Court Report by David C West

DAVE COURTNEY IN COURT

INNER LONDON SESSIONS

SOUTHWARK

7th JUNE – 11th JUNE 2004

Dave arrived for his trial for ABH against Jen in grand style on his Harley-Davidson. The Harley added a much need touch of glamour to the otherwise drab Court car park. Dave showed no signs of being in the slightest worried about the case, and was in a cheerful and buoyant mood. 

In the public gallery that day were his friends from Rochester Lynn and Sam. Dave kept us entertained while we waited for court to start. Sticking his flyers for Hell 2 Pay on the notice-boards next to the court office window for maximum publicity, almost anywhere he could find wall space a flyer went. 

He happily signed autographs for people as he waited and then dropped his pants, turned to Lynn and said ‘One day all this will be yours’. Lynn was suitably entertained, as we all were. Just as we were about to enter court Dave cracked a joke ‘You know what I can’t get over? Those tall walls with barbed wire an that.’ Which kind of summed up just how seriously Dave was taking things at this point. Dave had been offered a deal by the Crown that morning: they said if he went Guilty they would give him 18 months. Dave told them to fuck off. It made us realise the stakes were high, but true to form Dave just treated the whole thing as a joke.

The Jury were sworn in, then Dave was asked if he didn’t like any of them so said ‘The three on the end.’ The three on the end were removed and replaced. Unfortunately Dave meant the three on the back row, not the front row. Once the new jurors were sworn in the slow legal process ground to a halt. Apparently one of the jurors said they "had met Dave in a public situation." A situation the Judge described as ‘One of the most prejudice kind.’ Dave was suitably confused as he had never seen any of the jury before, so the court was adjourned while some debate went on and we adjourned down stairs to Courtney’s favourite Court Café for a cuppa.

Just as Dave was finishing putting his eleventh sugar in his cup we were called back to court. Dave complained his tea tasted ‘funny’ so left the last few mouthfuls and went back into court. Dave’s Barrister was puzzled about the juror and jokingly asked Dave ‘Have you slept with her?’ After some legal talk and another problem with a juror was sorted out. Now, was the legal process about to begin?

No! The Officer who originally arrested Dave, Detective Shitson, who had been waiting outside the court with us and had been witness to Dave dropping his trousers. Shitson had given the Judge a written statement of complaint about Dave dropping his trousers and now, unlike Dave’s trousers, it was bought up. 

So Shitson basically grassed Dave up, claiming he was reporting it to protect the ladies who were present (Lynn & Sam). CCTV evidence was shown to the Judge. It became apparent that this was a clear case of a prosecution witness trying to bribe the Judge by showing him a video of a man dropping his trousers, judging by the amount of time the Judge watched the video he must have been enjoying it. The Judge then announced that he wanted to lock Dave up for the duration of the trail, probably locked in the Judges bedroom handcuffed to his bed. It was only some clever words from Dave’s Barrister that Dave was let off with a warning that ‘If anything like this happens again I will bang you up.’ Dave from then on kept his trousers tightly belted, as who wants to be banged up the arse by a High Court Judge? Well, maybe Detective Shitson. So, was the legal process finally going to begin? No. We were adjourned for lunch and promptly went to the Ship pub (without Shitson) across the road for food and beer.

In the afternoon the Prosecution laid out their case to the jury, explaining the incident of ABH happened on 9th May 2003. The procescutions opening words were: "Jennifer will say they had a volatile relationship, but we are not dealing with whose fault the disagreement was, but whether it was assault."

The prosecution then stated Jen’s evidence: "On that day they were with Michael (Jacket) and their 5 year old daughter (Courtney). Jen went upstairs to the bedroom, Dave followed her when he entered the bedroom he tried to throttle her then he threw her. She fell and Dave fell on top of her. She struggled free and Michael called an ambulance. A friend came round to take Dave to hospital (he had an appointment that Dave about his leg)."

We were never told if they were going to the same hospital or not.

