All language subtitles for Law and Order UK - 3x07 - Anonymous.HDTV.fov.en

In the criminal justice system

the people are represented

by two separate yet equally important
groups -

the police who investigate crime

and the crown prosecutors who
prosecute the offenders.

These are their stories.

Yes! Come on!

Billy. I can hardly hear it.

I'm getting up at six. If I turn it down
any more I might as well turn it off.

There's an idea.

OK.

Stop it! What are you
doing? Stop it!

Billy.
Let me go, let me go.

No, please. Please, no.

Billy, what is it?

You say you weren't on your own.

No, my girlfriend was with me the
whole time. Right.

And you only heard a woman's voice,
yeah?

My Xbox was pretty loud. I only
turned it down after she screamed.

OK. One of our uniform will get some
more details.

Mrs Golofsky owns the building.

Ah, Mrs Golofsky, hello. I'm
Detective Sergeant Brooks.

Did you hear anything? Sorry?

Just trying to find out if you heard
anything at all?

Oh, no, nothing at all.

What about the girl who fell - did
she have a husband or boyfriend?

Oh, no, I never saw her with anyone.

As a matter of fact, I used to think

maybe she was the other way
inclined.

The victim's gone into surgery so we
can't speak to her for a while. OK.

And do you have a spare key for
Stephanie's flat?

Oh, yes. In the key cupboard.

Right, we need to have a look
around.

Do you need a key to get into the
building?

Yes...but you can use the buzzer.
Right.

My nephew put in a new lock in
April.

He's very technical is Alan.

Well, if you fetch that key for us
that would be great

and Anne will look after you. OK?
Thank you.

Right, we've got three old dears that
were fast asleep.

The bloke who found Stephanie said he
was out of the flat

as soon as he heard her fall but
didn't see or hear anyone else.

So the thing is...who did it?

And how did they get out?

You won't make a mess, will you?

She likes to keep everything looking
nice.

Was this her? Oh, yes.

She can look really lovely when she
makes an effort.

Do you know what she does for a
living?

She's a nurse. On the children's
ward.

At Alderman's Hospital. Oh. OK.

Thanks for your help, Mrs Golofsky.
We appreciate it.

Leave it to us now and we'll drop the
key in when we're done. Is that OK?

Oh, right. Thank you.

Ronnie. Yeah.

Look at this. A whole file of emails
all addressed to Stephanie,

starting in the beginning of last
year,

and signed by Giovanni.

I get the impression he was typing
one-handed.

They've tried tracking him, blocking
him, you name it.

Emails just keep coming.

I take it she changed her email address.
Half a dozen times. Made no difference.

She's kept hard copies of
everything.

I guess she didn't want this clogging
up her inbox.

I want to see you in that
little pink cami set tonight.

I'll know you're thinking of me when you
stretch out on your new Ikea mattress.

Then I want you to strip off...

Ugh. I want to wash my hands.

We found these little pink pyjamas
under her pillow

and she bought a mattress from Ikea
when she moved into her new flat.

He knows what toothpaste she uses,
furniture polish, everything.

And he's thought of new uses for most
of them.

Any word from the hospital? She's sedated
until the swelling on her brain goes down.

Any direct threats in here

like, 'I'm coming over to push you
down the stairs'? No.

I want to know who this pervert is.

Did she report these to anyone? Yes,
to a DS Fraser at Northcross CSU.

If someone reports a stalker we
don't just tell them not to worry.

But we have to prioritise according
to threat level.

And this guy's clever. He uses
multiple email addresses

and routes them through anonymous
remailers. Pretty much impossible to track.

When did he start with the threatening
phone calls? About six months ago.

Stephanie was freaked out by the
emails.

Her work put her on day shift so she
didn't have to be out at night.

But she was convinced he was getting
into her flat when she wasn't there.

That's why she moved. That's when he
told her

to stop trying to avoid him or he'd
kill her.

He said he'd go to the hospital and
take out as many people as he could.

When was this? Two weeks ago. That's
when we upgraded her threat level.

And still no leads? Only one.

A few days ago Stephanie got a call
from Ashbridge Prison.

