to look away. He had seen their family liaison officer explaining something to them during the break. Mr Stokes had been nodding, his face dark. Daniel could guess what they were being told. The pathologist, police witnesses and forensic scientists were next to be called. The solicitor would have explained that the photographs of the body were all necessary and that they needed to be projected in order to highlight details, but that the parents did not have to remain in court. Possibly Mr Stokes had identified his son’s body: confirming a birthmark on the shoulder, or the shape of Ben’s feet.

Now he did not turn to comfort his wife as she cried, or pass her
a handkerchief when she opened her handbag in search of a tissue. Only his eyes belied his pain; they searched the courtroom, every corner, every face, as if silently asking
why.

‘Are they going to show a movie?’ asked Sebastian.

‘No, they’ll be showing some pictures of …’ Daniel stopped himself from saying
the body,
remembering Sebastian’s fascination. ‘The other side’s lawyers will have some experts to explain what they think happened to the victim. I expect they’ll want to point things out on the screen …’

Sebastian smiled and nodded, put the lid on his pen and clasped his hands. It was as if a show was about to begin.

The afternoon began with police evidence: photographs of the child’s body, found flat on his back, arms at his sides. Sergeant Turner, who had interviewed Sebastian, went into the witness box. Footage was shown of Sebastian being questioned – refusing to admit that he had hurt Ben in any way. Jones took the rest of the afternoon to question Sergeant Turner, while playing footage of Sebastian talking about the blood on his clothes, and breaking down in tears. Jones also lingered over Sebastian’s bravado in the face of questioning and his logical explanations for the forensic evidence being on his person. The jury seemed to be left with the impression that Sebastian was clever and manipulative beyond his years.

It was the next morning before Irene was able to properly cross-examine the police sergeant. The court seemed heavier and more quiet than usual, as if everyone was still shocked by the sight of the young boy sobbing in police custody from the day before. He had seemed so small on the tapes.

‘Sergeant,
I’d like to ask you a few questions about Mr Rankine’s statement, if that’s OK?’ Irene began.

‘Of course,’ said the sergeant. Under the bright courtroom lighting, his face seemed red, almost angry, yet he smiled at Irene.

‘We have heard from the pathologist that the victim could have been attacked any time on the afternoon of 8 August … four, five, even nearer six o’clock. Mr Rankine stated that he saw a person in a pale blue or white top seemingly attacking the victim around three thirty or four in the afternoon. What did you do to confirm the identity of this white attacker?’

‘A white top belonging to the defendant has been submitted into evidence. The witness seemed confident that he saw a boy matching the description of the defendant earlier in the day – which the defendant admits – and then later on.’

‘I see,’ said Irene, turning and raising her hand to the jury. ‘But of course!’ She turned to face the sergeant. ‘Your defendant had a white top and admits squabbling with the victim around two. No need for you to do anything further. No need to investigate whether or not there was another attacker, possibly an adult in a
pale blue top …’

‘Miss Clarke,’ said Baron, with another crumpled smile, ‘do you intend to pose a question to the witness?’

‘Yes, m’lord. Sergeant, did the witness become convinced he saw a child in a white top because your colleagues suggested that you had someone of that description in custody?’

‘Certainly not!’

‘Miss Clarke, I would have expected better from a young QC,’ chastised the judge.

Daniel glanced at Irene but she was undaunted. She had a tilt to her chin as if in challenge.

‘Sergeant
Turner,’ she continued, ‘Mr Rankine has admitted in court that he may in fact have seen an adult wearing a blue or white top. Regardless of whether the defendant owned a white top, can you tell us what you did to trace this sighting of someone attacking the victim late in the afternoon at a time when my client has an alibi?’

‘We did examine CCTV footage, but could not confirm anyone in the playground at the time … in fact for the entire afternoon and early evening.’

‘Does that mean that a pale-blue-shirted adult did not attack the victim that afternoon?’

‘No, nor does it prove that your client did not attack the victim that afternoon.’

‘And why is that?’

Sergeant Turner coughed. ‘Well, the TV cameras were mainly aimed at the surrounding streets during the afternoon and not turned on the park for sufficient time to allow a sighting … Basically the attack was not on camera, neither was the fight the boys had earlier, to which the defendant has already admitted.’

‘How convenient.’ Again Irene turned to the jury. ‘The cameras were not pointed at the park in the afternoon, a witness spots a white- or pale-blue-shirted person attacking the victim, you have a child in custody who owns a white shirt, so that’s that …’

‘A white shirt marked with the victim’s blood,’ said Sergeant Turner, interrupting her, raising his voice.

Daniel felt the courtroom bristle as Irene again tilted her chin to the attack.

‘When the CCTV footage proved useless, what else did you do to find the late afternoon attacker?’

‘As
I said, forensic evidence convinced us that we had our man.’ Turner paused and seemed to blush, as if in recognition of the inappropriateness of his language.

‘You had your man,’
repeated Irene. ‘I see. You had a very small boy in custody, and a witness who told you that he saw someone in a pale blue or white top attacking the victim around four o’clock …’

Again Turner interrupted Irene. ‘The witness said he saw
a boy
… the same boy from the afternoon.’

