THE CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT

Wednesday, 1st February, 1989.

THE CLERK OF THE COURT: Panos Koupparis, is that your name?

THE ACCUSED PANOS KOUPPARIS: Yes.

THE CLERK OF THE COURT: And Kyriacoulla Koupparis.

MR. MEJZNER: My Lord, perhaps I may explain the basis on which 
appear today.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes, please do, Mr. Mejzner.

MR. MEJZNER: The position appears to be that I am here to assist 
my instructing solicitors.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: As an amicus curiae, so to speak.

MR. MEJZNER: Yes, and assist Mr. Koupparis. He will be 
representing himself today. It may be that that position will 
change. The position is that Mr. Koupparis has been asking for 
various documents, items and other things to be done for a 
substantial period of time. It is quite plain from the papers I 
have seen that he has been asking for these things to be done 
for a long period. It is quite plain that a lot of these 
matters were envisaged by previous counsel.

Clearly, the fitness to plead issue took some by surprise. The 
position is that he does not want to instruct counsel and find 
out on the day of the trial that nothing has been done and then 
sack counsel. So the position today is that he is representing 
himself and that position may change.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Mr. Koupparis, you are representing 
yourself. Do you want to say anything to me today, or would you 
like Mr. Mejzner to speak on your behalf?

THE ACCUSED PANOS KOUPPARIS: Sir, there are a number of points.

1


THE COMMON SERJEANT: Come down here, would you? I cannot hear 
you from the dock. (The accused came to the witness-box.)

THE ACCUSED: There are a few points that I should like to raise 
with your Lordship, concerning the delays that have taken place 
in this trial. In the last five months, since my last 
appearance before you, I have been struggling very hard to 
recover from the damage that Dr. Bowden's report has done to my 
defence, as you can well understand. Now there are several 
reports that have been done and have disputed Dr. Bowden and I 
understand that the trial is going ahead.

In order for me to prepare a defence, I need to have access to 
certain items taken by both the British police in this country 
and also the Cypriot police.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Over whom I have no power.

THE ACCUSED: No. It seems that we are hampered by this 
jurisdiction power that exists. There are a number of medical 
reports that I am seeking to obtain from Cyprus and it seems 
there has been no co-operation from the doctors and of course 
we cannot compel them to give evidence or give any assistance.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: To what issue would that go?

THE ACCUSED: At the moment there are 143 witnesses served. 
None of them say anything which I would substantially wish to 
challenge in the court. I feel that my defence could be 
handled very concisely by the preparation of one or two expert 
witness reports. Unfortunately, this has become very difficult 
for me because of the legal aspects of Dr. Bowden's report 
having been served. I now need access to primary medical 
records from which that expert evidence can be adduced and 
this is what is stopping my defence from progressing. I do not
want to find myself in the position of having to call endless 
numbers of witnesses to adduce this evidence on a

2


primary basis and then call an expert that has not been briefed 
and have to present this evidence in the court and for them to 
make an instantaneous decision. It would be far more convenient 
for the defence to get all the evidence in one piece submitted 
to the expert and go by that judgment.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: That would be a medical expert?

THE ACCUSED: It would be a medical expert but of course I 
cannot call a psychiatrist as there are certain--

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Can you tell me to what issue it would be 
directed?

THE ACCUSED: Yes. It would be to the issue of the adverse drug 
reaction which I inadvertently became the victim of, causing me 
to act in the way that I did at the time that I was arrested 
and some few weeks previously.

I have had a certain amount of disclosure, which shows quite 
clearly that I was suffering from a neurotic condition and that 
there is not question that I was being treated for any form of 
mental illness. I think the prosecution will agree that this is 
indicated by the medical reports that they have so far. I am 
not talking about the psychiatric reports; I am talking about 
the evidence from Cyprus. There is also an exhibit which shows 
quite clearly that I was taking a number of drugs which would 
be consistent with a neurosis.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: As a result of that, what effect do you 
say it has? I am trying to understand what you say.

THE ACCUSED: It would have a serious effect.