The prosecution continued: "She did not go back to the house. It was not until July 3rd she made a statement to the police about the incident. In his police statement Dave said" 

‘I was feeling rather wobbly that Dave (day of incident not statement) and she attacked me and in order to stop her I put my arms round her waist and I fell. It was an accident bought on in self defence. She claimed I had now given her an excuse to leave me.’

It was once this was read out that the Judge explained Jen was going to give her evidence by video link, but the fact this was being done should not be held against either party. Jens evidence for the afternoon is laid out below.

Prosecution) How would you say your relationship was in the period Jan – May 03?

Jen) Strange.

P) Where were you at the start of this?

J) Front room with my daughter and Michael.
P) Who is Michael?

J) He still lives there, he is a friend of ours, I introduced him to Dave.

P) Where was Dave at that time?

J) Dining room.

P) What was the mood?

J) Fine at 10am. Courtney threw crumbs on the floor, Dave got involved cos’ Courtney didn’t want to pick them up. (Dreadful Reception on Video Link) Then I said I’m not a slave like everyone round here treats me. Dave took this as an insult to him and that I was saying you treat me like a slave and we argued. I said shut up Dave, stop getting involved.

P) Was their swearing?

J) Yes, from him and me. My mood was that I was angry with him and everything. I just wanted to get off to college cos’ I had a life to lead. I then went to the bedroom to take the argument away from Courtney. As I was going upstairs I said "Fuck off" to Dave. Then he started running up the stairs to me.

P) What happened when he got to the top of the stairs? 

J) I was in the bedroom he came in and we started having a fight.

P) Describe the fight?

It was at this point Dave's defence passed a document to the Judge relating to the terrible audio levels on the video link. Everyone was finding it difficult to hear and above are the outline of what I was able to hear clearly at this stage. Jen was becoming more and more agitated in front of the video link and she was repeatedly asked to slow down her speech. Jen giving evidence by video link was obviously meant to give the impression she was scared of Dave. However this ploy seemed to be back firing. Although it wasn’t bought up in Court, the previous night Jen had been driving up and down outside Dave’s house shouting and screaming ‘Your Going Down!’ An act of a scared women?

At one point the Judge asked Jen if she would like to take a drink of water and Jen’s aggression shot out of her, as she snapped "No I can do with out water. I don’t need water." It appeared that the video link was unable to be repaired that day, so the case was adjourned till the next morning.

Another day, same Court. Dave was again in good mood. Again Sam and Lynn arrived and we were also joined by Ruth a friend of Dave’s from Portsmouth. Dave’s Barrister explained to the Court that she had stayed late the previous evening, read the instruction manual for the video link equipment and adjusted the bass settings and now it worked perfectly. Indeed, today was going to be a busy day in Court. Jen was to finish giving evidence for the prosecution and finish the questioning from the Defence. Detective Shitson was also to start giving his evidence for the prosecution and 41 minutes (the full length of Dave’s police interview tape) was to be played. Strangely, it was to be played by the prosecution and actually worked in Dave’s favour.

Jen appeared even more aggressive a witness this day and, when asked whether the fall could have been an accident, she replied "Dave done a wresting moved." She claimed that Dave had thrown her and then landed on her. Although her evidence did differ at stages, this was the one thing she stuck to, almost as if she had been coached about what happened, but when different questions where thrown at her, she was a bit stumped.

Such as: she claimed her shoulder had been dislocated and was in a sling for three weeks. However, the medical record of her admittance to hospital said the following:

Jennifer came to A & E at the Queen Elizabeth hospital Woolwich on 9th May 2003 and was admitted at 12.51. The following injuries were noted.

1) Superficial grazing to her forehead and left eyebrow.
2) Tenderness and grazing to her shoulder.
3) Graze on left elbow.
4) Bruising on her chest
5) X-ray showed no fracture in her shoulder.

The above was read out by Dave’s defence but this exchange between the prosecutor and Jen makes for interesting reading:

P) In the Queen Elizabeth hospital the Doctor recorded injuries to you, some superficial grazing on your left forehead and eyebrow. Did you have any treatment.

J) My arm was in a sling for three weeks. I was in hospital till about 4 or 5pm.