Daniel could sense that the jury were displeased by the sergeant shouting at Irene.

‘I see, so you had a match …’ Irene turned to the witness and paused.

‘We didn’t fit him up, he fitted the description.’ Turner’s face was now very red.

‘What if I was to tell you that Mr Rankine testified to being myopic, and that he now considers he may have seen an adult that afternoon, would you still consider that you had a match?’

‘Yes, the forensic evidence speaks for itself.’

‘I would say your lack of police work speaks for itself. If there is
a chance
that the witness did see an adult attack the victim, do you not consider it reasonable to do everything in your powers to locate this person?’

‘We conducted a thorough investigation. The defendant matched the description given by the witness, and was later found to have the victim’s blood on his clothes.’

‘Job done, I see,’ said Irene, raising her eyes to the jury and sitting down.

Baron lowered his glasses on his nose to stare critically at Irene before excusing the witness, but said nothing.

Daniel
noticed that she was breathing hard when she sat down. He watched the gentle swell of her chest. He stared at her for a few moments hoping that she would turn to him, but she did not.

In the afternoon, scenes of crime officers then testified to the evidence that had been recovered from the crime scene: the brick and blood-soaked foliage.

‘Let us be
very
clear,’ Irene said in cross-examination. ‘You did not find
a single fingerprint
at the crime scene?’

‘Well, we found some partial prints but these were not identifiable.’

‘To clarify, you did not find a single viable fingerprint at the crime scene?’

‘Correct.’

‘What about on the murder weapon? Did you get a print from the brick?’

‘No, but that is not surprising considering the nature of the surface …’

‘I will thank you to answer yes or no.’

‘No.’

After the scenes of crime officer left the stand, there was a break and then the Crown’s expert forensic scientist was called: Harry Watson.

Jones stood up and asked Watson to confirm his name and title and state his qualifications. Watson listed them: Bachelor of Arts from Nottingham, a chartered biologist and a member of the Institute of Biology. He had attended basic and advanced bloodstain pattern analysis courses held in the United States of America
and was a member of the International Association of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts. Watson described his experience as being mainly in the area of biological aspects of forensic science, such as body fluids, hairs and fibres.

Daniel could sense that Sebastian was bored. It had been a long afternoon, but this evidence was key to the Crown’s case and Daniel was hoping that Irene would be able to undermine it.

‘Which particular items did you analyse?’ Jones asked.

‘Mainly the clothes of the victim and the clothes of the defendant.’ Watson was about fifty and filled out his suit. He sat rigid, with tight lips as he waited on the next question.

‘And what did you find?’

‘The defendant’s jeans were taken into evidence on a search of the home. A concentration of fibres was found on the inner thigh area of the jeans. The fibres were positively matched with fibres from the trousers of the victim. Blood spatter was also identified on the defendant’s shoes, jeans and T-shirt. This blood was positively identified as belonging to the victim.’

‘How would you describe the blood pattern found on the defendant’s clothes?’

‘The stains found on the T-shirt were expirated blood – that’s blood blown out of the nose, mouth or a wound as a result of air pressure which is the propelling force.’

‘What sort of injuries to a victim would cause this kind of blood spatter on the defendant?’

‘The blood spatter is consistent with facial trauma – a violent assault to the face or nose, with the victim then blowing blood on to the attacker.’

Shocked murmurs rippled through the courtroom.

‘So Sebastian Croll was spattered with the victim’s expirated blood. Was
there anything else about the blood on the defendant’s clothes which indicated that he had been involved in a violent incident with the deceased?’

‘In addition to the expirated blood found on the defendant’s T-shirt there was contact staining on the jeans and shoes, which suggested that the defendant had been in close proximity to the deceased at the time of the fatal assault. There was also a small amount of blood on the sole of the defendant’s shoe.’

‘What might the blood on the sole indicate?’

‘Well, this may have occurred as a result of standing in the victim’s blood, after the assault had taken place.’

‘Was there any forensic evidence which suggested that the violent incident had taken place where the body was discovered?’

‘Yes, the soiling on the knees of the defendant’s jeans and the bottom area of the victim’s trousers was consistent with the leaves and dirt found at the crime scene.’

‘Was any other biological material from the victim recovered from the defendant?’

‘Well, yes, the defendant’s skin was found under the victim’s fingernails and there were scratches on the defendant’s arms and neck.’

‘So Ben had tried to fight Sebastian off and scratched him in the process?’

‘That is how it appeared.’

Gordon Jones took his seat, as Irene Clarke rose.

‘Mr Watson,’ said Irene, not looking at the witness but instead consulting her notes, ‘when did you join the Home Office Forensic Science Service?’

Mr Watson
straightened his tie then replied: ‘Just over thirty years ago.’

‘Thirty years. My! Quite a wealth of experience. You joined in 1979, is that correct?’

‘Yes.’

‘And in those thirty-one years of service, can you tell us how many cases you worked on?’

‘I have no way to tell without checking my records.’

‘Estimate for us – what would it be: thirty, a hundred, more than five hundred – how many, roughly?’

Irene was leaning forward on her lectern, shoulders near her ears. Daniel thought she looked like a girl leaning out of a window watching a parade.