I understand the medical expression for this is a drug-induced 
psychosis and the symptomatic profile was such that I was 
unable to distinguish reality from fantasy. I had been engaged 
for a number of months in a course of

3


treatment which included bibliotherapy. This entailed at first 
watching cartoons and later I had to play with toys.

I was a chronic benzodiazopan addict for a number of years and 
this is when I changed doctors, trying to wean myself from this 
involuntary drug addiction. This adverse drug reaction was 
potentiated by the fact that I was engaged in this reading, 
writing and so on and I lost the ability to distinguish fiction 
from reality.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Was this drug taken voluntarily?

THE ACCUSED: No, it was not.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: It was taken under prescription?

THE ACCUSED: It was taken under prescription. In fact, we are 
dealing here with a variety of drugs which come within known 
groups which cause psychotic reactions. I have been able to 
unearth countless examples of this. There was a recent trial 
that was stopped when a man showed an adverse drug reaction 
from an almost identical cocktail that I was taking at the 
time.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: That you very much. You have made it quite 
clear.

THE ACCUSED: May I make one other point? Apparently the Home
Office have refused to release my medical records that were 
compiled while I was in prison. I had to spend a short time, 
something like 2 months, in the psychiatric wing of Brixton 
Prison, almost immediately after I was arrested, until the drug 
reaction abated. I believe that they have refused to release 
these records and I should like to request that some sort or 
order is made.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Would you like to have them available?

THE ACCUSED: I believe they are essential for my defence to

4


show what my condition was like at the time and how I recovered 
from it fairly quickly. I have been seen by a number of prison 
psychiatrists. In fact, I was seen by two psychiatrists almost 
immediately before Dr. Bowden saw me and they both found me 
perfectly fit and sane. I would venture to add that thus it is 
essential for me to have access to these.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Can you help on that, Mr. Temple?

MR. TEMPLE: I suspect the court has no power to order the 
release of those medical reports.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: A request.

MR. TEMPLE: A request - most certainly. I am sure it will be 
heeded. Obviously, as far as it lies in the Crown's power, we 
will use all the influence we have to back up that request or 
hold that recommendation up.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: From Mr. Koupparis's request, it seems 
there is an issue implicit in the evidence he wishes to call.

MR. TEMPLE: My Lord, yes. Perhaps I may say that Mr. 
Koupparis's principal application today is for an adjournment. 
As far as the Crown is concerned, obviously we do not 
necessarily want to stand in the way of such an adjournment but 
two factors weigh heavily. Obviously one is that an adjournment 
for more than three weeks will lead to difficulties, given the 
inevitable dates of holidays.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: It will probably be 6 months or so before 
the case can be restored to the list.

MR. TEMPLE: But it may be that the problem can be alleviated to 
this extent, and no doubt Mr. Koupparis is listening carefully 
to what I have to say: it may be that the issue

5


in this case is not whether or not Mr. Koupparis typed and made 
up and dealt with the demands.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: It may be a matter of his state of mind.

MR. TEMPLE: It may well be that there is no issue that he 
himself operated under various pseudonyms such as Colonel Dixby 
and others. If that is the issue in the case, then the reports 
which have already been prepared when Mr. Koupparis was 
represented by others will of course come into their own and 
save very considerable court time.

If I may give your Lordship an indication of the types of 
admissions which have already been framed, they refer to all 
the taped telephone conversations in Cyprus, a brief summary of 
the contents of each of those tapes, including a brief summary 
as to the pseudonym used on that occasion. The reports also 
cover the factual content to the effect that Mr. Koupparis was 
responsible for the typing, documentation and delivery of what 
were known as the demand documents.

It may be that Mr. Koupparis resiles from that position. I do 
not know but it would obviously assist the court if the 
position could be made absolutely clear here and now as to the 
nature of his defence.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: I see, yes.

MR. TEMPLE; Unless I can assist your Lordship further...?

THE COMMON SERJEANT: No. You have crystallised the position as 
I understood it.

