Ref: A00-300995 Case No. 871626 Macpherson II
Volume V, Pages 47-68, Thursday 15th June, 1989
(In the presence of the jury)
PAUL THEODORE D'ORBAN: Sworn
Examined by Mr. Temple
Q. What are your full names? A. Paul Theodore D'Orban. I am
a registered medical practitioner. I hold degrees: Bachelor
of Medicine and Surgery, a Fellow of the Royal College of
Psychiatrists. I hold the post of Consultant Forensic
Psychiatrist at the Royal Free Hospital and am approved under
Section 12 of the Mental Health Act 1983.
Q. Against that very general introduction, would you confirm
that you have prepared a report dated 20th October 1988 upon
this defendant, Panos Koupparis? A. Yes.
Q. You have a copy of that report in front of you? A. Yes.
Q. Was that prepared when the matters relating to your
examination were fresh in your memory? A. Yes.
MR. TEMPLE: My Lord, may he have your leave?
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: Yes.
MR. TEMPLE: Can we first of all cover the material which you had
at your disposal. First of all, were you given and did you
have time to appreciate and study the prosecution statements
and exhibits in the case? A. Yes, they were available at
the prison and they were lent to me from there.
Q. For how long did you see this defendant? A. For about two
and a half hours. Sorry, about two hours.
Q. In your professional opinion was that sufficient for you to
come to an informed conclusion? A. Yes, it was.
Q. Did you see him in fact two days before you completed your
report, namely, the examination took place on 18th October?
A. Yes.
Q. I am not going to ask you to cover all the aspects you
mentioned in your report. I am going to give just a number
of limited relevant steps for my present purposes. First of
all, with regard to drugs, did you ask him what the position
was between November 1986 up to the date of his arrest in
May 1987? A. Yes, I did.
Q. What did he tell you with regard to that period? A. He
said he was taking a variety of drugs at that time, mostly
those belonging to the tricyclic antidepressant group.
Q. I am not going to ask you for the brand names. Could you
perhaps in a sentence or two, in layman's terms tell us what
that means? A. They are drugs used in the treatment of
severe depressive illness. The effects and side-effects are
by and large similar for ths [sic] group of drugs that I enumerated
here.
Q. You speak of the effects and side-effects; again in general
terms, how would you describe the effects and side-effects?
A. The main therapeutic effects would be to improve the
patient's depressive symptoms. In particular, it would help
the person to sleep normally; it would begin gradually to
improve his mood of depression and normalise it. It would
improve his appetite and I think, in summary, it would really
be helpful with specific symptoms of depressive illness.
Q. And the side-effects of which you spoke? A. There are a
variety of side-effects, mostly physical things like, for
example, dryness of the mouth, drowsiness. There are
sometimes effects on the gastro-intestinal system, but those
are relatively unusual.
Q. Gastro ---? A. Gastro-intestinal system.
Q. What is that? A. The abdominal organs. It can cause
paralysis of the (inaudible) of the intestine in particular,
but that is quite unusual. I think those are the most
important ones at any rate.
Q. I just want a general introduction at this stage. He was
telling you that between November 1986 and the date of his
arrest he was taking that group of drugs. Did he mention as
to what his record was of taking them according to the
prescription? A. It seemed to me it was very erratic in
the way he was taking them.
Q. You used the expression, "It seems to me". Did he personally
make any comment to you about whether or not he was taking
drugs as prescribed? A. Yes.
Q. What did he tell you? A. He said he was erratic in taking
his medicine and he also had passages of amnesia which he
attributed to the use of drugs.
Q. Amnesia, do we understand to be loss of memory? A. Yes.
If I may perhaps add, that would be a possible side-effect of
the other group of drugs he was taking.
Q. When you say "him", for those two hours did you ask him
questions about his background and give him the opportunity
to say what he wanted to you? A. Yes.
Q. I want you to go directly to your opinion as to whether or
not he was suffering from any type of illness and if so,
what. A. I do not know whether I should deal with the
question of his fitness to plead.