They said a prisoner had asked to
have her mobile

added to his list of allowed
numbers.

Stephanie had never heard of him and
she'd only had that mobile a few weeks.

I made a mistake. It's easily done.
I put a three instead of a five.

Mr Morgan, you gave Stephanie's name
as well as her number.

There's a lot of Stephanies around. Only
one got pushed down the stairs. Yeah?

Well, I've got one hell of an alibi.

It doesn't mean you weren't involved

and it won't look too pretty in
front of the parole board.

Look, you're pissing up the wrong
tree.

A bloke called Lowry asked me to
request a number.

Said he was low on phone credit and
wanted to hook up with some bird.

Very community-spirited of you. He
made it worth my while.

And where is this Lowry now?

Got out last week.

Are we done?

Excuse me. I'm DS Matt Devlin. Do
you know the guy who lives here?

A Russell Lowry. Yeah, I know him.

Do you know where we could find him?
He starts at the Lord Palmerston.

Keeps going till he finds a girl
who's drunk or dumb enough.

Not a fan? Seemed all right at first.
Offered me a cheap deal on his laptop.

Invited me in to take a look and
then puts his hand up my skirt.

And they say romance is dead.

I think that when you feel a
connection with a woman,

you owe it to yourself to follow it
up.

OK, Mr Lowry...what about Stephanie
Blake?

We met in a bar and we clicked.

When was this? It was about a month
ago.

It was a place in town, in Soho.

She gave me her number and I was
interested in exploring the possibility.

So why then didn't you just call
her?

Well, I...had a little local
difficulty.

Remanded for assault in Ashbridge
Prison. Yeah.

It was an unfortunate misunderstanding. The
judge said it didn't merit a custodial sentence.

Why mess around getting Morgan to
request her number?

He was low on smokes but didn't need
his phone credits.

I had cigarettes and a lot of calls to
make so worked out well for the both of us.

Not strictly within the rules though.
No.

But it was a victimless crime.

Do you have a job, Russell?
I'm...between careers right now.

I was up north for a while.

I've only recently relocated to
London.

Did you contact Stephanie Blake when
you got out?

I'm afraid it was a case of out of
sight, out of mind.

Another possibility arose. What can
I say? I like to spread the love.

Life's short, you know.

See? It's in the email.

I like to spread the love
and that's not all I like to spread.

Is this all you have? No forensics,
nothing to link him to the scene?

Nothing on the stairs. No
fingerprints, no trace evidence.

The only DNA on the chain was on the
victim.

But we know Lowry tried to contact Stephanie
from prison whilst hiding his identity

and he recently sold his laptop on
eBay.

We need a reason to hold on to him
while we track down the buyer.

Lowry's neighbour, the one he groped,
might she want to report sexual assault?

Well, she seemed pretty keen to see
the back of him.

Talk to her. It might buy you some
time.

DI Chandler.

Oh, thank you.

Stephanie Blake has regained
consciousness.

Do you recognise this man?

No.

You think he's Giovanni?

He says he met you in a bar in Soho
a couple of months ago.

I don't go to bars. So this isn't
the man that attacked you?

I don't know.

I never saw his face. He grabbed me
from behind and I tried to turn around

but he was too strong.

Oh, darling. It's OK, Mum.

Why don't you take us through what
happened Stephanie?

I went out to take my rubbish down
to the basement...

and he grabbed hold of me at the top
of the stairs.

I didn't notice any rubbish on the
landing.

No, sorry. It was after I'd taken
the rubbish down.

I was coming back up to the flat.

Did he say anything? He said he was
Giovanni.

I started to scream and...

he tried to choke me with the
necklace I was wearing

and then he threw me down the
stairs. Dear God.

Has anyone stood out at all

whose behaviour seemed genuinely
suspicious?

The only name I ever came up with
was Lucas Dutton.

And who's he? We were living in the same
block of flats when the emails started.

Why him?

I'd go to the local supermarket and
he'd be there too

or I'd go to the bank on the corner

and he'd be queuing for the
cashpoint right behind me.

First the emails, then the phone
calls, now he tries to kill me.