MR. TEMPLE: My Lord, I have crystallised it for you and 
obviously I would only add this. Crown have always accepted the 
fact that there may be an issue as to the state of mind at the 
relevant time.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: A medical issue, yes.

6


MR. TEMPLE: Obviously, as soon as the Crown receives the expert 
evidence relied upon, under the new rules the Crown would for 
themselves, of course, wish for some time to be given for them 
to instruct a suitable expert.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes. So although you are not blankly 
opposing the adjournment, you are cautioning against the 
consequences.

MR. TEMPLE: Yes, my Lord.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Of course, I must also think of Mrs. 
Koupparis. She has had this matter hanging over her head for a 
long time.

MR. TEMPLE: Certainly she has.

MR. ZEIDMAN: My Lord, I am opposing the application. That is 
not of course through any desire to prevent Mr. Koupparis from 
obtaining everything he wants; that is a matter for him 
entirely. In my submission, Mr. Koupparis's desire to have an 
adjournment must be balanced against the effect on the co-
defendant. This is not the first application. I think on a 
previous occasion I made the observation that I was not 
opposing it but was very concerned because of the delay. This 
is the first application that we seek to oppose.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: It is about 20 months now, is it not?

MR. ZEIDMAN: 14th May, 1987 they were arrested.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes.

MR. ZEIDMAN: The committal to this case was on 25th November, 
1987. I do not go into all the details.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: No. That is my impression: about 20 
months.

7


MR. ZEIDMAN: Mrs. Koupparis is a woman of completely good 
character. She came here for a two-week holiday. Her home is in 
Cyprus. She has a five year old daughter. She is parted from 
all her family, her parents. Her father is an ill man. 
Fortunately, he has had a by-pass operation which has gone 
well. I think that was some five months ago. However, all her 
friends and relations are living away from her. Although she 
speaks perfect English she is living in a country that is not 
her home and it is not the culture that she wants for her 
daughter.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Is she managing to be occupied?

MR. ZIEDMAN: She is. She is working. She was educated up to

A Level standard and is a very efficient person. So I am not 
suggesting that she is miserable and unhappy all the time. 
However, she is very greatly distressed, as of course anybody 
would be. It is not easy, looking after a five-year old by 
herself, anyway, and this has all now begun to play very 
substantially on her nerves. She wants an end to the matter and 
wants an adjudication upon the issue.

I do not want to go into all the reports. It would be 
inappropriate to do so. However, perhaps with respect I may 
remind the court that when the issue as to whether there was a 
case to answer was being considered by the learned stipendiary 
magistrate, he made it very clear that he regarded it as a very 
difficult question for him to decide and in the end said yes, 
on a balance of probabilities he thought it should be 
committed, but made it very clear that he thought this was a 
troublesome case.

It is perhaps trite to cite it but, in my submission, this may 
well be one of those cases where the delay is amounting, in her 
case, to a denial of the justice. She worries about it all the 
time and it is no consolation to advise her as to the weight of 
the evidence. That is not the point. I also rely heavily on the 
fact that the daughter has had a great deal of distress.

8


THE COMMON SERJEANT: She wants to be back in Cyprus, I suppose.

MR. ZEIDMAN: With her parents.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: What about her daughter's education?

MR. ZEIDMAN: That is the point. At the age of 5 it does not 
exaggerate it to say that this whole case will inevitably have 
some effect upon the daughter.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes.

MR. ZEIDMAN: Mrs Koupparis's life also has been very greatly 
adversely affected by this. No defendant is going to ask to be 
charged but the time is coming when she is entitled to say, "I 
want this over" and if the matter is adjourned for one week, 
three weeks or whatever it is, the court can never be certain 
that it will not be faced with a further application for 
something else. Therefore I say that Mr. Koupparis's request is 
not the only one to consider.

MR. MEJZNER: Perhaps I may say something.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes.

MR. MEJZNER: If this case was to go ahead on 20th February, it 
may be that in reality Mr. Koupparis would not get a fair 
trial. Perhaps I may explain to your Lordship what is being 
done since my instructing solicitor is not here.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: I appreciate it is a medical matter but I 
will request the Home Office to produce to him his medical 
records as quickly as possible.