Q. No, I do not want you to deal with that for present purposes.
A. I came to the conclusion, on the information that was
available to me, that he was suffering from a manic
depressive illness and that during the period of the alleged
offences he was in a state of hypomania.
Q. I appreciate that it is always difficult for counsel to say
to you, "Never mind about a detailed medical explanation".
Putting it in layman's terms as best you can, quite shortly
would you explain to the jury what is understood by hypomania
and perhaps, if it is possible, to give them an illustration
as to the behaviour which would fall in that category.
A. Yes, I would describe it as primarily a disturbance of
mood in the direction of elevation of mood, excitement, a
feeling of excessive well-being, a feeling of energy. In
fact, one of the unfortunate things is a patient often feels
so well that they do not realise that they are ill and they
are notoriously reluctant to accept treatment in a mental
state like that. At times you can also get delusional ideas
associated with this mood disturbance and the delusional
ideas tend to be mostly grandiose ones.
Q. Can you give us an example? A. Yes, that the person is -
let us say that he is a famous person; that he has performed
great feats of one kind or another; that he has unusual
intelligence; has great ability; that he is able to solve
scientific problems that others are not able to do. I think
those are examples of the sort of delusional ideas people may
develop and they are quite obviously related in a way to the
extensive mood disturbance of the patient.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: Would you say that again, please?
A. Related to the extensive mood of the patient. In that
respect they are unlike schizophrenic delusions.
MR. TEMPLE: Pausing there, your opinion at the material time the
alleged offences were committed, the state of hypomania. I
want to come to your assessment as to his state of mind. The
first question: what conclusion did you reach with regard to
his ability to make judgments [sic]? A. I felt that his judgment [sic]
would have been quite severely impaired at the time because
of his mental illness, particularly his mood disturbance and
his grandiose ideas. These would have substantially
affected his judgment [sic].
Q. Notwithstanding that opinion, would you please answer in the
first instance, "Yes" or "No" to the question and then if
you want to elaborate on it in any way, please say so: in
your opinion would he know the nature and quality of his
acts? A. Yes.
Q. Again "Yes" or "No" and please qualify if you feel right to
do so, would he know right from wrong, wrong in the sense of
being against the law? A. Yes.
Q. Can I perhaps just ask you to help us on one other aspect:
you remember you were giving us illustrations as to the type
of behaviour one might expect from a hypomanic sufferer. Is
arrogance a characteristic you would expect? A. Yes, it is
often an accompanying characteristic. Often these symptoms
may be perhaps a great exaggeration of the person's natural
personality traits and they often gain expression in
arrogance for example, or excessive irritability in patients
and so on.
Q. I asked you to tell us about your qualifications; for how
long have you specialised in this type of medical assessment?
A. I have been in psychiatry for the past 30 years and in
this particular field for the past 23 years.
CROSS-EXAMINED BY MR. BECKMAN
Q. Would he realise - assuming for a moment I am going to go
into the issue of hypomania - or not - would he realise all
the consequences of his actions; all of them? A. I think
if he stopped to consider them he could potentially do so.
In fact, it is unlikely that he would consider them in that
sort of situation.
Q. Unlikely to do so? A. Yes.
Q. He could believe quite genuinely that he was the character he
had himself created? A. Yes.
Q. He would not be able to control himself? A. I think that
is a matter of degree. I think to a large extent he would
not stop to even try to control himself in an abnormal mood
like that.
Q. He might not necessarily in those circumstances have the free
will we all possess? A. Well, that is a philosophical
question which I would find difficult to answer as a
psychiatrist.
Q. Let me now go on to the mainstream of what I was going to ask
you. The main purpose of your examination was not to look
into what caused, or may have caused, or precipitated the
effects; the main purpose was to look at his condition prior
to being tried? A. That is right.
Q. It was only incidental to that purpose did you deal with what
might be his mental condition at the time of the findings?
