IT is now Day 45 and you might have thought that the seemingly
never-ending Guinness trial would have long since lost any entertainment
value.
But with the prosecution still in full flow, and with the hearing of
Mr Ernest Saunders, Guinness chairman and chief executive during the
bitter takeover battle for the Distillers group, and three others,
likely to continue well into the autumn, Mr Justice Henry works hard at
bringing out whatever humour there is to be found.
He invites auditor Mr Howard Hughes of Price Waterhouse to hypothesise
on large payments made to individuals.
Suppose a payment of #350,000 had been made to say . . . a soothsayer
or astrologer, and the managing director of the company could authorise
such a payment, would that be the end of the matter as far as you are
concerned? Soothsayer? Astrologer?
Aptly named for a trial involving high finance, Howard Hughes will
have none of that. Even though the sum might be small in relation to the
total cost of a takeover he would want to know what the payment was for,
certainly to this type of individual.
If he suspected that there might be a fraud involved, and he was not
suggesting that was the situation in the current hearing, he would want
to speak to somebody else in the company, maybe even the board.
First, however, he would take legal advice.
''Why would you do that?'' the Judge wanted to know. ''After all you
are the auditor and all a lawyer would tell you was that you had
authority.''
It appears that Mr Hughes is a cautious man and would speak to his
lawyer to confirm something he already knew. It was a step that met with
the full approval of the prosecuting counsel. ''Far be it for me to
dissuade you from taking legal advice''.
This may not be the stuff that would pull them in at the London
Palladium, but here in Court No.2 at Southwark Crown Court it does bring
some light relief as the evidence unfolds at considerable length.
Mind you, having said that, it is not pulling in the crowds here
either.
Way back at the beginning of the trial the public chairs were all
taken up, as too were the press seats (they don't have benches in this
courtroom -- renovated at considerable expense to accommodate this
unusual trial). Now there are only five people in the public area. And
in the press area just four journalists stick it out.
At the beginning it became a ritual for Mr Saunders to share a jape
with reporters before the daily proceedings got underway. He will still
tell them a joke or two, but it is now no longer on such a regular
basis. Nevertheless when a strange face, such as mine, suddenly appears
he does take notice.
He is still taking notes of the evidence, but they are not as copious
as way back in February. Every so often he scribbles with a plastic
ballpoint on a foolscap notebook. A very large black briefcase, or a
small suitcase (it is difficult to tell which) full of documents is at
the side of his desk. There is no longer a dock in this courtroom. All
of the accused sit behind desks, albeit modest compared with those to
which they are accustomed.
His fellow accused, Gerald Ronson, uses a much more expensive gold and
black pen, but he is not so interested in the court proceedings. He
spends his day reading and writing business documents.
At the other end of the room sit the jury, well away from the
defendants, press, and public.
You have to admire them. As they listen to the witnesses there is not
the slightest sign of boredom from these eight men and four women good
and true who must by now be close buddies.
Juries at the best of times do a remarkable job, but words cannot
describe the heroics of this lot. The male jury members are in shirt
sleeves.
Just behind the court, tourists sunbathe on the Thames riverside walk
with views of Tower Bridge and HMS Belfast. While the jury soak-in
words, the tourists soak-in pints of bitter.
Given a choice, few of us would have little doubt where we would
rather be.
Even Mr Saunders' eminent and much admired brief -- Dick Ferguson, QC,
the only barrister qualified to practise in England, Wales, and Northern
Ireland -- would probably prefer to be enjoying his favourite beverage
(would you believe it is Guinness?) with the tourists.
This trial is a lawyer's dream. It looks certain to go down in the
Guinness Book of records as the longest-ever in this country. At an
estimate of #30,000 a day it is thought the final bill will be more than
#30m.
When it finally does reach a conclusion, Mr Saunders faces the
prospect of a second -- equally long -- trial also connected with the
takeover.
While the rest of Britain may well have forgotten about this trial,
Southwark Crown Court is now very central to his life.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article