MR. MEJZNER: In relation to the medical evidence, we now expect 
two reports from Cyprus and two doctors that Mr. Koupparis was 
under in Cyprus having been contacted and are preparing reports 
and are sending them over, hopefully,

9


with full disclosure of the medical reports. A 
psychopharmacologist has been instructed but he can prepare 
only a provisional report until the reports from Cyprus are 
available and until the Home Office records are available. My 
instructing solicitor has been writing since 16th December to 
the Crown Prosecution Service in relation to medical records 
after arrest. We heard two days ago that the Home Office is 
refusing to disclose these records. Of course, they are crucial 
to Mr. Koupparis's defence and to any expert.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes. I can quite see that point.

MR. MEJZNER: The custody record was asked for at an early 
stage. The full custody record was seen, again only two days 
ago. The custody record disclosed the names of two doctors who 
saw Mr. Koupparis on his arrest. Both those doctors, in view of 
the comments they made, have to be spoken to and statements 
taken from them.

The position is that in Cyprus there are a lot of medical files 
and other items that have been seized by the Cypriot police, 
which in effect my instructing solicitor has to see. We have 
been requesting those in effect from 16th December, yet nothing 
has come about.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: There is no guarantee that anything will 
come of them if I adjourn the matter for 6 months.

MR. MEJZNER: What I ask is for Legal Aid for my instructing 
solicitors to go to Cyprus, first to interview witnesses and 
secondly to look at the medical records that are there. The 
solicitor for Mrs. Koupparis has already been there but it is 
essential in Mr. Koupparis's case that someone sees the items 
that have been seized. We know items have been seized, on Mr. 
Koupparis's instructions but we have not seen a list and it is 
essential that the items should be seen and we know there are a 
lot of medical files over there.

10


As far as the exhibits here are concerned, Mr. Koupparis has 
been asking for a long time for them to be seen. Mr. Koupparis 
has seen them only two days ago. A large number of photo-copies 
of these exhibits have been asked for and photo-copies are 
being provided but we have not yet had those or yet had an 
opportunity to show them to Mr. Koupparis.

In relation to the tapes, your Lordship ordered on 5th October 
that Mr. Koupparis should have access to the tapes. That is 
something he has wanted for a long time. We were only in effect 
given access to those tapes some two weeks ago. Mr. Koupparis 
has now heard most of them. He has heard the Greek ones but not 
the English ones. I have heard the English ones. From what I 
have heard, transcripts of one or two of those tapes will be 
necessary but the Cypriot ones will need a translator for them. 
Mr. Koupparis has prepared a provisional translation for us but 
we will need an official translation of those tapes.

There is much to be done. I would say that it is quite apparent 
from the papers that Mr. Koupparis is not, in effect, playing 
around with the court. He has been asking for all those matters 
to be done for a long period. It seems clear, looking at 
previous junior counsel's advice, that most of those matters 
were asked to be done in July of this year, yet nothing has 
been done.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: The trouble is, I see no end to these 
applications.

MR. MEJZNER: My Lord, if we are not in a position to be ready 
or Mr. Koupparis is not in a position to be ready by the 
beginning of May or the end of April, then he is not going to 
be in a position to be ready. It is really a matter of going to 
Cyprus, which can be arranged fairly quickly, seeing the 
exhibits there and having the relevant ones, copies or 
exhibits, being brought over here.

Mr. Koupparis, between 15th October when the previous 
solicitors were dismissed, and November, when my Legal Aid

11


was transferred, had himself written to the Home Office asking 
for full disclosure but had no replies.

May I say that my instructions have been hampered to some 
extent by not getting the papers from the previous solicitors. 
In fact, we received 1500 pages of the defence bundles only on 
5th September. We have not received the correspondence files.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Has anyone been to the office to collect 
them? That is the only simple way to do it.

MR. MEJZNER: Twice, I understand.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: And they have not been available, not been 
produced?