A. Yes, I commented on his mental condition in the process
of examining him really for a primarily different purpose. I
should add that there may be number of sources of information
which were lacking at the time which I would like to have had
if it had been possible, and if I had been specifically asked
to give an opinion on his mental state at the time of the
act, I think I would have asked for ---
Q. You would like a lot more information? A. Yes, I was
really, if I may add ---
Q. You were dealing with his mental condition at that time and
nothing more, basically. At the same time it brought you
into considering what his mental condition might have been
earlier? A. Yes.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: You were considering his fitness to
plead? A. Yes.
Q. That means his fitness to face a trial at all? A. Yes.
MR. BECKMAN: So there is no doubt, that is not a matter in issue
at all now. Without going into the details of it, you were
brought in because there was a genuine disagreement amongst
your predecessors? A. Yes.
Q. Predecessors who, if I may say so, were gentlemen of
integrity who genuinely disagreed? A. Yes.
Q. There were no charletons [sic] or quacks? A. No, not at all. I
know them and I have a high regard for their opinions.
Q. The matter you were considering was a matter about which we
are not concerned; it is academic. Just two matters that I
want to ask you that came out in the course of the major
investigations. In the course of the interview with you, am
I right in saying that - and indeed it is your phrase in your
statement - that he co-operated quite readily? A. Yes.
Q. Secondly, as far as you were concerned, he was anxious, "very
anxious" is your word, to be tried, that the case should
proceed? A. Yes, he was very anxious to demonstrate to me
in fact he was quite fit to be tried. I think he had taken
some trouble to look at the criteria himself and he was
anxious to show that he met this criteria and he was well
enough to be tried.
Q. Now going on to his possible state of mind at the time of the
alleged offence, you must necessarily, in the course of your
investigation, rely upon information supplied directly or
indirectly? A. I am sorry?
Q. You must rely on information supplied directly or indirectly?
A. Yes.
Q. You discovered from him that he had consulted a neuro-
psychiatrist in Cyprus, Dr. Sophocleos [sic], who had prescribed
for him antidepressant drugs? A. Yes.
Q. You also discovered from him some months later he was given
an insulin injection and tricyclic antidepressants?
A. Yes, as far as I can recall, it was my own deduction this
was almost certainly an insulin injection he was given.
Q. I am grateful for that. Is it also right at some stage he
was also given another antidepressant, namely, Parstelin?
A. That is right, which is of a different type.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: What is it? A. The generic name is
tranylcypromine.
Q. Is that an antidepressant? A. Yes, my Lord.
MR. BECKMAN: As far as you could discover, he ws [sic] on these for a
period of some ten months? A. Yes.
Q. Later again, until his arrest, there was a third stage of
antidepressant treatment and he was taking a variety of drugs
belonging to the tricyclic antidepressant group? A. Yes.
MR. BECKMAN: These included - I will spell them if your Lordship
needs them.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: I do not know how much I will need them
if I remind the jury of them. If they are not in the report
I shall need them.
MR. BECKMAN: They are all in the report, the doctor's own
report. They are also referred to elsewhere. (To the
witness): Among that group was also included Anafranil,
Ludiomil and viloxazine and Vivalan? A. Yes, Vivalan is
actually viloxazine.
Q. You mentioned to the jury - in case one does not know the
difference, the generic name is a description of the drug
itself in scientific terms; the trade name is the name given
by the company, say ICI or Roche, to the particular drug.
Sometimes it is known better than others, like Librium or
Valium? A. Yes.
Q. Going on to this, he was also having benzodiazepine
hypnotics, including Valium, Halcion and alprazolam, which is
also known as Zantax [sic]? A. Yes.
Q. Have you had the opportunity to analyse in depth the effect
of any of these drugs? A. In general terms, yes.
Q. In specific terms in relation to him? A. No, I have not
had the opportunity of doing that.