Please.

You have to help me.

You have to make him stop.

Lucas Dutton's still living in the
same flats.

He's got no record and he's working
as a hotel porter.

I reckon Lowry's still our main
contender.

I think we've hit a brick wall
there.

Lowry forgot to mention that his
time up north

was spent in Woodberry Prison just
outside Rotherham.

What was he in for? Computer fraud.

Hacking into people's bank accounts,
helping himself.

So he'd know how to send emails that
can't be traced.

He didn't get out till last July which means
he was still banged up when the emails started.

Maybe he got hold of one of them
WiFi phones.

See? I do read the papers.

What, and he spent half a day typing
a four-page email on a phone?

I know prison security's lax but I
think they'd have noticed that.

I wouldn't be so sure.

Matt, you want a bite? No, you're
all right.

So what happened with Lowry's
neighbour then?

Oh...she had him charged with sexual
assault.

He's back in Ashbridge Prison. Good.
At least we know where he is.

It's down to what you get out of Mr
Dutton then, isn't it?

Are you arresting me?

No, we're talking to you. Then I
don't have to answer you.

Can you tell us if you know
Stephanie Blake? No comment.

Mr Dutton, look, all we want to do
is chat.

If we could come in - That'd be a
breach of my human rights. Sorry?

Article 8 European Convention of
Human Rights. The right to privacy.

He knows his stuff. He does. We'll
come back with a warrant. Do that.

Did you notice the camera? Mm. Maybe
he's shooting some home movies.

But whose home? Mm.

I don't think we need a warrant, do
you?

All right.

Seriously, when did you last get a
successful prosecution for online obscenity?

If someone's in a public place you
can take their picture.

You've been filming a woman in her
own flat.

The same flat that Stephanie Blake
lived in. That is voyeurism.

As outlined in Section 67 of the
Sexual Offences Act 2003.

Section 67 applies only if someone
has an expectation of privacy.

If they leave their curtains open
and walk about naked... Come off it.

..this could be interpreted as
consent and then it's not voyeurism.

That's the law. You reckon?

OK. Lucas, where were you at 1am
Tuesday morning?

They can't ask me that.

If this relates to a separate
investigation I require full disclosure.

Someone threw Stephanie Blake down a
flight of stairs.

We know you liked following her
around.

I'll bet you filmed her too.

And now we've got your computer so
we'll find the emails eventually.

I don't know what they mean. We're
here to talk about dirty movies.

You want to talk about assault, we
have to start over.

And you'll have to show me evidence
linking my client to the victim.

Hold that thought.

Weaselly-looking fellow, isn't he?

Yeah, he is.

You think he's the one who did it?

Well, we don't know yet.

Oh, that poor girl. At least they're
letting her home.

Her mother came to collect some
clothes for her.

I had to ask her to empty the bin in
the kitchen.

There was a terrible smell coming
from the flat.

We had rats once, some years ago.

Ohh. I don't want to live through
that again. No. Indeed.

Thank you very much, Mrs Golofsky.
You've been a great help. Thank you.

I thought Stephanie took the rubbish
out. That's what she said.

Right, thanks.

DS Fraser last spoke to Stephanie
the day before the attack.

She told her that the prison lead
looked like a dead end

and she didn't have the resources to
trace the emails.

Not only that, she also said that
the situation would only change

if they felt that Stephanie was in
immediate physical danger.

And the next day she gets pushed
down the stairs.

Forensics checked the locks. No-one
forced it. No-one buzzed anyone in.

And then there's the thing with the
bin. I mean, it's...

It just doesn't add up, Matty.

That's not the only bin in the flat.

I emptied the others. I was going to
do the kitchen one later.

But it just seems a bit odd

that you would leave the kitchen bin,
considering it was so full.

Especially given how clean your flat
is.

It looked to me like you could eat
off the floor. What is this?

Someone throws me down the stairs and all
you care about is what happened to my rubbish.

No, no, we just want to be sure of
the facts, that's all.

You see, in a case like this,
assault,

it's very, very unusual for there to
be no forensic evidence at all.

I don't know. Maybe he was wearing
gloves.