MR. MEJZNER: They have not been available and clearly not 
knowing what is going on and what has been asked for between 
previous defence solicitors and the prosecution has put us in a 
very difficult position. But we still have not seen the 
correspondence file or articles and other information that Mr. 
Koupparis has given to the previous solicitors.

My Lord, I should have thought that if we are not in a position 
by the end of April or beginning of May, we shall never be in a 
position. But everything now appears to be in the pipeline. 
(Counsel took further instructions.)

My Lord, I am informed that we have had the custody record for 
four days. I informed you that we had had the custody record 
for two days. It is in fact for four days.

If your Lordship wishes, I can hand up the correspondence 
between my instructing solicitors and the Crown prosecuting 
solicitors.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: No, I do not want it. If it is handed into 
the court, to the taxing officer, I presume it will be taken 
into consideration. I presume the previous solicitor was 
Legally Aided, was he not?

12


MR. MEJZNER: My Lord, yes.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Well, there ought to be a complaint made 
and the matters ought to be handed into the court. The problem 
is that I shall not be available in May at all, so that would 
put it immediately into June and that brings us to the 
holidays.

MR. TEMPLE: My Lord, I think you have heard what Mr. Mejzner 
said: that there would not be many substantive issues in 
relation to the issues.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: No, but until a further decision is 
reached, that is right. It has been suggested to me that if I 
were to put over this application until Monday, it might then 
be possible for Mr. Koupparis to indicate what he will want. 
That might be helpful to us in fixing a date. An estimate would 
be very helpful indeed.

MR. MEJZNER: My Lord, I wonder whether your Lordship could 
direct your Lordship's question to Mr. Koupparis.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes. Would you be able to let the 
prosecution know, on the basis of your present intentions, what 
papers you are likely to require?

THE ACCUSED: My Lord, that is a problematical question for me.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Well, it is.

THE ACCUSED: If I knew that the necessary procedures for my 
defence had been carried out and a proper expert witness 
existed who I might rely upon to present my case, then there 
are not many witnesses I would wish to call.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: As I understand it, you will not be 
requiring any witnesses as to fact.

13


THE ACCUSED: Your Lordship, under these conditions that I have 
just outlined, the only thing that I dispute is that a valid 
demand was made or that the procedure that took place was 
indeed or could have been construed as a blackmail under the 
circumstances. But as to whether I was a man wearing a hat or 
this sort of thing, if that is what you mean by witnesses as to 
fact, I think I have made my position quite clear in the 
statements that I made at the committal, your Lordship.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: So the Crown can really proceed on the 
basis that very few witnesses to fact will be required?

THE ACCUSED: That is only under the circumstances that I have a 
psychopharmacological defence, as it were. If I have to fight 
the case in the sense of calling the primary witnesses adducing 
the evidence and proving that what the expert says happened 
actually happened, from the whole mass of lay witnesses, that 
is the only course that I would have. I have no other recourse, 
I am afraid. I cannot see an easier way out of it myself. It is 
something that I would be very reticent to do, I might add. My 
primary witnesses would run into about fifty people.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: How many?

THE ACCUSED: Fifty, your Lordship. I have to call evidence 
going back six years. This is when this prescribed drug 
addiction started, and I also have to call expert witnesses to 
confirm that the symptom that I was being treated for was in 
fact a benign symptom which did not need medication in the 
first place. So it is quite complex. However, all this can be 
handled by one single well-prepared report of an expert of a 
forensic nature.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Mr. Temple, have you any observations, 
having heard that? It does appear to me that in the interests 
of justice I have to grant some adjournment. The question is, 
how long. I am very sorry. If the bail

14


conditions of Mrs. Koupparis can be altered so that she could 
go back to Cyprus, I would certainly do that.

MR. ZEIDMAN: My Lord, I think she is on unconditional bail. I 
think there is a surrender of the passport. I shall check. That 
is not an immediate problem because in some ways it is more 
distressing to go back, to have to introduce her child to them 
and then take it away.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: I have great sympathy with her. I think
I should be failing in my duty if I did not offer Mr.Koupparis 
every opportunity to establish his defence. He would 
justifiably feel aggrieved. But I want to see some action 
taking place.

