The 'Mr. Asia' case

Press, 26 February 1981, Page 11

The 'Mr. Asia' case

6 No arrest reason’

NZPA Lancaster Police had already decided to arrest a man while he was making a statement as a witness, the “Mr Asia” trial was told yesterday. The detective taking the statement was unaware that the decision had been made to arrest a Londoner, Jack Barclay, the Lancaster Castle Court heard. When police formally arrested him they would not say why and refused him permission to contact anyone, his counsel, Mr Michael Hill, Q.C., said. But another detective denied that his reason for the refusal was “a trot of words signifying nothing.” , Detective Chief Inspector Peter Newhouse also denied that Mr Barclay’s . clothes were removed and he was given a “siren suit” so he would feel as uncomfortable and alone as possible. , He was speaking at the end of the second day of a “trial within a trial” in the drugs conspiracy and murder case, which moved into its seventh week yesterday. In legal argument in the absence bf the jury, Mr Hill is contending that his client

I was dealt with in an unlawful and unfair way almost from his first arrest. Barclay, a chartered accountant, aged 27, is alleged to have worked for companies that laundered money for the syndicate in Britain. According to the prosecution his role was essential to the operation in the United Kingdom of a ring that originated in Australia and New Zealand. . Mr Hill’s argument is likely to run for at least two more days. Yesterday the Court heard first from the Lancashire detective; who arrested Barclay. Constable Michael Needham said that he had not made a statement about the arrest until January this year, 14 months later. It also heard from the station officer at Kensington, which was the London base for Lancashire detectives’ investigating the murder and alleged conspiracy. Sergeant lan Neville said that Barclay did not ask why he was being arrested as Mr Hill repeatedly alleged. The Court heard that before his arrest a three-part “running” witness statement was taken from Barclay by Detective Sergeant John Halsall. In the meantime after consultation with the head of the investigation, Chief Superintendent Ray Rimmer, Mr Needham had been told to arrest Barclay, who was taken to be booked by Mr Neville. The trial judge, Mrs Justice Heilbron, told Mr New-

house that the arrest at that point disturbed her, and she asked why it had happened. “There was a little bit of confusion — pure and simple,” Mr Newhouse said. “There was so much going on at the time.” Mr Hill told Mr Newhouse that the British Criminal Justice Act provided for any person held in custody to have information about his arrest passed on to someone named by him unless it would hinder police inquiries. “How do you justify witholding this right?” Mr Hill asked. "There was so much going on in Lancashire, Scotland and London that we felt if any information got out it might hinder inquiries or lead people to destroy or dispose of any evidence needed,” Mr Newhouse said. “That’s just a trot of words signifying nothing, a standard form of excuse isn’t it?” Mr Hill said. “No,” Mr Newhouse replied. Mr Newhouse confirmed that when Barclay arrived at Chorley police station in Lancashire he was told that his clothes would be taken for forensic examination. They were removed and he was given a plasticisedpaper police issue siren suit, but no forensic examination was carried out on the clothes. “At that stage the intention was to make him feel as uncomfortable and alone as possible, wasn’t it?” Mr Hill said. “No,” Mr Newhouse replied.