Or maybe he wiped things after he
touched them.

Maybe.

It sounds like you don't believe me.

Look, it's just that we know that DS
Fraser told you

she didn't have the resources to
trace the emails

and that things would only change

if you were seen to be more at risk.

So? So I'm sure that you must have
had patients in the past

that have genuinely needed help...

..but have decided to exaggerate
their symptoms...

so as they're taken more seriously.

You think that's what I'm doing.

You think that I'm exaggerating.

Well, no, I...I think that you feel
scared and isolated

and like no-one's doing anything to
stop this man. Because they're not.

For two years the police have done
nothing.

This man's tormented me with emails
and phone calls

and now he wants to kill me and
still you won't help me.

But...

..did he push you down the stairs?

Was there actually an attacker?

The truth is he's going to kill me.

I'm dead unless you help me

and you don't even believe I need
help.

You must see

that we can't investigate a crime
that hasn't happened.

He's going to kill me.

I get that she was desperate but
that so wasn't the way to go.

You know we should charge her. Yeah,
but she's got enough problems.

We've got enough to charge Dutton
with voyeurism.

With any luck they'll link him back
to the original emails.

Not a total waste of time then.

What happened to the other one? Oh,
Lowry, yeah.

He got out. Solicitor managed to get
the sexual assault charges dismissed.

So he's back spreading the love.

I guess so. I can introduce you, if
you like. I think I'll pass.

Actually, Matt, I need to get a copy
of your report.

What, you want to check my homework?
It's for the hospital lawyers.

They spent a lot of money on extra
security because of Miss Blake.

If she's lying then they'll probably
fire her.

Have you got her contact details?

I can email them. Leave it with me.

Mm, something smells like feet.

I'm broadening your culinary
horizons.

Welcome to the world...

of Korean cuisine.

Look at that.

It's a claw. That's an exotic
delicacy.

I think you need to see this.

Matt.

Oh, my God.

Stephanie Blake.

Beaten and stabbed. Broken neck.

On the phone? The last thing she did
was call 999.

It's Giovanni. It's the
man in the picture.

Oh, no, he's coming in.

What does she mean, the man in the
picture? We showed her Lowry's mug shot.

She couldn't mean Dutton? No, she'd
have used his name.

Anyway, he was in custody at the
time.

Is this all we have?

It's him, James.

Russell Lowry.

We sent her home, two days later he
killed her.

OK.

Find me enough to charge him. That
will be a pleasure.

OK, so, you are
trying to connect me to a murder.

No, we're going to connect you to a
murder.

Oh, really? Well, good luck with
that.

As you can see, I'm a big fan of
classical music.

Especially Mozart.

A lot of copies of Don Giovanni.

Well, you know how it is.

Still trying to find that perfect
one.

They found 25 different recordings
of Mozart's Don Giovanni.

The unrepentant rake. Yes, certainly
appropriate.

Did they manage to track down his
missing laptop?

Yeah, but the guy who bought it reconditions
them to sell on so, apparently, it's no use.

No luck tracing the emails? They've
got someone working on it.

Am I the only one who noticed the
bloody great elephant in the room?

This guy Lowry was in Woodberry when
these emails started.

As far as I'm aware not even Cat C
prisons

allow inmates online computers.

Why do you think we haven't charged
him?

So who are the investigating
officers? Brooks and Devlin.

And how certain are they that Lowry
is our man?

Well, they let him go and a young
woman got killed. They're certain.

Well, you're out on a limb here,
James.

I'm not sure that I would take that
risk in your place.

Call it gut instinct, George.

So what are you and your gut
planning to do?

Send them to Rotherham to see if
they can work out how he did it.

Our philosophy is to give them
practical skills and a sense of pride

so they're able to play a part in
society. Nice theory.

It's more than that. We have a
fully-functioning car repair shop,

courses in joinery and metalwork

as well as further education and
adult learning.

Not to forget the very particular
jewel in our crown.

A professional online marketing
company and training facility.

And Lowry would have had access to
this? Good God no.

He was in for computer fraud. We're
not completely insane.