MR. ZEIDMAN: My Lord, my only worry is that whatever date is 
fixed, your Lordship would be faced with another application. 
It is difficult, on the face of it, to see how the issue as to 
the number of witnesses is affected by the medical defence but 
I do not want to trespass into somebody else's case. It is not 
easy to see the relationship between the two. One almost 
wonders whether the prosecution evidence could be adduced 
because these matters of the medical defence seem peculiarly 
within the defence case. One wonders whether that would be 
effective. But I acknowledge the difficulty and obviously it 
would be totally unrealistic in a case of this kind, for me to 
apply for severance because they are so closely connected.

MR. TEMPLE: My Lord, would you give the Crown leave to enquire 
of this witness per as to whether he accepts the matters which 
he put forward during the course of his evidence in the 
committal proceedings, to the effect that he compiled the 
documents and other matters?

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes.

MR. TEMPLE: Might I invite your Lordship to Page 5 of the

15


documents? Does your Lordship feel it right that I should put 
these matters to him?

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes.

MR. TEMPLE: You understand the issue, do you not? I just want 
to be clear as to the issues which are going to be raised 
between the Crown and yourself on your trial.

THE ACCUSED PANOS KOUPPARIS: Yes.

MR. TEMPLE: You remember when I was asking you questions at the 
magistrates' court, we covered a considerable amount of ground 
and amongst the ground covered was a question of whether or not 
you accepted that you typed the documents which were termed the 
demand documents?

THE ACCUSED: Yes.

MR. TEMPLE: Is it right that you did indeed type those 
documents?

THE ACCUSED: I believe that I said that I did at the time and I 
have never sought to deny it.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Do you want now to go back on that?

THE ACCUSED: I have never sought to deny that I was the source 
of the documents.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: You are being asked a direct question. You 
are accepting the fact that you did do them?

THE ACCUSED: I admitted it, then, your Lordship, and I admit it 
now.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: I see. Thank you.

MR. TEMPLE: Do you also admit that it was you who sent those

16


documents to the presidential palace in Cyprus?

THE ACCUSED: Yes, I do.

MR. TEMPLE: Do you also admit that it was you who arranged to 
sent a copy of those demand documents to the Cypriot High 
Commission in London?

THE ACCUSED: Yes, I do.

MR. TEMPLE: Do you admit that amongst the names you used was 
Winthorpe?

THE ACCUSED: Do you want to question me on each individual one?

MR. TEMPLE: No. I just want to ask you whether or not during 
the course of your stay in London and in Cyprus prior to your 
arrest you had ever made use of the name Winthorpe?

THE ACCUSED: I never purported to be Winthorpe.

MR. TEMPLE: Do you remember in the magistrate's court you said 
to me - and I am looking at your signed deposition - "I am 
Winthorpe"?

THE ACCUSED: Yes, I do.

MR. TEMPLE: Do you accept that you used those words in the 
magistrates' court?

THE ACCUSED: Yes, I do, although I don't accept that I signed 
any deposition at that time. I don't remember doing such a 
thing. Perhaps I did but I don't remember.

MR. TEMPLE: Let us take it in stages. You accept that in the 
magistrates' court you told me upon your oath, quote: "I am 
Winthorpe"?

17


THE ACCUSED: Yes, sir.

MR. TEMPLE: Was that true?

THE ACCUSED: It is a difficult question because I have never 
actually purported to be Winthorpe but Winthorpe was a product 
of my imagination at the time. He was a delusion, as most of 
the events that took place were a delusion and at one point I 
had constructed a story line to a trivial story I was writing, 
which included the character Winthrop - not Winthorpe.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: So you do?

THE ACCUSED: I didn't use Winthrop at the time. Winthrop 
resulted as a result of my own imagination. It is very 
difficult for me to explain because I was under a psychosis at 
the time.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: You need not explain to me now. You may 
have to explain later.