Q. Have you considered, in relation to him, the effect upon him
of these drugs, either singly or in any combination? A. Not
specifically. It would have been very difficult for me to
know exactly what he was prescribed, when and how he took
them. I would have needed information from his doctor who
was prescribing them at the time and his records, dosage and
so on. Even then it would have been difficult because, as I
said, I understood from him that he was taking them in an
erratic fashion, so it would have been very - quite difficult
to analyse the effects in any detail, but I did not attempt
to do that.
Q. The doctors concerned - because we have had this situation -
doctors can prescribe, chemists can give on prescription and
then the patient may take them either in accordance with the
precise method of treatment, or not? A. Yes.
Q. I think perhaps I may get it from you: is it right that
there are doctors who unfortunately in prescribing sometimes
prescribe cocktails of drugs that are dangerous in given
combinations? Unfortunately there are doctors who do that?
A. That can occur. I would not like to make any criticism
of the doctors in this particular case because I would not
know enough about exactly what they prescribed, but in
general terms that is certainly a proposition I would agree
with.
Q. The doctors in this case who would have been concerned at
the relevant time would be - you know the names -
Dr. Sophocleos [sic] and Dr. Evdokas? A. I have the name of
Dr. Sophocleos [sic], he gave me.
Q. You do not have the name of Dr. Evdokas? A. No.
Q. Also of course the other matter; you presumably have not
considered in depth his effect of withdrawing from the drugs
prescribed or taken in relation to new drugs then being
taken? A. No, I did not consider that. I think in
relation to the antidepressants it would be not of any great
importance. I think the other group of drugs might cause
problems on withdrawal.
Q. Which group is that? A. The benzodiazepine group.
Q. The effect of drugs generally can vary from one individual to
another? A. Yes, certainly.
Q. So the actual permutations are enormous, interrelating a
particular chemical structure and more, because in respect of
the side-effects of drug "A" or drug "B" or withdrawal, the
permutations are enormous? A. Yes, by and large similar
drugs tend to cause similar side-effects and effects in
different people, but there are very considerable variations,
yes.
Q. I apologise for not getting it to you before but you have had
the opportunity at last of glancing at Dr. Ashton's
statement? A. Yes, I have not had the opportunity of
finishing it completely but I had a quick glance.
Q. So far as you have seen, do you disagree with the contents
of that report? A. No, so far as I have read it. I did
not finish it but I do not disagree with it. I think I read
up to about ---
Q. Do you personally know Dr. Ashton? A. No.
Q. She is in a specialised sphere in your world and that is -
what is her --- A. Pschyo [sic]-pharmacology. I have heard of
Dr. Ashton but I do not know her personally.
Q. She has written many textbooks? A. I believe so.
Q. It would be right to say she is fairly authoritative on the
subject? A. Yes.
Q. Indeed, all one has to do is read published literature to
find that out? A. Again, in so far as it may matter later
and may I say "may" deliberately because it may be
unnecessary, you read the report of Professor West as well?
A. Yes.
Q. Again, do you disagree with that? A. No, I agree with it
basically.
Q. Professor West agrees basically with Dr. Ashton. A. So I
understand. Perhaps I should add that in order to form an
independent opinion of Professor West, I would really have
to - again, I would have to have more material available from
the various doctors treating him at the time and about their
findings and so on in order to form a reliable judgment [sic] about
it, but in general terms I do agree.
Q. In other words, if it were possible you would have to have
Dr. Sophocleos [sic] and Dr. Evdokas, the doctors in Greece?
A. Yes, I would want to have reports from them.
Q. Effectively what you are saying is, for example, if we have
to decide whether he was suffering from hypomania or
something having exactly the same or similar symptoms, namely
a drug related situation, then we need guidance, the sort of
guidance you say? A. I am sorry?
Q. In order to decide whether or not this was endogenous hypo-
mania or whether it is something which is transitory and
caused by drugs, or virtually from drugs, we need some
outside guidance? A. Yes.