Any prisoner applying goes through
an exhaustive vetting procedure.

The competition's pretty fierce.

Then, once they're in, all Internet
access is closely monitored.

No, Lowry was in one of the
workshops.

There's no way he ever set foot in
here.

The IT expert confirmed that the early
emails originated from the prison's IP address

but she can't narrow it down to the
marketing company

unless they agree to hand over their
records.

So how was Lowry able to waltz in
and out of this media place,

let alone spend hours online,
without anyone noticing?

Lowry's cellmate, Keith Wilson,
started on the training project

a couple of months after Lowry got
there.

We think he must have been helping
him.

Yeah, I know, it's all still
supposition.

We're going through Lowry's history but all we have
that definitely links him to Stephanie is the 999 call.

Animal rescue.

I beg your pardon? In the two months
before he was arrested for fraud

Lowry worked in a call centre raising
money for an animal rescue organisation.

During that time Stephanie Blake set up a
monthly direct debit to the same organisation.

Guess who signed her up as a donor?

So, they talked on the phone.

Stephanie used to be friendly,
outgoing. Lowry liked what he heard.

Not just that. It means he had her
bank details, address, mobile number.

The guy's a hacker.

And once he had those...he could
find out anything about her.

Right down to what she bought with
her supermarket clubcard points.

Don't you just love technology?

Like I told the police, I've never
heard of this Stephanie Blake.

Why would I be emailing her?

We don't think you were.

In fact...we're pretty sure it was
your cellmate Russell Lowry.

But we think you helped him.

You got him into the media centre
and gave him your pass code.

No. No way. If I did something like
that I'd be thrown off the programme.

That job's my ticket out of here.

I wouldn't risk it for Lowry. I
didn't even like him.

Then what was it, Mr Wilson, bribery
or blackmail?

Trouble is, if you say you're the
only one who ever used that computer...

then that means you must have sent
the emails for him.

You'll be charged with harassment
and aiding and abetting murder. What

You can't be serious?

Are you still convinced Lowry never
touched your PC?

It was only meant to be the once.

Lowry helped Wilson put together the presentation
that got him into the training programme.

So Wilson owed him a favour. Yeah.

Apparently Lowry told him he was
into online dating.

That is one hell of a euphemism.

Didn't anyone notice he wasn't meant
to be there? Oh, it gets better.

The guy running the project had a
problem with his firewall.

Wilson suggested Lowry might be able
to fix it.

Next thing you know, Lowry becomes
unofficial IT support.

The governor turns a blind eye cos
it's cheaper than a professional.

So Lowry comes and goes as he
pleases. Mm-hm.

And he's got access to the entire
prison computer system.

They're lucky all he did was send a
few emails. As far as they know.

Who's defending this? Evelyn
Wyndham.

Oh, God. Queen of the early
dismissal.

The victim, in her state of panic,

is describing a man breaking in to
her flat.

During the call she identifies the
intruder as Giovanni.

And you want to introduce this as
identification of the defendant Mr Lowry.

Yes. Miss Blake had previously been
shown Mr Lowry's photograph

because the police believed he was
the Giovanni who was stalking her.

But she couldn't identify my client.
She said she'd never seen him before.

The point is the police never told
her the name of the man.

As far as she was concerned he was
Giovanni. Spurious speculation.

No, informed reasoning. She only
knew Lowry as Giovanni

so when she used that name to
identify her murderer

it's as if she was saying Russell
Lowry is climbing in my window.

Was she shown photos of any other
suspects? Only Russell Lowry.

She briefly looked at a photo then,
in a state of high emotion,

she saw a man who may or may not
have resembled that photo.

Therefore I maintain the prejudicial
effect

outweighs the probative value of the
evidence. Far from it.

The key phrase here is high emotion.

This is a classic example of res
gestae.

Faced with imminent death there is no
reason to suspect the victim was lying.

Except that she'd lied before.

A week before she died, she threw
herself down the stairs

and told the police Giovanni did it.
There is no conclusive evidence

that she fabricated the attack.

But the police concluded that no
crime had been committed

which demonstrates that Miss Blake

cannot be considered a reliable
witness.