THE ACCUSED: But, as I say, the use of these drugs in relation 
to the psychotic experience may produce some confusion. I ask 
the court to accept that my answers may not make perfectly 
logical sense when I am acting under the influence of these 
drugs.

MR. TEMPLE: Let us stick very much to the questions of fact. 
Can I put it in this way. Did you ever book an airline ticket 
in the name of Winthorp or Winthrop?

THE ACCUSED: I don't know. It is something that I don't 
remember, I'm afraid.

MR. TEMPLE: Could you have?

THE ACCUSED: It is possible, yes.

18


MR. TEMPLE: Have you ever used a title Nemo?

THE ACCUSED: Indeed I have.

MR. TEMPLE: In London?

THE ACCUSED: Yes.

MR. TEMPLE: Have you also called yourself Wilkins?

THE ACCUSED: Yes, I have.

MR. TEMPLE: Have you made telephone calls in the name of 
Wilkins?

THE ACCUSED: Yes.

MR. TEMPLE: Have you also gone under the name of Simeon or 
Simon Cambanellos

THE ACCUSED: That is my name, actually.

MR. TEMPLE; What is the answer to the question?

THE ACCUSED: My name is Simon Cambanellos.

MR. TEMPLE: Have you used that name?

THE ACCUSED: Yes.

MR. TEMPLE: Apart from your other name, of Panos?

THE ACCUSED: I have used both names.

MR. TEMPLE: Were you using that name during the course of 14th 
May, 1987, when you wrote to the Cypriot High Commission?

THE ACCUSED: The Cypriot High Commission were aware that that

19


was a pseudonym but, yes, I was using the name Simon 
Cambanellos, even though it is my actual name in Cyprus.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Those admissions may shorten the list of 
witnesses you seek to call.

MR. TEMPLE: Certainly, my Lord.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: We have still the medical evidence, which 
indeed is far-ranging and in Cyprus may or may not be 
available.

MR. TEMPLE: My Lord, armed with those admissions, it makes the 
Crown's position very much easier with regard to the 
arrangements for witnesses and I do not think I can add 
anything to the initial observations that I have made. Perhaps 
I may just make it absolutely clear that the Crown do not wish 
to actively oppose this application but would ask the court for 
a short adjournment of not more than three or four weeks, if 
possible, as from 20th February.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: After very careful reflection I am minded 
to grant a limited adjournment. That will be to 29th March. 
This case will start on 29th March, which is the first working 
day after the Easter vacation. It is not likely that I shall 
entertain any further applications. So that means that everyone 
concerned must do his best to ensure that everything is ready 
for trial and I am greatly in sympathy with your client, Mr. 
Zeidman.

MR. ZEIDMAN: Thank you.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: But I am minded to grant this application 
so that efforts can be made, including a trip to Cyprus by your 
instructing solicitors. They may be able to get the documents. 
I am quite sure that correspondence is virtually useless.

MR. MEJZNER: Yes, thank you.

20


THE COMMON SERJEANT: Mr. Temple, do you wish to make any 
further observations?

MR. TEMPLE: My Lord, no, in the circumstances. I understand 
Mr. Koupparis has one more application.

THE ACCUSED: May I encroach on your Lordship for a moment to 
take up a point that we left off the last time I appeared 
before you, that of bail? At that time you had Dr. d'Orban's 
report and, quite frankly, I am not surprised that the result 
was negative. Would you be minded to re-consider that matter 
now, sir?

THE COMMON SERJEANT: What do the prosecution think?

MR. TEMPLE: My Lord, bail is opposed.

MR. ZEIDMAN: My Lord, forgive me. If the question of bail is 
raised, I am not entirely sure of my locus standi but it seems 
in principle that representations could be made to the court on 
the question of bail by any person.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes.

MR. ZEIDMAN: I would at least argue that I have a right on 
behalf of Mrs. Koupparis to make observations and if the 
application was successful, would wish to do so, to oppose the 
application.