This obviously pointed out that there was nothing wrong with her shoulder and she was trying to make a visible point of a non-existent injury. Even the prosecution barrister didn’t mention anything about the shoulder, and Jen just said "My arm was in a sling." Just because you put your arm in a swing, doesn’t mean their anything wrong with it, if you put a size 11 shoe on, if you’re a size 9, your feet don’t grow, your not size 11.

In her evidence Jen also said she picked up a garden hoe outside the house and threatened Dave (in self defence) with it. This must prove that her shoulder was OK to do this and also in other evidence given it is claimed she threw this at Dave as he was getting into the car. Jen denied this.

The end of the prosecution interview of their witness concluded like this:

P) You made a statement on 21st July 2003, and this incident happened 9th May 2003. Is this the first time you reported it. Why so long?

J) 'Cos I was trying to sort myself out with a place of safety in Ashford and there were some nasty comment on a website. Dave’s Website.

P) Are you saying the nasty comments made you go to the police.

J) No.

P) Is it possible that Dave fell on you by accident?

J) No, he did a wresting move.

P) Thank you Ms. Pinto.

Everything seemed to be going the way Dave predicted, even the prosecution had to bring out the fact that Jen only reported the incident two and a half months after it happened and she was aware of what was on the website.

So it was now the turn of Dave’s Defence to interview Jen, which wasn’t going to help the prosecution case at all. In this Jen admitted she would not have reported it were it not for the website. It was also revealed thatm apart from Courtney (Jen and Dave’s child) Jen’s own child was actually living at Dave’s during this time. Which slightly spoiled Jen's reason of wanting to find a place of safety. 

Dave’s defence read out part of Jens police statement, which went like this: "About three weeks ago I called Dave on his mobile. I had heard that he had moved someone new in and didn’t want me anymore."

It was also mentioned about Jen’s relationship with Angela Bostock, Steve McFadden’s ex wife, and that was the reason she wanted to leave Dave. If you remember from Jen’s own evidence she said "My mood was that I was angry with him and everything. I just wanted to get off to college cos’ I had a life to lead." Further proof that Jen saw this incident as a way to leave Dave and start a new life with Angela. It backed up Dave’s version of events where Dave claimed Jen said "You’ve given me the reason to leave you" and was laughing after the incident.

Then the Defence asked Jen if she had a problem with her temper. Jen denied this and this little exchange happened:

Defence) You have so far refused to say this could possibly have been an accident. It’s fair to say you have a problem with your temper?

J) No. Living with Dave you can’t have too much of a temper.

D) I’m showing you a picture of someone called Rachel with injuries. You had a fight?

J) No, we just had a fight.

The Defence also asked about whether there were any marks on Jen’s neck, where she said Dave tried to throttle her. Jen said there were but they only came out after she left hospital, which seemed to rather disprove she had been throttled.

Later on Jen also denied she had any intention or had ever had any intention of writing a book. This again was disproved by a later witness. Again, later Jen admitted she had at least one perjured herself and lied in a court case, and it was not the one in which Dave was on trial along with Austin Warne’s. In fact Jen admitted that when she gave her evidence in that case she did not lie. 

The next witness on was our friend Detective Shitson. Shitson was starting to prove he was a real shit when asked whether he could remember the picture on the wall of Dave’s house, and whether he could remember if it showed a black woman or whether the image had been changed to Taz.

Detective Shitson said "Yes I know the mural. The paint is fading and the plaster is coming off, it’s looking rather shabby." He then went on to claim it was still a black women. He obviously didn’t like Dave’s mural. It was Dectective Shitson that played Dave’s interview tape. In it Dave said "I’ll only do this interview if you’ll play it in full at any trial." Although Detective Shitson said he couldn’t agree to it, the tape was played in full and in it Dave gave a clear concise version of events, saying he fell on Jen and was holding her by the waist. He also said he had a doctor’s appointment that morning about his foot and was on crutches, so could not have run upstairs as Jen claimed he did.