All right.

My ruling is that the tape is
admissible.

But defence should apply to adduce
evidence of the victim's bad character.

Let's give the jury the full
picture.

So the tape's still in. It is but if Lowry's
defence destroys Stephanie's credibility

it's as good as worthless. What about the original
contact through the call centre, the email harassment?

The emails aren't really the
problem.

We can prove he was stalking her
online

but we can't demonstrate a pattern of
escalation leading to murder.

If the first attack had actually happened
it would be different but, as it stands...

He walks? No, we'll get a conviction
for cyberstalking.

But not for murder.

Really unlikely, guys.

They think she was lying on the
tape?

Well, it's... It's more that the
defence can say that the ID's unreliable.

It's difficult when there's no
witness to cross-examine.

You mean because she's dead?

So because he killed her they can
say what they like?

They can tell people that my
daughter was a liar?

And that means her murderer will go
free?

Well, he won't walk away from the
stalking charge.

He destroyed her life.

He made her afraid to step outside
her own front door.

Then she came to you for help...and
he killed her.

She never harmed anyone in her life.

My daughter was not a liar!

He knew that we were onto him.
That's what started the escalation.

He wasn't controlling the game any
more.

If we hadn't brought him in she'd
still be alive.

You didn't have enough evidence to hold
him. We were investigating the wrong crime.

If she hadn't faked her own attack -
Are we sure that she did?

You can't change the facts. It's clear from that
report that you were both in no doubt that she had lied.

That was then, this is now. Oh, no.
Don't even think about it.

It wouldn't hurt if we went back
over the evidence. And then what?

Decide you made a mistake? Let a
guilty conscience to affect your memory?

You go down that route and you not
only destroy your credibility,

you undermine the whole department.

If the alternative is to let Lowry
walk - I don't want to hear it.

Don't forget it was your name on
that report.

You stated, in no uncertain terms,
that Stephanie Blake faked the attack.

You go back on that now and I promise
you that's the end of your career.

I don't hear very well

and I always worry that it might be
one of the girls

needing to get inside quickly.

Of course, yes. So you just...you
buzz them in just in case. Yes.

Do you mind if I take a seat? Oh, no.
Sit down, please do.

Thank you very much. Thank you.

So...what about the night that
Stephanie Blake fell down the stairs?

Maybe someone rang the - Oh, I was
asleep.

It was very late. Of course. I
understand.

But what about earlier on in the
evening, before you went to bed.

Maybe someone rang - Would you have a
biscuit?

Oh, that's great. Thank you very
much.

That's very kind. Yeah. As I was
saying,

maybe...maybe someone rang the bell,

you couldn't quite hear, you thought
it was one of the other girls?

No, I don't think so.

Oh. But there might have been
someone.

Mm.

Oh, yeah. There might have been.

Well, that's good.

Thank you.

Very nice. Mm. Yeah.

OK, just let me be quite clear about
this.

You decided to review your own
investigation.

That's right.

And, based on new evidence,

you now believe Stephanie Blake was
telling the truth about the attack.

Yes, I do.

Ronnie...

the defence saw the report for the
original investigation.

They know you concluded that no
crime was committed. I realise that.

Well, then you must also realise that
doing this will undermine everything

that you and your colleagues have
done in the past two months.

Our interpretation of the evidence
was flawed

and, in light of subsequent events,
I think - That's just my point.

You've got to see the implications.

If police officers rewrite history
with the benefit of hindsight -

In order to get a conviction. Then
what is to stop

every investigating officer with a shaky case
from going back and amending their reports?

I can only look at the case in front
of me

and in this particular case...

..I believe we made a mistake. The
defence won't take your word for it.

They won't have to. I know you want
to put him away.

It's not about that. Come off it,
Ronnie. James, it's not about that.

We interpreted the evidence based on
what we thought we knew.

We jumped to conclusions...and we let
her down.

Are you absolutely convinced you've
got the evidence to back this up?

Yes, I am.

OK, I'll apply to amend the
indictment.

We'll charge Lowry with attempted
murder.

Thank you. Don't thank me yet.