THE ACCUSED PANGS KOUPPARIS: Does that mean that my wife's 
counsel is opposing my bail application, or would oppose it?

THE COMMON SERJEANT: I think if I were minded to grant it, he 
would oppose it. I think that is the position.

MR. ZEIDMAN: Yes, my Lord. She would be a very frightened woman 
if this defendant were released.

21


THE COMMON SERJEANT: No bail will be granted.

THE ACCUSE PANOS KOUPPARIS: Is that the end of the proceedings, 
sir?

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes, but do everything you can, Mr.

Koupparis, to be available or to make sure that the trial can 
go on at the date I have specified because otherwise there will 
be very lengthy delays and I certainly would not be able to try 
it and you might find yourself in prison for another 6 months.

THE ACCUSED: Yes, sir. I am doing everything I can from the 
restraints of prison.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: I appreciate your problems.

MR. ZEIDMAN: On the question of bail for Mrs. Koupparis, I 
think it was unconditional but I am not quite sure. I wonder 
whether the matter regarding the surrender of her passport 
could be checked. I do not mind, in principle, the formal 
condition being upheld. There is no objection by the Crown. My 
application is that it should be fully unconditional bail. That 
is to say to delete the condition as to her passport. However, 
I do not want to make much of it because if she has her 
passport to go away, it does not really matter where it is, 
apart from that.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: I am prepared to say, as far as this lady 
is concerned, that, with the exception of the sureties which 
stand - what does she say about living and sleeping at 32 
Xxxxxx Gardens?

MR. ZEIDMAN: Yes. There is no problem about that. Of course, if 
she were to go away to Cyprus, then that condition would be --

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Well, she can make application in due 
course and that can be granted.

22


MR. MEJZNER: Is your Lordship able to grant my instructing 
solicitor Legal Aid today to get to Cyprus?

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes, I am because there is only one way to 
deal with the matter and that is for your instructing solicitor 
to go round and see the doctors personally. I think he is more 
likely to get results that way. When I say "results", you will 
be told whether the information is available.

MR. MEJZNER: Your Lordship shall request the medical records 
from the Home Office?

THE COMMON SERJEANT: In the interests of justice, I shall 
request those. If they are not forthcoming, I shall take 
further steps, which might involve the calling of an officer 
from the Home Office.

MR. ZEIDMAN: If the position be at the moment that she resides 
at that fixed address then of course that would still be a 
condition, if she went away for a two-week holiday.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: No. The holiday would merely necessitate 
an application to the court.

MR. ZEIDMAN: Oh.

MR. MEJZNER: We know that the psychopharmacologist who has been 
instructed to prepare a report is very busy at this time. Would 
your Lordship grant Legal Aid to consult with another 
pyschopharmacologist so that at least one report is ready?

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes, I will, because it might be quicker 
in the long run and of course when the reports are available, 
they will have to be exchanged and it might be desirable to 
show them to the prosecution. Mr. Temple, does this cover 
everything for the time being?

23


MR. TEMPLE: My Lord, for the time being, yes. May I say I am 
sure that Mr. Mejzner, myself and his client can come to some 
proper arrangement to place before the jury the contents of 
these telephone calls. The Crown, for their part, would be 
quite content to rely on the summaries already produced and of 
course, if Mr. Mejzner were to wish the Crown to concentrate on 
any particular phrases or add anything in, of course that can 
be produced. It may be that he wishes a particular matter to be 
included and the Crown will facilitate that being placed before 
the jury.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: If the Cypriot police are in possession of 
the documents, I have no doubt they can be obtained either 
through efforts here or through contacts in the various areas.

MR. MEJZNER: May I say that Tapes AE2 and AE1, RH2 and RH3.

MR. TEMPLE: I know what AE1 and AE2 are.

MR. MEJZNER: But I know what RH2 and 3 are and we have not had 
copies.

THE COMMON SERJEANT: Yes. I direct that a transcript of the 
proceedings this morning be prepared and made available with 
the papers for the hearing.

----------------

24