Q. Let us see if we can find that. Again using terms I have
learned for the purpose of the case, "endogenous" means that
which is within the person and they can do nothing about it?
A. Yes.
Q. Whereas, opposed to endogenous, something that is produced by
the wrong drugs or wrong combination, that would produce
similar effects but it is not endogenous; it is not a problem
within the person? A. Yes, I think that the only thought
that I would add, these sort of undesirable effects so far as
the mental state of the patient is concerned are much more
likely to occur in somebody who has a tendency to develop
hypomania ---
Q. In other words, someone --- A. It would be unusual for
somebody who does not have the inbuilt tendency to produce it
to show these side-effects.
Q. Someone who may have to possibly (inaudible) unless they
happen to take the wrong drugs? A. No, what I am saying is
even then it is unlikely they would show signs of hypomania
unless they had some natural predisposition to it.
Q. In so far as you have not looked at the interrelationship of
possible cocktails of these drugs, possible withdrawal
symptoms, do you want to look at that more carefully before
you consider that? A. Yes, I am taking no particular note
about withdrawal symptoms but about antidepressants causing
hypomania symptoms, and as regards that I would say that it
would be unusual for antidepressants to precipitate hypomania
unless there were some inherent tendency in the person or
potential to develop these symptoms in a clinical situation.
Commonly, what happens is that a patient, for example, who is
severely depressed is treated with antidepressants and then
suddenly develops hypomania, but a patient like that is in
fact likely to be suffering from a manic depressive psychosis
and somebody who does not have that inherent potential would
be unlikely to develop that side-effect.
Q. That could be produced by virtue of the interrelationship
with the drugs themselves, even somebody who is not
predisposed? A. I would doubt that. I do not think I
would entirely agree with that.
Q. Let us examine it. One of the things to find out whether a
person has hypomania is to see effectively whether or not it
is in the family? A. Yes.
Q. To see if the diagnosis is right, because hypomania is caused
by a chemical imbalance in the brain or an abnormality in the
chemical function in the brain? A. Yes, it is thought, and
it is thought to be genetically based.
Q. It may be effected chemically by drugs creating similar
symptoms, put it that way? A. Yes, I take your point on
the ---
Q. As you said, one of the ways to see if a person may be
(inaudible) is to see the family history because these things
are genetic: they may be passed down from father to son,
mother to daughter? A. Yes, there often is a family
history.
Q. The lack of family history would be a contra-indication to
indicate there would be less likelihood? A. It would not
be a contra-indication but it would mean the likelihood is
less.
Q. Would it also be right if you had - one of the main symptoms
is delusions which are not symptoms of hypomania, delusions
of grandeur? A. They are relatively unusual (inaudible).
Delusions do occur but they are not uncommon.
Q. Delusions are not uncommon? A. No.
Q. To use a classic one; to think he is Napoleon. That would
confirm the suggestion but it is not common? A. No.
Q. Is it right a lack of symptoms of classical hypomania before
and after a given period would in fact indicate it is not
true endogenous hypomania? A. Yes, that is true.
Q. Some of the classical indications that you get with hypomania
are that you have hallucinations, grandiose ideas and an
inability to divide fact from fantasy? A. You very rarely
get hallucinations with hypomania.
Q. I should have used the word "delusions". A. Yes, you can
certainly get delusions but hallucinations are rare.
Q. Hallucinations, grandiose ideas - and remember, I do not have
someone assisting at my elbow - but the other matters you
agree with? A. Yes.
Q. Did you know that there were no manifest symptoms of
hypomania for the earlier part of his life? A. Yes.
Q. You were aware, were you, that in 1981 for example, he saw
doctors in connection with other matters and there was not
the slightest indication of endogenous hypomania? A. Yes,
this was when he had the so-called "jumping leg syndrome".
Q. Yes, when he had muscle jerks. I think he saw at that time
Dr. Ashworth and Dr. Orton [sic]. A. Yes.