Why is he doing this? Because he
believes it's the right thing to do?

But does he believe that Stephanie
was attacked?

That is not a question we need to
ask. You reckon

If Ronnie's new evidence contradicts
his earlier conclusion

we can re-establish Stephanie's
credibility.

We just accept that he changed his
mind? If he shows us the evidence...

then the rest is his business.

Stephanie Blake's landlady remembers letting
someone into the building at around 7:30.

She wasn't able to hear what the
person said on the intercom

because of her poor hearing so she
assumed it was one of the tenants.

However, having spoken to all of the
tenants

I now conclude that the unknown person
must have been Stephanie's attacker.

And why didn't the landlady mention
this in her original statement?

Well, she hadn't realised the
connection between that event

and the attack so she didn't realise
its importance.

The original police report also
cited

the lack of forensic evidence at the
scene.

Surely that must still be an issue.

Well, there was no forensic evidence
at the murder scene either.

Nonetheless, Stephanie Blake was
still dead.

The attacker was cleverer than we
thought.

Thank you.

Miss Wyndham.

Well, my goodness. This is quite a
turnaround.

As I said, new evidence came to
light.

Yes, yes, which caused you to revise
your conclusions.

And it's just good luck that
revising those conclusions

has strengthened the prosecution's
case against my client.

I'm sorry, was that a question?

Did you reopen the case before or
after we'd applied to adduce evidence

for Miss Blake's bad character?

After. But I fully intended going back
on the investigation since the murder.

Of course. And I'm sure my learned friends
for the Crown were very encouraging.

Choose your words with care, Miss
Wyndham. I intend to, my lord.

Far be it from me to accuse the
opposing counsel of suborning perjury.

DS Brooks, it wasn't just lack of
evidence

that made you think that Miss Blake
had faked the attack, was it?

Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean.

As I understand it, didn't her behaviour acknowledge
the fact that she'd made the whole thing up?

No. Well, the CRIS report said it
did.

When asked if there had been
an attacker

Miss Blake burst into tears and
failed to answer the questions.

Well, this was a young girl that was
terrified

and we were accusing her rather than
helping her.

When you say 'we',

do you mean your partner, DS Devlin?

Yes.

And he agrees with your revised
conclusion?

As far as I know.

Well, does he agree or doesn't he?
Yes or no?

Of course he does. She didn't stalk
and kill herself, did she?

What the hell were you thinking? She
asked my opinion and I gave it to her.

No, you gave his opinion.

You were an inch away from perjury and now
you want to drag your partner down with you.

You could've warned me. I thought it
was best to leave you out of it.

Until you decide to drop him in it.
Look, given new evidence -

New evidence? Some old dear
remembered she answered a buzzer.

It's pretty tenuous. Tenuous? That's
the understatement of the year.

I told you categorically to leave
this alone.

I know. If it were up to me you'd be
suspended by now.

But I've been advised that it would
compromise the department

if we were seen to be covering up a
possible case of negligence.

So consider yourself on gardening
leave until the end of the trial.

Thank you.

Ron.

Why didn't you say what you were
doing?

There's no point both of us being on
gardening leave. You live in a flat.

So, what, it's OK for you to fall on your
sword for the greater good, but not for me?

Matt, you're being overdramatic.

All I did was go back over the
evidence.

That's not evidence. It's finding
stuff that wasn't there.

What did you say to the old girl? It was
her fault, it's a chance to put it right?

You know me better than that. Do I?
We could have gone back together

and found something on Lowry but,
you know, this is ridiculous.

We both look ridiculous. I'll tell
you what's ridiculous.

A girl on a landing having a chat
with a man who isn't even there,

tries to garrotte herself with her
necklace and throws herself downstairs.

That's ridiculous. We both decided
that she faked the attack.

You know that and I know that.

And now, thanks to you and your
one-man crusade,

Lowry is going to walk. I don't
think so. Well, I do.

And I've been called as a witness
for the defence.

And no matter how much I want to see
Lowry go down...

I will not lie under oath, Ron.

Well, I wouldn't expect you to.

DS Devlin is standing by the
original report.

Apparently.