Shortly after the tape was played the court was adjourned for the day. However, the Judge gave the jury a stern warning. The Judge basically said: Whatever you do, do not look at David Courtney’s website www.davecourtney.com. Do not look at it! So Dave promptly put on the website a message saying ‘Hello Jurors’. Also on the tape Detective Shitson had asked Dave to draw a map of the upstairs of the house. This map was shown round court as an exhibit and, although I didn’t get one, I saw that when Dave was asked to sign it he had done so in his usual way ‘Dave Courtney OBE.’ The Judge then asked "What does OBE stand for?" Dave’s defence said "One Big Ego". The Judge seemed satisfied.

It was clear now that everything was showing that Dave was innocent, so we adjourned to the pub across the road.

We had also been joined in the afternoon by a fellow called Dave. He had rung Dave up regarding having a business meeting but didn’t realise Dave was actually in Court, so that was the setting for the meeting. Dave invited us to his place for a drink and we readily agreed. Ruth drove and Dave gave us a motorcycle escort. He held traffic at round-abouts so we could pass though without stopping. He did the same at turnings and as we were struggling to get into the correct lane for a left turn as we passed though Greenwich, Dave nipped into the lane on the Bike, then stopped and we just drove on though. It was one of the quickest trips though London ever, unless of course you were in a prison van going from Court to the Belmarsh, which somehow at this point seemed doubtful that would happen to Dave.

We stayed at Dave’s that night as Dave had to be on time, otherwise he risked a lashing from the Judge. We had to weave our way through the traffic without an outrider escort. Once again we were waiting outside court with Dave and Detective Shitson. Ruth’s bag was open and obviously being one to look in ladies bags, Shitson made a claim that someone had recording equipment in their bag. Although there were no signs saying recording equipment wasn’t allowed in court, the only sign was a No Smoking" sign, which Dave just ignored and smoked a cigar. The only person who mentioned this was a court usher who just said "Lovely smell, I love the smell of cigars" and walked into court.

I was trying to explain it was most likely me who had recording equipment, as I had Dave’s video camera, a tape recorder and a Swiss Army knife in my bag, but couldn’t understand how they had been spotted as it was never opened. It turned out Detective Shitson had mistaken Ruth’s mobile phone for a tape recorder, a great example of a policeman’s observational skills. Shitson didn’t seem to notice the camera or tape recorder, even though I had taken them out my bag, so I put them back in my bag. It was obvious Detective Shitson had been keeping a close eye on Ruth, (really his wife should be told about Peeping Shitson) it did show us what a creepy shit-stirring shit Shitson was.

This was a busy day again in Court. Detective Shitson gave the remainder of his evidence, which didn’t last long and the only relevant thing he really said was when asked by the Defence "So as far as domestic violence is concerned there is 8 years of records kept by the police, and there is no record of any callout regarding Dave." Detective Shitson simply replied "Correct."

It was at this point it was announced that Dave would not be giving evidence. Dave thought the playing of his interview tape had said all that could be said. With this it was Jacket's turn on the stand. Jacket informed the Court that he knew Jen about 18 months before he had met Dave. Dave invited him to stay at the house to do some work for a week and he has been their ever since on Dave and Jens invitation and it was sometime before Dave’s car accident he moved in. He said Jen confided in him and said she wanted to leave Dave. Jen was aggressive and took it out on the kids. She left Dave 2 – 3 weeks before he had the accident and only returned when she found out he was in hospital. During the 5 months Dave was in hospital Jen moved Angela into the house. Jacket confirmed that Dave had been on crutches and could not walk well. He also said that he did not see the incident upstairs but did see Jen throw the hoe at the car as Dave was leaving to go to hospital.

The next Defence witness was a film maker called Leon Gavin. He confirmed to the court that Jen had spoken to him on numerous occasions about writing a book and that it common knowledge that she intended to write one. In fact I myself had discussed with Jen about her writing a book.

There was then legal arguments about whether Dave’s medical evidence Doctor Davis’s could be admitted. This was due to the fact that Doctor Davis could not be tracked down to give evidence, which would have pointed to the fact that Dave was on crutches at the time. There was much argument about this and the case was finally adjourned for another day.

In the final summing up the prosecution even referred to Jen as a fishwife and as we all now know, it took the Jury 15 minutes to unanimously find him ‘NOT GUILTY’.

Back to Main Page