Q. They had seen him because he had this muscle reflex, and
having seen him there was from that no indication he was
suffering from endogenous hypomania? A. Yes, I would not
have expected it because these are not symptoms you get.
Q. The fact that they noticed nothing untoward would be a factor
which would be against the diagnosis of endogenous hypomania?
A. Yes, except (inaudible) can be at a later stage. All it
means is at that particular stage ---
Q. All things are possible, but what is going to happen, doctors
have to decide matters beyond reasonable doubt, so I am
merely giving rise to the possibilities and factors which
indicate one way or the other. If it goes away, that is if
the delusions or whatever particular thing - say something,
the bizarre behaviour - if it diminishes after - in other
words, when there is no opportunity of taking drugs, such as
in prison, and if it diminishes afterwards, that again is an
indication it may be - may be, I put it no higher - a drug
induced situation rather than endogenous hypomania? A. Yes,
you can get natural remissions but it can suggest the
possibility it was drug induced and sometimes arises because
the person was no longer ---
Q. Indeed, at the time that you examined him, your examination
showed that he was not suffering from delusional ideas.
Indeed, from what little you had - I am not comparing his
early life but the period, short period, before his arrest
when the offences are said to be committed - he was, as far
as you could see, becoming more articulate, clearer, less
deluded, more rational? A. Yes.
Q. Becoming so? A. Yes.
Q. That again might arise in diagnoses in favour of drug
inducement, which he is no longer on, and against the
possibility of hypomania? A. Yes.
Q. I believe you discovered there was at that time no evidence
of abnormal mood disturbance? A. Yes.
Q. Abnormal mood disturbance, I think you mentioned before, is a
classic symptom of hypomania? A. Yes.
Q. In other words, at the particular time you examined him he
was not, as far as you could tell, suffering from hypomania?
A. No.
Q. Whether or not - we can leave that an open possibility -
whether or not he may have been predisposed to it? A. Yes.
Q. There may be some of us who get prescribed the wrong drugs
and find it can affect us. A. Indeed.
Q. At the time of the alleged offence, from which you have seen
all the information you have, there was ample evidence of
some disturbance, whatever it was? A. Yes.
Q. You would agree that occurred during the period which may be
drug related, on the information you had? A. Yes.
Q. I believe our view is this; that whether it is drug related
or whether it is hypomania, either, you took this view that
his judgment [sic] - these are your words, both clearly and
precisely set out in your statement and repeated exactly
here - that his judgment [sic] would have been severely affected by
his illness? A. Yes.
Q. What do you mean by that? A. Well, he would have been
quite reckless. I think he would not have stopped to
consider in a cool and calm fashion what he was doing and
what all the consequences might be to himself. I think that
his abnormal mood and his grandiose ideas would have led to
him living in what can only be described as a state of
fantasy.
Q. A fantasy world? A. Yes.
Q. Where the division between fantasy, fiction and reality would
be difficult, if not impossible, for him to know? A. Yes.
I do not think - it would not be impossible for him to know;
I would not agree with that. I think fundamentally he would
be capable of knowing what he was doing.
Q. He would be capable of it? A. Yes, I think he did know
what he was doing.
Q. The capacity would be there but he may not in fact realise it
because of the compulsion of this disorder, whether drug
created or otherwise? A. No, I think that he would in
effect know what he was doing.
Q. But sometimes he would be in this bizarre world of fantasy?
A. Yes.
Q. He would believe, and genuinely believe, that he was the
person concerned? A. Yes.
Q. He would genuinely believe that he - sorry? A. I think he
would - it is difficult to really reconstruct the mental
state but I think even in that sort of state, where he in
effect believes he is some fictional character, I think if
you come down to brass tacks, so to speak, he could still
realise that he is not really that and it is in a sense his
imagination; that he is really still a weak person; that he
is - I think it would still be possible for him to realise
that.
MR. BECKMAN: So - I am going to use that word - it would be
possible for him to realise it - he may realise it, he may
not, it is certainly possible. Is that a fair way of putting
it?
