The 'Mr Asia' case

Press, 27 February 1981, Page 5

The 'Mr Asia' case

‘Bullied by detective, thrown across room’

jqZPA Lancaster A Lancashire detective "bullied a defendant whose statements were devised by police, it was alleged at the •‘Mr Asia” trial yesterday. The defendant was reduced to tears after being thrown across a room .and hit 'by the detective, the Court was told. After the Londoner, Jack Barclay, was threatened with '’further violence, he allegedly said to police: “Why don t you believe what I’m - saying?” , ivr ■ Barclay’s counsel, Mr Michael Hill, Q.C., alleged ■that, the first of two statements was a'distorted amalgam' of things said by his client. He suggested that the violence occurred before the second statement, in which words put into Barclay s mouth had been distilled 'from other defendants’ interviews. . Detectives who gave evidence yesterday denied offering any violence at any 'time or taking .any statement incorrectly. Mr Hill was speaking on the third day of ’ a “trial within 'a trial” m the absence, of-the jury in which he is contending that evidence was taken from Barclay in an unlawful and unfair way. 4 • A chartered accountant, aged 37, Barclay is alleged to have been an essential member of the drugs conspiracy in Britain, carried out by a ring that originated . in Australia and New Zeaj . He was interviewed by f Lancashire detectives, on No-?-vember 2 and 3, 19/9. at ; Chorley Police Station 'where

• he and .other suspects were held. Their arrests followed the discovery of the body of an Aucklander, Christopher Martin Johnstone, the man alleged to have been the ring’s South-East Asian drugs buyer. • Mr Hill said that Detective Inspector William Hacking, who took .both statements from Barclay, made it clear that im\ne way or another he was’ going to get what he wanted. “You made it clear that you did not believe the denials,” Mr Hill-said. “You believed the truth was that he was involved. “On more than one.occasion you. told him that what you were prepared to accept was an admission.” Mr Hacking denied this. Mr Hill alleged that when Mr Hacking and Detective Constable Michael Arnold did not get anywhere with -the first statement, Barclay was threatened with involvement in the murder.. “Mr Hacking dictated the answers to a series of questions despite continued denials.” Mr Hill said. “What is written is an amalgam, of things said by Mr Barclay, a distortion of what he .said.” “No sir it was not,” Mr Arnold replied. Barclay Was told that in the end he would have to sign and was refused permission to read the statement. Mr Hill said. “At that time it was clear that he had given up. and he was returned to the ceils,” Mr Hill said.. “No, sir, that was not the case.”' ’ When' the second statement was taken s next day Mr Hacking was accompanied

by Detective Constable Raymond Bell who told the Court that Barclay showed no sign of stress whatsoever during the interview. However, Mr Hill alleged that when taking his client into the interview room, Mr Hacking threw Barclay across the room and then pushed him into a chair. “You hit him five times across the back of the head with your hand and threstened further violence,” he told Mr Hacking. “You said to Mr Bell to go and see if another room was free. You bullied him when Mr Bell was out of the room and had him in “As the result of violence to which you subjected him the suit he was wearing was torn.”

Mr Hacking replied: “He was not subjected to any violence.” Mr Hill said to Mr Bell: “Did you put into Mr Barclay’s mouth things as said by him, those things being distilled from interviews with other defendants?” — “No sir,” Mr Bell replied. The Q.C. contended that Barclay was dressed only in a plasticised-paper siren suit for four days and had nothing on his feet. He alleged that notes said to have been recorded by police during the interview were in fact yset out afterwards. Mr Hill said that on. a number of points in his argument he was looking for a more likely: explanation than that in the police evidence. S “I can’t pretend it’s more conclusive,” he told the trial judge, Mrs Justice Heilbron. His cross-examination continues today.