All language subtitles for Law and Order UK s03e07 Anonymous.eng

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?

Sub made possible
by Adriano_CSI

www.addic7ed.com

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.

STEPHANIE: 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?

FOREMAN: 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?

Repair and Synchronization by
Easy Subtitles Synchronizer 1.0.0.0