I thought he agreed with DS Brooks.
So did we.

Right. So what now?

John Abbott, one of the hospital
lawyers,

requested a copy of the police
report after the first incident.

They were going to fire Blake if
she'd made it all up.

DS Devlin told me to leave it with
him.

And?

They didn't fire her.

We're sure those were his exact
words?

Abbott takes notes of everything. He basically
gave me a transcript of the conversation.

OK.

Good.

James, are you sure about this?

I refer the court to Exhibit 8,

a printout of the original CRIS
report.

Can you tell me what term you used

to describe the conclusion of the
investigation?

No crime.

Would it be correct to say that if
no crime was committed

then Stephanie Blake must have faked
the attack?

That's one interpretation. I say it's the
only interpretation so I ask you again.

When you filled out the report, was it
your opinion that she faked the attack?

Yes or no?

Yes. And you still stand by that
report?

Yes, I do.

No further questions, my lord.

DS Devlin,

after the original investigation were you
satisfied with the conclusions in your report?

As far as I could be. So you saw no
need to re-examine the evidence?

Not at the time, no. Whereas your
partner, DS Brooks,

became concerned that mistakes may have been
made during the course of the investigation

that may have led you to reach an
incorrect conclusion. Is that right?

DS Brooks wanted to go back over the
evidence to be sure we hadn't missed anything.

But you yourself, you weren't
involved in this process? No.

You didn't reinterview the
witnesses? No.

You didn't compare the original
crime-scene report with that of the murder

and cross-reference for similarities?
I was working on other cases.

So you'd moved on because you felt entirely
confident that you'd reached the right result.

The case was officially closed.

And yet your partner, DS Brooks,

an officer of considerably longer
service

and more experience that yourself,

felt so concerned

that he took it upon himself to
single-handedly reopen the investigation.

Is that correct? Yeah.

Yet you were still entirely
confident.

DS Devlin, did your original
investigation

conclude that Stephanie Blake was
being stalked

by someone using the name Giovanni?

Yes. And did you eventually conclude
that Russell Lowry

and Giovanni were the same person?
Yes, we did.

Did you conclude that Miss Blake was in
lethal and immediate danger from her stalker?

Er, no, no, we... So at what point
did you reach that conclusion?

When you saw Miss Blake lying dead of
stab wounds and a broken neck?

By that point I assume even you,
entirely confident as you were,

must have realised you'd made a
mistake.

During the initial investigation

we found no evidence that an attack
had taken place.

As far as we could tell, at that
point, no crime had been committed.

So, having concluded that, you decided that Stephanie
Blake faced no serious threat from Russell Lowry.

That's right.

And yet...

you told her employers that she faced
a serious threat from Giovanni,

otherwise known as Russell Lowry...
did you not?

Well... Well, yeah. Yeah, I did.

So did you lie?

I felt sorry for her.

I didn't think she should lose her
job.

I'm sorry, DS Devlin, was that a yes,
you lied? Yes.

And are you lying now?

No.

If you lied to Stephanie's employers
to protect her job

perhaps you're lying now to hide your
incompetence.

Incompetence that you're too arrogant to admit
even in the face of new and compelling evidence.

Mr Steel. I'm curious about the
witness's

expedient attitude towards the truth,
my lord.

I have no further questions.

You didn't have to go that far.

I went as far as I needed to. Matt
Devlin is a good police officer.

Not today.

Today he was collateral damage.

Would the defendant please stand?

Members of the jury, have you reached
a verdict upon which you are all agreed?

Yes.

On the count of attempted murder, do you find the
defendant, Russell Lowry, guilty or not guilty?

Guilty.

And on the count of murder, do you find the
defendant, Russell Lowry, guilty or not guilty?

Guilty.

He was pretty rough on you in there,
wasn't he?

You think

Makes you glad he's on our side
though, eh?

You put me in an impossible
position, Ronnie.

And then you stood by while Steel
called me a bad copper.

Worse than that, a stupid copper.

I never set out to make you look
stupid, Matt, you know that.

What, that was just an added bonus,
was it?

Well...every cloud, eh?

Too soon?

itfc subtitles