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: To realise what?
MR. BECKMAN: To realise whether he was - (to the witness): I
think we were talking about fantasy or the real world;
believing he was part of these delusions? A. Yes.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: You mean, taking this case, he might
think, "I am Captain Nemo"? A. Yes.
Q. He would know what he was doing as Captain Nemo but he might
think he was genuinely somebody different? A. Yes, I think
it would be almost a sort of double identity in the way he
would think he is Captain Nemo, but at the same time he would
realise, or he would be capable of realising, that he is not.
If somebody stopped and discussed the matter with him, I
think he would have been very probably capable of realising
that he is not.
MR. BECKMAN: If someone stopped him at the time and said to him,
"Out of your world of fantasy; you are not Nemo, you are
Digsby", or whoever in this case, if somebody had done that,
he would then be capable of logically appreciating those are
the parts he had been playing? A. Yes.
Q. But until that time he would remain, in part or otherwise, in
his fantasy world? A. Yes.
Q. Lack of judgment [sic] you told us about. All this would depend
on the possible effect of drugs or possible degree of
hypomania? A. Yes.
Q. As far as delusions are concerned, you told us they do not
happen all that often in hypomania. Do they happen so far as
any cases where you get side-effects of these particular
drugs or particular interrelation of drugs - cocktail of
drugs? Can they happen, delusions? A. They can happen.
I do not know whether they are more common in hypomania. I
do not really know what the answer to that is.
Q. That we would have to leave to a psycho-pharmacologist?
A. I think one would have to read up the literature and
consult colleagues and so on. Probably there is an answer
to the question available, but I do not actually know it
off-hand.
Q. Could bizarre behaviour of either hypomania or a drug induced
situation include a mad sense of humour on a large scale?
A. Yes, very much so.
Q. Could it also include someone who believed they could affect
a large organisation or country and have a massive hoax -
consider they themselves to be a court joker? A. Yes.
Q. They would consider it was funny although others might not
find it funny at all? A. Yes, absolutely.
RE-EXAMINED BY MR. TEMPLE
Q. Just one matter for you: I just want you to examine with me
Mr. Beckman's last series of suggestions where bizarre
behaviour could be characterised by a mad sense of humour on
a large scale. A. Yes.
Q. You have read the documents in this case? A. Yes.
Q. In particular, you read the documents which were sent out to
the Government of Cyprus? A. Yes.
Q. Equally, could it be in the mind of the man who sent this
document an attempt at blackmail? A. Yes. I am not sure
whether that is a question that I can - which lies within my
field of expertise, but if I can answer it then the answer is
yes, it could.
Q. You were able to say to Mr. Beckman it could be on the one
hand a bizarre sense of humour. My question to you - I
think you have answered it - say anyone is misled, could it
be equally that in the mind of the man who sent this document
it was an attempt at blackmail? A. Yes, it could be.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: In terms of the Court, with which you
are familiar, that would be a matter for the jury to decide.
A. Yes, my Lord.
Q. In your experience that would be the sort of issue which
twelve men and woman of good common sense are best equipped
to solve? A. Yes.
Q. In any particular case? A. Yes.
Q. You considered obviously that at the time when you saw him he
was fit to plead? A. Yes.
Q. He has pleaded so, as Mr. Beckman said, that is out of the
window now. A. Yes.
Q. You also considered whether this might be a case where the
jury would have to consider whether he was guilty but insane.
That is why you were asked questions by Mr. Temple? A. Yes.
Q. That is not a point in this case at all? A. Yes.
Q. So we are back to endogenous - that is natural - hypomania
or perhaps a drug related or induced condition which is
similar to that, and the jury will have to decide whether, at
the time he did what he did, he knew what he was doing and
intended to do it? A. Yes. May I apologise for not
having been here at two o'clock.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: It is already true this case has a jinx
on it, but you arrived in the nick of time and thank you very
much for your evidence.
(The witness withdrew)
Index | Previous | Next